Taoism of Western Imagination

[YMWong]

[wudangspirit]

[Aetherous]

I got about 1/3 of the way done and...I don't have time for this! Could the main points be summarized (like copy and paste an important point) for those of us who have too much to do? Thanks.

[Taomeow]

I got about 1/3 of the way done and...I don't have time for this! Could the main points be summarized (like copy and paste an important point) for those of us who have too much to do? Thanks.

His main point is to profess superiority of his understanding of taoism over that of a bunch of others. He chooses easy targets like the infamous author of the Tao of Pooh to make his point. He flexes his intellectual muscles against a bunch of mental midgets and it makes him feel strong. However, he's as much off the mark as the nincompoops he pours his sarcasm out on, as clueless about what taoism actually "does" as everybody he puts down. He thinks taoism is believing "this rather than that" in your head. He thinks what he believes "about" it is bigger-better than what others believe "about" it. He thinks that's because he read some elitist edition books, university press, etc., while "others" read popular ones. That's the core of his message.

[de_paradise]

Edited September 26, 2008 by de_paradise

[YMWong]

His main point is to profess superiority of his understanding of taoism over that of a bunch of others. He chooses easy targets like the infamous author of the Tao of Pooh to make his point. He flexes his intellectual muscles against a bunch of mental midgets and it makes him feel strong. However, he's as much off the mark as the nincompoops he pours his sarcasm out on, as clueless about what taoism actually "does" as everybody he puts down. He thinks taoism is believing "this rather than that" in your head. He thinks what he believes "about" it is bigger-better than what others believe "about" it. He thinks that's because he read some elitist edition books, university press, etc., while "others" read popular ones. That's the core of his message.

 

An interesting opinion of this article which clearly shows how you feel about yourself

 

Inside

 

YM

[Taomeow]

An interesting opinion of this article which clearly shows how you feel about yourself

 

Inside

 

YM

What's that, a jab or a psychic reading?

 

Please avoid ad hominem, YM, you're very prone to it and I'm very alert to it.

[YMWong]

What's that, a jab or a psychic reading?

 

Please avoid ad hominem, YM, you're very prone to it and I'm very alert to it.

 

You read things where there are none, TM

 

Relax

 

YM

[SiliconValley]

What's that, a jab or a psychic reading?

 

Please avoid ad hominem, YM, you're very prone to it and I'm very alert to it.

 

 

Ok

 

Tao meows at YMWong, YMWong shouts back and meow purrs back! We've seen both do this earlier, but can this be done with some amount for respect for each other?

 

If one does not agree with another, why cannot it be stated with a little more respect? Justing thinking it loud...

 

Anyways, keep it coming meow ... if that helps anyone

Edited September 27, 2008 by SiliconValley

[Taomeow]

You read things where there are none, TM

 

Relax

 

YM

You mean you're going to give me a massage?

 

If not, why are you telling me to relax? I am pretty chill as it is, but if what you mean is you can work on my right ankle long distance, by projecting your healing qi -- I did some minor but annoying damage to it yesterday -- I would appreciate it.

[YMWong]

You mean you're going to give me a massage?

 

If not, why are you telling me to relax? I am pretty chill as it is, but if what you mean is you can work on my right ankle long distance, by projecting your healing qi -- I did some minor but annoying damage to it yesterday -- I would appreciate it.

 

Who is prone to throwing jabs should be able to take jabs, TM.

 

Your opinionated understanding of Russel's article, in reply to a request of "copy and paste of important points", do not only give Russel a bad service but all other readers as well.

 

The fact that you are passing those understandings as "the core of his message" is even worst, in my opinion.

 

But in your mind you "are being attacked" ...

 

YM

[autopoetic]

I read the whole article, and feel well rewarded for my efforts. It hit home on a number of fronts... I was a 'tao of pooh' taoist for some years, before reading a lot more, and taking up an actual taoist meditation practice. The stuff about 'spiritual colonialism' is well taken.

 

But it occurs to me that another complained aired on this board is that the word "taoism" is a relatively recent invention... it is in fact a word seemingly made up to placate the western need to categorize. This makes the whole article somewhat at odds with itself, in the sense that it is a defense of the proper use of the word 'taoism' against cultural fusion. But that cultural fusion is exactly what produced the word in the first place! If one was feeling particularly cheeky, a westerner could argue that 'taoism' is actually our word to define as we please. (I'm not feeling that cheeky, that would be to miss the point. I'm just saying.)

 

I just wonder if this exact same argument works with other religions. What would you think if someone argued thusly:

 

[humour]So called 'Christians' are merely cultural colonists. They have pillaged a rich middle-eastern tradition for their own purposes, with very little knowledge of the culture that produced it over 2000 years ago. Very few of them have actually read the complete Christian text, and virtually none have gone to the trouble of learning Aramaic to read it in the original. Even the priests of said 'religion' don't usually bother to learn Greek, to read a slightly less bastardized version! Rather, they accept the watered down and highly edited translation passed down to them under names like 'The King James Bible' and other such clap-trap. They believe just because they pick up a few trappings of so called 'Christian faith' like crosses (which wasn't even a Christian symbol until hundreds of years after Jesus died) they are good Christians. They don't seem to realize that original Christianity, as practiced in the original, authentic, middle-eastern context, involved such impressive devotional practices as voluntary poverty. Those who think they can rightly call themselves 'Christians' without traveling to the middle-east, learning ancient Aramaic, and giving away all their worldly possessions, are completely deluded, and in fact very very evil.[/humour]

[YMWong]

But it occurs to me that another complained aired on this board is that the word "taoism" is a relatively recent invention... it is in fact a word seemingly made up to placate the western need to categorize. This makes the whole article somewhat at odds with itself, in the sense that it is a defense of the proper use of the word 'taoism' against cultural fusion. But that cultural fusion is exactly what produced the word in the first place! If one was feeling particularly cheeky, a westerner could argue that 'taoism' is actually our word to define as we please. (I'm not feeling that cheeky, that would be to miss the point. I'm just saying.)

 

Good points raised. But I think that Russel's, as well as a number of other scholars who agree with him, is actually trying to convey the idea that Taoism/Daoism is not, or should not be, "a new word" but in fact the english translation of a specific - thou very wide - tradition that has been around in China for a couple of thousand of years and with roots even further back.

 

That's the actual point of his work, as I see it, in that *westerners* (sorry for the generalization here) tend in fact to see Taoism/Daoism as a new term and in that respect would want to fit their preconceived notions into it.

In that respect some, including myself, have been speaking of a "western daoism" vs. a "chinese daoism" - where 'chinese daoism' does not mean 'daoism for chinese only' but instead 'daoism as it is understood in china'.

 

YM

Edited September 27, 2008 by YMWong

[Aetherous]

That's the actual point of his work, as I see it, in that *westerners* (sorry for the generalization here) tend in fact to see Taoism/Daoism as a new term and in that respect would want to fit their preconceived notions into it.

In that respect some, including myself, have been speaking of a "western daoism" vs. a "chinese daoism" - where 'chinese daoism' does not mean 'daoism for chinese only' but instead 'daoism as it is understood in china'.

 

That was the basic idea I got from the little I read...sounds good, but it does seem that Taomeow was right. Way too many words to just make that simple point....boring!

[Procurator]

. What would you think if someone argued thusly:

 

[humour]So called 'Christians' are merely cultural colonists. They have pillaged a rich middle-eastern tradition for their own purposes, with very little knowledge of the culture that produced it over 2000 years ago. Very few of them have actually read the complete Christian text, ..........., involved such impressive devotional practices as voluntary poverty. Those who think they can rightly call themselves 'Christians' without traveling to the middle-east, learning ancient Aramaic, and giving away all their worldly possessions, are completely deluded, and in fact very very evil.[/humour]

what humor? this is accurate to a T. a "T" as in - Thou shalt not kill. Edited September 27, 2008 by Procurator

[Procurator]

 

The fact that you are passing those understandings as "the core of his message" is even worst, in my opinion.

 

 

YM

Its a greate article. Unfortunately the situation is much worse than at its date. The worst the ignorant authors like Watts could do was to create hordes of poseurs calling themselves taoits, but no great harm was done otherwise to the vain and the simple

 

Nowdays the malignant frauds peddle seminars costing in thousands of euros, and peddle books of harmful practices, straying the simpletons away from Dao; shortening their lives too.

 

That is why the secrecy is of utmost importance now more than ever, lest to enhance the ammunition of the frauds.

[Taoist81]

Its a greate article. Unfortunately the situation is much worse than at its date. The worst the ignorant authors like Watts could do was to create hordes of poseurs calling themselves taoits, but no great harm was done otherwise to the vain and the simple

 

Nowdays the malignant frauds peddle seminars costing in thousands of euros, and peddle books of harmful practices, straying the simpletons away from Dao; shortening their lives too.

 

That is why the secrecy is of utmost importance now more than ever, lest to enhance the ammunition of the frauds.

Procurator,

 

(First off, please note, this is coming from someone who once considered himself a Taoist, but now, seeing what "taoism" "is" tends to be leery of the label in favor of more "open" none labels while seeing the "philosophy of the Tao" as for all intents and purposes supreme, only using the term "taoist" with necessary qualifiers.)

While you make valid points about things being "much worse", your "solution" is really what caused the problem. The fact that "real Taoist Masters" keep their teachings secret has made it possible for these charlatans to pedal their wares to a public who has no idea what to expect other than fantastical stories of magical Masters in the mountains. Openness breeds understanding. If Taoist teachers had not been so paranoid of "round-eyed devils" in the first place then Taoism may have been exported (as all religions hope for their "solution to life's problems" to be) in a more pure form. Instead, the texts that were available were translated with relatively little "traditional input" (excepting certain legends of Wilhelm's secret master) and interpreted in western minds by western minds. In the utilization of secrecy they did not "protect" the masses, nor did they produce more "masters", they simply created a breeding ground for those who would use the vacuum to make a profit (just as happens with any religion).

 

edit: to clarify, with lessened secrecy, those seeking instruction could know ahead of time what they would expect to learn as well as the history (with documentation) of who they were to learn from.

Edited September 27, 2008 by Taoist81

[autopoetic]

That's the actual point of his work, as I see it, in that *westerners* (sorry for the generalization here) tend in fact to see Taoism/Daoism as a new term and in that respect would want to fit their preconceived notions into it.

In that respect some, including myself, have been speaking of a "western daoism" vs. a "chinese daoism" - where 'chinese daoism' does not mean 'daoism for chinese only' but instead 'daoism as it is understood in china'.

 

This distinction between 'western daoism' and 'chinese daoism' is a good one, I think. Just so long as we all understand that, while each of us may prefer one over the other, just because a version of daoism is western doesn't automatically make it inferior or inauthentic. Spiritual traditions have to start somewhere. Of course, it may be the case (I think it is the case) that a lot of western daoism is inauthentic and spiritually vacuous... but not just because it's western. If I had to guess, I'd say it's because most new spiritual traditions suck. Only the ones with something to offer last, but history hasn't yet had a chance to sort the wheat from the chaff, as it were.

 

One further comment on the article: is it just me, or did he really have it in for protestantism? I mean, catholics haven't exactly been the nicest group in history either.

[mjjbecker]

[Taomeow]

That was the basic idea I got from the little I read...sounds good, but it does seem that Taomeow was right. Way too many words to just make that simple point....boring!

 

By the way, "Westerners" is an interesting term in this sort of discussions. Perhaps I'm guilty of having used it too on occasion in the sense "arrogant idiots," but... Well, let's see...

 

What do we call people -- way over a billion of them -- who

 

learn a curriculum of standard Western sciences for their standard schooling;

subscribe to a state-sponsored official ideology, that of atheism and "scientific materialism;"

burn all scriptures they can find, demolish taoist and buddhist temples, then rebuild a few of them to boost tourism, and appoint Communist party officials as priests and monks -- the real ones having been either killed or locked up in concentration camps just a historic second earlier;

and so on?..

 

Tip: we can't really call them Europeans, nor Americans... so when we talk about those big bad clueless Westerners who do those horrible stupid things to taoism, we don't include them, right? But... looks like one doesn't have to be a Westerner in order to do reprehensible things with, to, against taoism?.. And if one is not a Westerner, does it guarantee a wonderfully tactful and respectful treatment of taoism?.. See above...

 

Mike,

 

excellent analysis! Thank you.

Edited September 27, 2008 by Taomeow

[YMWong]

This distinction between 'western daoism' and 'chinese daoism' is a good one, I think. Just so long as we all understand that, while each of us may prefer one over the other, just because a version of daoism is western doesn't automatically make it inferior or inauthentic. Spiritual traditions have to start somewhere. Of course, it may be the case (I think it is the case) that a lot of western daoism is inauthentic and spiritually vacuous... but not just because it's western. If I had to guess, I'd say it's because most new spiritual traditions suck. Only the ones with something to offer last, but history hasn't yet had a chance to sort the wheat from the chaff, as it were.

 

Yes, I fully agree with your point of view.

 

And, yes, of course there is no 'superior' or 'inferior' tradition. They are all good if they do good to somebody, if to a few, but one must understand they are not necessarily the same thing.

 

I am also not arguing about 'western daoism' to be *a kind of daoism* and that's why I call it so i.e. 'western daoism'.

 

I however have an issue about people doing/selling 'western daoism' but than feeling the - usually commercial - need to link it to Maoshan, to Wudang or any other 'sounding' chinese term. There are in fact many nice groups around that claim no direct affiliation to any chinese daoist center but transmit some good and sound traditions.

 

It's all good, as long as there is honesty

 

YM

[YMWong]

Broadly speaking, the author is correct in his assertion that understanding of the culture and context is very important when doing an academic study. Clearly the author is emphasising the academic side of things because he is an academic.

 

The author concludes that in order to study Taoism correctly, one must be able to read the 'classic' writings in the original vernacular, (not accessible to the Hoi Polloi), and also study directly with Taoist priests in China.

 

Personally, I would agree with the need to study under a teacher of a 'living' tradition. To read all of the classics in the original vernacular? No. To be able to understand and appreciate the teachings of your own tradition, yes. If you have the time, inclination and aptitude then by all means go for it. Most people find the common peoples language with simplified characters hard enough.

 

Very good comments to which I fully agree.

 

Daoism, as one can see in Saso's article posted, is fundamentally an Oral Tradition.

So, yes, you don't need to "read" the classics but you MUST have somebody explaining them (their core, that is) to you. So an illiterate can learn and become a Daoist, even in chinese sense of the term, and he will be taught to memorize some texts - exactly like anybody else.

 

In Daoism there are 'Three Treasures' and these are: Dao 道、Jing (scriptures) 經、Master 師.

The Scriptures simply stands for the Tradition as passed down from previous generations.

 

YM

[松永道]

YM, Thanks for presenting this article. However, I do disagree with the author's initial conclusion that there is no such distinction between Religious Daoism and Philosophical Daoism.

 

I do not know when the distinction between religion, daojiao (道教), and philosophy, daojia (道家), first appeared in Chinese history. The author may be correct that it was the construction of late imperial confucist scholars. However, the practice of daojia has been a valid lifestyle for centuries though it may have been so thoroughly built in to traditional Chinese thought that it was beyond naming.

 

I'll explain.

 

Traditional Chinese disciplines almost all used the vocabulary of what we now call Philosophical Daoism. Yin, Yang, Xu, Shi, Wuxing, Bagua, etc (阴、阳、虚、实、五行、八卦、等) are all found in ancient science, medicine, martial arts, calligraphy, painting, and music. Where the practitioners of these arts all ordained Daoist priests? Of course not. And yet you have words like Yi Dao (医道) - the way of medicine; Wu Dao (武道) - the way of martial arts; Qin Dao (琴道) - the way of the zither, Dan Dao (丹道) - the way of internal cultivation. And householders could practice these Dao, they were not exclusive to Daoist priests. Practicing a form of Dao also did not grant one the title Daoshi (道士) nor Daoren (道人).

 

But it seems the author does not recognize this as Daoism. For him, Daoism is a name. The Daoist of his imagination is a Daoshi,

 

Perhaps an American today can indeed become "a Taoist." But if so, how and where can

that really happen? Not, certainly, in an American bookstore, library, or classroom. I would say

that if one travelled, for instance, to the Abbey of the White Clouds in Beijing, and underwent

the spiritual training necessary to practice Taoism in the living tradition of "Complete

Perfection," then a person of our society might be justified in claiming to "follow the Tao."

 

And so to follow Dao one must know the rituals and be officially ordained. Poppycock! Americans would call my teacher a Daoist for he understands and continues to study the Daodejing, Nanhua Jing, Huangdi Neijing, uses the philosophy of Yin, Yang, Wuxing, Bagua in the practice of TCM, Taijiquan, and Neigong. But he is not what Chinese call a Daoist. He does not live in a monastery nor wear the robes, though he does know many of the rituals. He follows Yi Dao, Wu Dao, and Dan Dao, and though his master was also not a Daoist, his tomb stone is in the Daoguan on Huashan.

 

In reality, people who follow Dao are not always called Daoists, and not every Daoist really follows Dao. And on this point I'd say the author is just as confused as his audience.

 

---

 

But aside from arguing the historical accuracy of American Taoism, I think this article points to another important phenomenon that happens when religions move out of their original cultural context into a new one. We've seen it happen with Buddhism in China, Tibet and Japan, Christianity in Africa and the Americas, and now Buddhism and Taoism in the west. In each of the above cases the prior belief systems and new religious belief system combine like mother and father to create and offspring that carries features of both but is also something new entirely.

 

You could says it's the evolution of belief. Old ideas are reexamined from the bottom up, shaken up, reorganized, and ultimately rewritten. And this is how they stay alive and thrive into a new era. It's not only impossible for an American to follow the tenets of Ming Dynasty Daoism but an idiotic suggestion. Yes, I think it's important to have a correct understanding of religious history - so you know how to re-interpret it into modernity.

 

The American Dao is not the Han Dynasty Dao, Tang Dynasty Dao, or Ming Dynasty Dao. It is new and it's supposed to be. And as it matures it will look back and continue to re-imagine Gehong, Wei Boyang, Lu Dongbin, and Wang Chongyang along with Laozi, Zhuangzi, and Liezi just as it always has throughout Chinese history.

 

That's the nature of change.

Edited September 27, 2008 by 松永道

[YMWong]

Dear SYD,

 

the terms Daojia (Dao School) and Daojiao (Dao Tradition/Religion) have been used interchangeably throughout chinese history and only more recently it has been claimed, by those outside the tradition, that the two things are different i.e. Daojia a pure, philosophical and/or mystical tradition while Daojiao a later corrupted religious belief.

 

This said, however, it is true that all along chinese history there has been a lot of people who were attracted by one or more *components* of the Daoist Tradition. There is plenty of evidence of Confucians, Literate and common people who were fervent students/pratictioners of Fengshui, Yijing reading, meditation or other daoistic activities. Some of them simply learned *by themselves* through reading of classical literature, exploration of human mind etc. while others practiced specific skills under actual Daoists (Daoshi).

 

These people are, in my opinion, as close as it comes to modern 'western daoists'

 

Needless to say, none of them claimed to be a 'daoist' (daoshi), none used to hold seminars wearing funny hats and costumes or boasted holding lineages of 7000 generations.

They simply did as they pleased, cultivated their hobbies and interests some to an actual high level.

 

After all in chinese society, in the past as today, there are thousands of people who *believe in Dao* (xin Dao) and regularly go to the temples, pray the Daoist gods and follow *some* daoist rules. Most of them have no idea about Daoism: you could change the temple sculpture of Laozi with a Buddha and they wouldn't notice the difference. If you ask them why they go to a specific temple they'll reply that's because that specific deity is 'ling' and can bring blessing.

 

Change is in the nature of everything, as you righly say, and Daoism do not escape from this Rule.

As a matter of facts Daoism has been changing dramatically during the last 2000 years.

But changes can and do come from within the tradition and cannot possibly come from the outside.

 

If I am a chef and I learn from somebody who knows it how to make a pizza with time my *recipe* might naturally change or, at a certain time, I can actually and consciously improve it.

 

But for somebody who has never been in a kitchen and was not taught about pizza - how can he change it ?

He is not changing the pizza recipe, he is making up something with his preconceived notions of what a pizza should be and selling it as a pizza.

 

What's more in many cases he is selling it as an original recipe learned from an italian chef, maybe claiming of having lived in Naples for 3 generations, speaking with a fake southern italian accent ....

 

I am sure that ANYBODY can be a good chef, even a gifted one and maybe without training.

Anybody can make great dishes and find lots of people that would enjoy them ... but that's a different story.

 

And now all this pizza talk is getting me hungry ...

 

YM

[松永道]

But for somebody who has never been in a kitchen and was not taught about pizza - how can he change it ?

He is not changing the pizza recipe, he is making up something with his preconceived notions of what a pizza should be and selling it as a pizza.

 

 

Sounds like the 'steak' they sell here in Xi'an. The genuine western article!

 

In defense of western daoists though, they come from a societal belief system that labels you by what you believe. You don't need to be a priest to be a Christian nor an imam to be a Muslim. You don't even need to go to church, temple, or mosque. You just have to say it. That's it! That's all you have to do to identify with a belief system in the West. Why should you need to be ordained to call yourself a Daoist? The English word Daoist is not the translation for Daoshi, it should read Xin Dao.

 

---

 

Needless to say, none of them claimed to be a 'daoist' (daoshi), none used to hold seminars wearing funny hats and costumes or boasted holding lineages of 7000 generations.

 

 

There are plenty of people who misrepresent themselves to make money. They'll say they are whatever sells. But this too is hardly a new phenomenon. In almost every city I've traveled through in China in most any park you can find a 'master' in funny clothes any morning of the week. And they all boast lineages going back to Zhang Sanfeng, Laozi, or even Huangdi. And most would say they're Daoist, Buddhist, Tibetan, pretty much what ever it took to crack open a western wallet. Lets not confuse the charlatans with the hobby Daoists, they are two entirely different breeds.

 

---

 

Change is in the nature of everything, as you righly say, and Daoism do not escape from this Rule.

As a matter of facts Daoism has been changing dramatically during the last 2000 years.

But changes can and do come from within the tradition and cannot possibly come from the outside.

 

 

If they're outside the tradition, how could they change it? To use your analogy; there are lots of people making pizza in the world. Some chefs make it well, some make it poorly. But I have yet to find a chef who makes pizza so poorly, so famously poorly, that he somehow makes even the good chef's pizza taste worse. They have no relation. Now sure some people, who've only eaten bad pizza may think pizza tastes terrible. They may think it's green, square, and soggy. But even so, where good pizza is made, people will eat it and they'll know it's good. And should there be a place in the world were the folks love green, square, soggy pizza then to them I say bon appetite!

 

The way I see it, Chinese Daoism grew out of a few books and teachings then proceeded to mix with culture in every age that followed. In the west, Taoism again grows out of books and teachings, to mix with a different culture. Call it Western Daoism or Chinese Daoism - it's no matter, it's still all the Dao, or more accurately, none of it is..

 

道可道非常道，名可名非常名...