Are Shamatha and Vipassana practice the buddhist version of ming and xing practice in daoism

[Asher Topaz]

I have been an avid reader of William Bodri's work and some of Nan Huai Chin. They seem to imply that Buddhism and Daoism are doing the same thing but from different angles. Buddhism is from the angle of mind/Shen. While Daoism is from the angle of Qi. Bodri talks about how the first 4 jhana's or form Jhana's are alchemical in nature hence why they are called form Jhana. They purify the form realm of a person's being which is yuan jing, qi and shen. And then the formless jhana's work on emptiness itself. They say its slower than alchemy  but safer. As one achieves each jhana the alchemical transformation occurs naturally on its own. They say as one becomes extreme yin true yang qi rises and opens the extraordinary meridians. He emphasizes Anapanasati or Skeleton Visualization. Do you guys think his right. Also on my own as I started reading books on daoism like Damo Mitchell, Wang Mu laying the foundation, Jerry ALan Johnsons Neigong book, Taoist yoga and even Nathan Brine the disciple of Wang Liping. They all talk about xing and ming. Ming represents jing to qi to shen transformation. While xing represents working with ones true nature. The two seem similar to buddhist Shamatha and Vipassana. Cuz Shamatha or concentration practices do not work with ones true nature rather they help to purify ones mind until it becomes comlpetely still and pliable which is at fourth jhana.Plus they seem to be energy transformations as one climbs the jhana ladder.  At the point of fourth jhana you have reached yuan shen. Then from 4th jhana one can practice Vipassana cuz the mind is still and strong enough to look back on its own nature and observe itself. Similar to Xing practices in daoism. Do you guys agree with this?

[Cleansox]

Nah. 

But we all have hang-ups. 

Edited February 13, 2022 by Cleansox

[Apech]

5 hours ago, Asher Topaz said:

I have been an avid reader of William Bodri's work and some of Nan Huai Chin. They seem to imply that Buddhism and Daoism are doing the same thing but from different angles. Buddhism is from the angle of mind/Shen. While Daoism is from the angle of Qi. Bodri talks about how the first 4 jhana's or form Jhana's are alchemical in nature hence why they are called form Jhana. They purify the form realm of a person's being which is yuan jing, qi and shen. And then the formless jhana's work on emptiness itself. They say its slower than alchemy  but safer. As one achieves each jhana the alchemical transformation occurs naturally on its own. They say as one becomes extreme yin true yang qi rises and opens the extraordinary meridians. He emphasizes Anapanasati or Skeleton Visualization. Do you guys think his right. Also on my own as I started reading books on daoism like Damo Mitchell, Wang Mu laying the foundation, Jerry ALan Johnsons Neigong book, Taoist yoga and even Nathan Brine the disciple of Wang Liping. They all talk about xing and ming. Ming represents jing to qi to shen transformation. While xing represents working with ones true nature. The two seem similar to buddhist Shamatha and Vipassana. Cuz Shamatha or concentration practices do not work with ones true nature rather they help to purify ones mind until it becomes comlpetely still and pliable which is at fourth jhana.Plus they seem to be energy transformations as one climbs the jhana ladder.  At the point of fourth jhana you have reached yuan shen. Then from 4th jhana one can practice Vipassana cuz the mind is still and strong enough to look back on its own nature and observe itself. Similar to Xing practices in daoism. Do you guys agree with this?

•  

 

 

Not really.

 

the only thing you could say is that shamatha creates the 'cauldron' for alchemy in a very general sense.  Vipassana just means examining and refers utimately to turning mind back onto mind.

 

alchemical/tantric practices are generally reserved for completion stage sadhanas and not introduced till then.  Neidan starts with the subtle body techniques from the beginning.

 

 

[awaken]

是的，道家和佛家練到後來是一樣的

道家其實不是從氣入手，而是從陰陽入手，從氣入手是搬運法淺化了道家修煉

佛教則是省略了氣和光，事實上在佛經當中，都有提到氣感和光，甚至各種內景，這些都和道家是相同的

當我們提到佛家和道家，我們必須要知道，佛家指的是哪方面的佛家，淨土宗和禪宗都有很大程度地扭曲，因此我們必須回到最初的經典來看，例如楞伽經，阿含經，這樣才能從經典當中找出和道家相同的路徑

同樣的，道家也要搞清楚是哪方面的道家，是扭曲的搬運法底下的道家？還是悟真篇參同契所提到的道家修煉？那可是兩回事

當我們能看懂道家修煉的悟真篇參同契，也能看懂佛家的阿含經楞伽經，也能練到裡面所說的程度，那我們就會知道，他們說的，都是同樣的內容

但是對一個迷失在道家搬運法的人，和迷失在淨土宗禪宗的人來說，那可是完全兩條不同的路，幾乎找不到共同點。

[Cleansox]

Awaken wrote, and Google translated:

 

Yes, Taoism and Buddhism are the same after practice

In fact, Taoism does not start from qi, but from yin and yang. Starting from qi is a simple way of transporting Taoism.

Buddhism omits qi and light. In fact, in the Buddhist scriptures, the sense of qi and light, and even various interior scenes are mentioned. These are the same as Taoism.

When we talk about Buddhism and Taoism, we must know what kind of Buddhism Buddhism is referring to. Both Pure Land and Zen are very distorted, so we have to go back to the original scriptures, such as Langka Sutras, Ahan Sutras, so that we can find the same path as Taoism from the classics

In the same way, Taoism must also figure out which aspect of Taoism it is, the Taoism under the twisted transfer method? Or is it the Taoist cultivation mentioned in the Enlightenment Chapter? That's two different things

When we can understand the Taoist practice of Wuzhen, and we can also understand the Buddha's Akan Sutra, and we can practice to the extent that it says in it, then we will know that what they say is all same content.

But for a person who is lost in the Daoist transport method, and a person who is lost in the Zen Buddhism of the Pure Land School, they are completely different paths, and there is almost no common ground. 

 

Here, the commentator takes over 

While there are overlaps, depending on practices and interpretation in any single lineage, I would still disagree with the OP.

Edited February 20, 2022 by Cleansox

[stirling]

Quote

Zen Buddhism of the Pure Land School

 

What schools of Zen Buddhism would those be? Maybe this is a mis-translation? There is the Obaku Zen school, but most of the nembutsu trappings of that sect are washed out... they are mostly like the Rinzai school at this point.

 

I am familiar with Rinzai, have been working in Soto Zen for 6 years, and Tibetan Buddhism for 25 years before that. I can assure you that neither are devotional "Pure Land" schools, they are comfortably Mahayana. There is nothing "distorted" about at least these 2 schools of Zen - they use the same sutras as anyone else, and both have plenty of enlightened masters in their ranks.

[Cleansox]

6 hours ago, stirling said:

 Maybe this is a mis-translation? 

What? 

Accusing Google Translate of a mistake? 

How dare you? 😁 

[awaken]

On 2022/2/21 at 3:36 AM, stirling said:

 

What schools of Zen Buddhism would those be? Maybe this is a mis-translation? There is the Obaku Zen school, but most of the nembutsu trappings of that sect are washed out... they are mostly like the Rinzai school at this point.

 

I am familiar with Rinzai, have been working in Soto Zen for 6 years, and Tibetan Buddhism for 25 years before that. I can assure you that neither are devotional "Pure Land" schools, they are comfortably Mahayana. There is nothing "distorted" about at least these 2 schools of Zen - they use the same sutras as anyone else, and both have plenty of enlightened masters in their ranks.

 

淨土宗 and 禪宗

兩個不同的宗派，是目前佛教界的兩大派別。

另外一個大派別是西藏密宗佛教。

淨土宗和禪宗歪曲佛教原始教義非常的嚴重，可以說是完全背離佛陀原始的本意。

所以現在年輕人轉向南傳佛教的人數也越來越多，因為真理越辯越明，誰是盲目的信仰，誰又是真正的實修，大家眼睛都會看。

 

Edited February 25, 2022 by awaken

[stirling]

12 hours ago, awaken said:

 

淨土宗 and 禪宗

兩個不同的宗派，是目前佛教界的兩大派別。

另外一個大派別是西藏密宗佛教。

淨土宗和禪宗歪曲佛教原始教義非常的嚴重，可以說是完全背離佛陀原始的本意。

所以現在年輕人轉向南傳佛教的人數也越來越多，因為真理越辯越明，誰是盲目的信仰，誰又是真正的實修，大家眼睛都會看。

 

 

I took the liberty of translating (likely poorly) what you have said. It was actually very easy. I used:

 

https://translate.google.com

 

Quote

Pure Land Buddhism and Zen Buddhism
Different denominations of different denominations, and large denominations of the Buddhist world.
In addition, one large faction is esoteric Buddhism.
The Pure Land Buddhism, the Pure Land Buddhism, the Distorted Buddhism, the Primitive Doctrine, and the Pure Land Buddhism.
Since then, the current year of the year, the Buddhist people, Theravada, Theravada, Theravada, Theravada, Theravada, Theravada, Theravada, Theravada, Theravada, Theravada, Theravada, Theravada, Theravada, Theravada, Theravada.

 

Since you clearly speak SOME english, it would probably be easier for other posters to follow your discourse AND give you the opportunity to be properly understood if you used its services and translated any inconsistencies yourself. 

 

The idea that there is a "pure" Buddhism is obviously nonsense. The Tripitaka teachings have all been successfully dated to be at least 500 years after the historical Buddhas death. There are enlightened masters all of over the place on all continents. The Buddha taught "skillful means". How would we know what skillful means are today... he is 2000+ years gone. What we DO have are enlightened masters sharing NEW teachings that are utterly consistent with the Buddhas teachings, though the practices may vary. Practices come and go. The Buddha said:

 

Quote

“We should use the teaching like a raft to bring us across the river. And then when we've crossed the river, we can leave the raft there for someone else to use.”

 

Teachings come and go. Different masters and different students get different teachings. The Buddha had teachings that contradicted each other because they were meant for SPECIFIC audiences and students. So it has always been. So it is today. 

[Geof Nanto]

@stirling

 

I likewise used Google Translate on that post of Awaken's and got a much more coherent result: 

 

Quote

 

Pure Land and Zen

 

The two different sects are the two major sects in the Buddhist world at present.

 

Another major sect is Tibetan Tantric Buddhism.

 

Pure Land Buddhism and Zen Buddhism distort the original teachings of Buddhism very seriously. It can be said that it completely deviates from the original intention of the Buddha.

 

So now more and more young people are turning to Southern Buddhism, because the truth becomes clearer and clearer, and everyone can see who is a blind faith and who is a true practitioner.

 

 

 

[stirling]

54 minutes ago, Yueya said:

@stirling

 

I likewise used Google Translate on that post of Awaken's and got a much more coherent result: 

 

Quod erat demonstrandum.

[Geof Nanto]

2 hours ago, stirling said:

 

Quod erat demonstrandum.

 

I assumed Google Translate would give everyone the same result. It seems that’s not the case. Or perhaps your attempt was just a blip in the system. I’d be interested to learn what translation other people get for this passage. 

 

Out of curiosity, I regularly translate Awaken’s Chinese posts. She is an experienced practitioner and has much knowledge. I find it valuable to learn the perspective of a Chinese practitioner well versed in Buddhism and Daoism. For straightforward sentences, Google Translate does surprising well. But once she includes technical terms relating to spiritual practice, the result is jumbled nonsense.  

 

However, as far as I’m concerned, Awaken has every right to post here in Chinese if she so chooses. But as I recently found out for myself when I tried conversing with her using Google Translate (beginning here) the result is far from satisfactory.  

[stirling]

4 minutes ago, Yueya said:

I assumed Google Translate would give everyone the same result. It seems that’s not the case. Or perhaps your attempt was just a blip in the system. I’d be interested to learn what translation other people get for this passage.

 

I assume that too, but it isn't really my point. If someone is responding to an english posting that they can clearly read, I am unsure what real imposition it is to respond in kind, translated by google or not. Given some understanding of english his would actually give the poster the opportunity to be sure that they are being represented properly.

 

Quote

Out of curiosity, I regularly translate Awaken’s Chinese posts. She is an experienced practitioner and has much knowledge. I find it valuable to learn the perspective of a Chinese practitioner well versed in Buddhism and Daoism. For straightforward sentences, Google Translate does surprising well. But once she includes technical terms relating to spiritual practice, the result is jumbled nonsense.

 

I value the posts of ANY practitioner with real experience, from ANY frame of experience. In terms of clarity, I would imagine that Awaken has the ability to edit the translations more capably than I could possibly interpret their intricacies? Does this seem reasonable?

 

Quote

However, as far as I’m concerned, Awaken has every right to post here in Chinese if she so chooses. But as I recently found out for myself when I tried conversing with her using Google Translate (beginning here) the result is far from satisfactory.

 

I feel I am clearly having the same experience. In this case, I am fine if someone wants to question the traditions I have hailed from, but would expect the questioner to be able to argue from the same language the statement originates in, being that they have read it in that language.  

 

It isn't my intention to be oblique... only plain... I hope this comes across. 

 

Bows.

[awaken]

佛陀的教法有他原始的核心，不是一句『善巧方便』就把佛陀所教導的核心價值給抹煞掉，或者偷偷用其他自以為是的概念置換掉，這是我無法認同那些扭曲佛陀核心教法的教派的原因。

 

四禪，四念處等等核心價值，是任何學習佛法者所必須要會的，如果不會，或者基於先天的文化不利或者智能不足等等原因，採用其他辦法，都是可以理解的，但是『退而求其次』的做法，不應該拿來取代『核心價值』，甚至『鳩佔鵲巢』，將『方便法』置換掉『核心價值』，這種做法，起碼我是不認同的，因此，我用『扭曲的佛教』來看待『淨土宗』和『禪宗』。

 

至於那些所謂號稱『開悟』的大師，每個人都有自訂的一套開悟的定義，但是卻和佛陀的定義風馬牛不相干，可笑之極，要自稱開悟，起碼得練到佛陀所講的核心價值所在，如果沒有，只是採用那套被扭曲的佛法，然後吸收一堆信徒之後，才自稱開悟，那真是笑話，起碼在我眼裡就是如此。

 

我就看到台灣有不少大師，自稱開悟，信徒還把文章放到大藏經裡面，我調出來看之後，簡直慘不忍睹，胡說八道沒有證量的東西，也敢放到大藏經裡面。所以我奉勸各位信徒，看到自稱開悟的大師的時候，最好頭上打上一百個問號，以免被誤導。

 

很抱歉，我的英文書寫能力差到不行，與其我用google翻譯給大家，不如我寫出我的母語，各位再去翻譯，如果有誤解，再來額外溝通就好。這是一個有google翻譯可利用的年代，如果不清楚，就多溝通一下就好，畢竟閱讀比書寫容易，各位閱讀翻譯過的中文，比我書寫英文是容易得多了。更何況，學習道家知識，最好也能懂一點中文，是吧？

Edited February 26, 2022 by awaken

[awarenessrules]

On 2/26/2022 at 11:29 AM, awaken said:

佛陀的教法有他原始的核心，不是一句『善巧方便』就把佛陀所教導的核心價值給抹煞掉，或者偷偷用其他自以為是的概念置換掉，這是我無法認同那些扭曲佛陀核心教法的教派的原因。

 

四禪，四念處等等核心價值，是任何學習佛法者所必須要會的，如果不會，或者基於先天的文化不利或者智能不足等等原因，採用其他辦法，都是可以理解的，但是『退而求其次』的做法，不應該拿來取代『核心價值』，甚至『鳩佔鵲巢』，將『方便法』置換掉『核心價值』，這種做法，起碼我是不認同的，因此，我用『扭曲的佛教』來看待『淨土宗』和『禪宗』。

 

至於那些所謂號稱『開悟』的大師，每個人都有自訂的一套開悟的定義，但是卻和佛陀的定義風馬牛不相干，可笑之極，要自稱開悟，起碼得練到佛陀所講的核心價值所在，如果沒有，只是採用那套被扭曲的佛法，然後吸收一堆信徒之後，才自稱開悟，那真是笑話，起碼在我眼裡就是如此。

 

我就看到台灣有不少大師，自稱開悟，信徒還把文章放到大藏經裡面，我調出來看之後，簡直慘不忍睹，胡說八道沒有證量的東西，也敢放到大藏經裡面。所以我奉勸各位信徒，看到自稱開悟的大師的時候，最好頭上打上一百個問號，以免被誤導。

 

很抱歉，我的英文書寫能力差到不行，與其我用google翻譯給大家，不如我寫出我的母語，各位再去翻譯，如果有誤解，再來額外溝通就好。這是一個有google翻譯可利用的年代，如果不清楚，就多溝通一下就好，畢竟閱讀比書寫容易，各位閱讀翻譯過的中文，比我書寫英文是容易得多了。更何況，學習道家知識，最好也能懂一點中文，是吧？

 

So which one is Authentic Buddhism, There are also others like Theravada, Hinayana, Mahayana, esoteric Buddhism etc. Any Teachers recommendations from both west and east that teach the authentic practice would be really appreciated.

[awaken]

 

．．

 

Edited March 1, 2022 by awaken

[awaken]

5 hours ago, awarenessrules said:

 

So which one is Authentic Buddhism, There are also others like Theravada, Hinayana, Mahayana, esoteric Buddhism etc. Any Teachers recommendations from both west and east that teach the authentic practice would be really appreciated.

上座部對於初學者來說，扭曲是比較少的，但是到了後段，還是有扭曲的，特別是在四禪的部分，有很大的扭曲。

密宗佛教要看派別，像宗喀巴那一派的扭曲是非常嚴重的