A sect of Taoism that Brings Fortune to all

[asanjuan2008]

I take that 'value' in a purely historical perspective, not a personal judgement of the thing itself.

 

Come now, whether from a historical perspective or personal perspective, it was obviously meant as a slight on taoism as seen in the USA and other extra-Chinese settings.

 

Anything has the value that *you* give it, regardless of its objective worth.

YM

 

You might want to think about this when using money, then. Money may have subjective worth to each person, but boy does it give back objective verifiable objects (like cars, houses, and food).

[YMWong]

Come now, whether from a historical perspective or personal perspective, it was obviously meant as a slight on taoism as seen in the USA and other extra-Chinese settings.

 

Frankly speaking that was not my reading but I guess only Pietro knows

 

You might want to think about this when using money, then. Money may have subjective worth to each person, but boy does it give back objective verifiable objects (like cars, houses, and food).

 

Money is exactly, in my opinion, one of those things that have a subjective value more than an objective one

 

But that's only my perspective, of course

 

YM

[Pietro]

Frankly speaking that was not my reading but I guess only Pietro knows

 

Thank you,

YM for providing such a great defence of my writing.

 

In this case asanjuan is correct. I did infer that the new religion would be more superficial, and thus contain less value for the someone approaching it, than the other two (so new age taoist, would be less interesting than original taoism on the one side or christianity, on the other).

 

The idea that things are either hierarchical, on a single dimension (like money), or different but equal, like all the colors that has the same brightness, is reductive.

 

In mathemathics, for example, you can have what are called "Partially Ordered Set", which means that some two elements are one better (higher, bigger, whatever you are measuring) than the other, and some others are not.

 

I do not have the time right now to enter into a detail answer to your message asanjuan. I will try to do so later today.

 

Thank you,

Pietro

[zanshin]

By this idea, we should all be animists as this was the original human religion, must be the best version. Everything came from somewhere, but did it really only ever get worse and more superfical? Of couse things evolve and change to fit the situation and the time, sometimes they get worse, but we should strive to make them better and certainly not to become stagnate and dogmatic.

[Baguakid]

Well, I can say this. The "religion" which Mak_Tin_Si practices has no interest in me based on his writings and arrogance.

 

Taoist practices in my mind revolve around internal alchemy, that's it. No talismans, no rituals, no sorcery, blah blah.

 

An energetic, spirutal practice.

[zanshin]

In practice I am also more interested in the energetic spiritual side, but academically I am interested in many religions and cultural practices. I think Mak Tin Si's posts are fascinating and a wonderful resource for the board.

 

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

-- Aristotle

[Pietro]

1. Why this obsession with assigning some objective "value" to religions, or sects? I would think that the function of any religion is to help its members spiritually without detriment to others around them, and if any religion does so, then one cannot say it is less or more than any other. The fact that Taoism in the USA has produced a vibrant variant with imports from other philosophical tenets does not in any way devalue it versus the original tenets in China, so long as the basic works like the Tao Te Ching are still revered and so long as it uplifts its members.

 

Absolutely, the function of a religion, from what I have understood is to 'save' its members. What exactly means to save someone depends on the religion, but generally there is a vague understanding that things are not as cool as they could be or as they should be (at least in respect to our mind or our spirit), and as such we need to find a way to either go there, or change them, or change ourselves. In short reach the state where things are cooler.

 

(NOTE: things are a bit more complicated, as sometimes religions work their way around. FOr example a priest I know, explained me that actually the aim of Chrstianity is not to go to heaven, but to bring heaven to earth. The fact of going to heaven after you die, is more a byproduct of this. Like I remember a Buddhist teacher saying that we were doing an exercise not to reach enlightenment. Our aim was just to do the exercise. Enlightenment, was just a possible byproduct)

 

As such a religion has a function, and in respect to that function you can define a religion to be more effective or less effective. Also this is a bit of circual logic in all this, as a religion is both defining the aim, the way to reach it, and when people have reached it. How do you get out of this circularity? You use society. You use the social feedback to know where you are. Both the common non meditative folks, the meditative people, and the people who are universally recognised to have achieved something.

 

Buddha didn't just became enlightened. He became enlightened and then he teached, and the people took up his teachings. This is a way to permit to society to give a feedback on you and know if what you have achieved has an objective value, or it is just another personal dream, another folding of the Samsara. Another way to know if you have reached something of value is to ask someone who has done so. Or to be tested by someone who has done so. All those methods have been found in the millenia to push people into finding an objective, shared, salvation. And this because all the culture have observed that human beings are very prone to two big weakness: self delusion, and escapism.

 

So each teacher tests himself constantly. They go to each other. They get feedback from their community. They try to understand their enlightenment in the general theory of their religion. And sometimes of other religions as well.

 

The research for a salvation, although done in solitude, is part of a general human quest. We are all in it together.

 

The fact that a religion is popular does not necessarily mean that it brings to any form of salvation. It can as easily bring to a form of escapism and self delusion. People thinking they have reached something then going home and they bite their dog, they slap their kids."But", they say, "all is ok, because all is part of the Dao". This is a way to use the Tao Te Ching not to reach something, but to avoid doing any internal work. I am not saying you do this (how could I know), but that this is a risk.

 

So now we have people from different religions, they are all popular. Are they all equally good to let you be saved? Maybe. But then let us look at things under stress. Because many things which seem to work well under no stress fall apart under stress. Take people who have gone through major trauma. Rape, torture, seeing their children dying sudden and avoidable death. Those are trauma that can remain with a person for the rest of their life. Some of those religions will help you out of them, and some will not. Authentic Taoism will, I know this as a fact. Authentic Buddhism will. Authentic Chrsitianity will. Will their New Age counterpart work as well. I doubt so.

 

So we have a difference between traditions that will help you when things are really bad, and traditions that will only help you when things are moderately ok. And is not a small irrelevant division.

 

This is to answer your question: why assigining a value to religion? To avoid spending time to learn something which you think will help you when thigs are rough, and then discovering that the boat is sinking and the safe jacket is full of holes. But now it is too late.

 

This obsession with true and untrue religions is simply a facet of the inherent tribalism in people...an us versus them outlook burned into our genes that really should have no place in Taoism.

 

There is also that aspect in everybody. But if you read well what I wrote I did not put all facets of Taoism on the one side, and all other religions on the other.

 

2. You say there is no continuity with the original, and yet the fact is, the original works of Taoism speak for themselves, even given the various translations and interpretations.

 

When you read a book what is important is: can you get what was the message of the author. If you got another message that is nice and dandy, but it is not what the author wanted to say. You can start a religion on that, but you cannot claim that that religion is coming from the book. At most that it has been vaguely inspired by the book. That is it your interpretation of that book.

 

You might think that you are getting what the authors of the Tao Te Ching meant. But can you be sure? Can anyone be sure? If there is a continuous tradition who have passed on the meaning along side the book you would know. On the side of many great texts there is an oral tradition that accompany them.

 

This is not meant to take away your freedom to read, enjoy and interpret the tao te ching as you like. Just to claim that that is what it absolutely meant.

 

The "Christian Bible" is an amalgamation of many works and MANY translations (since obviously most everyone does not speak Hebrew or Latin), some present in some sects, some not in others, and yet all the groups that use the "bible" are called "Christian", because the CORE belief, that of the person called Christ, is one and the same.

 

Oh yes, the bible is a mess on this regard. And Greek, most of the new testament was written in greek by people who spoke greek as their second language! But the bible had a vibrant alive tradition that kep itself alive through the millenia. I mentioned this priest. One time he explained me (I don't remember what the question was) how there was a great debate in the 6th century about what to do of the Christians who first were Chrstians, then when the Romans would take them they would deny their Christianity, and then once they were free, they would try to go back to christianity. And that (St.)Augustine in that occasion said that "no, the gates of the Lord are always open", and as soon as a person declares its sins, and its desires to be accepted, he would be accepted back. (Sorry if this is not exactly it, I am no christian). This priest then concluded how this have been, from that time, the position of the Church. Can you see how there is a debate, an answer, and a continuity in this story. How Christianity takes shape through a collective effort of its members?

 

If you read the creed, you are reading an history text. Every line, every claim is some 50 years of internal discussion in the church.

 

What I am saying is that when a tradition passes through the bottleneck of a single or few person who have to carry the whole tradition, and were not trained to do so, often the religion looses parts of its identity. And possible parts of its healing powers.

 

This is why traditions who are not very popular (like Taoism) tend to have lineages. This is to make sure that at least some person know the whole tradition, and can pass it on. But yes, this brings all sort of power play, that are just not there in more popular religions.

 

Some of the offshoots of Christianity (I will use this religions as an example because I was Catholic and am familiar with it more than, say Islam or Judaism, or Hinduism) in countries like the Philippines have adapted local philosophies to such an extent that one could hardly call them Christians if one looked at the original variation in the Middle East, and yet the basic core values (such as the Bible) remain and thus label the whole (the Philippines) as "catholic" still - notwithstanding local beliefs intertwined with biblical characters such as dwarves, spirits, local deities, etc.

 

I am unfortunately not familiar with them enough to comment. I would need to know how much of the internal teachings of the church has passed on in this community to be able to comment on their effective healing power. Healing power which might still exist, but be coming from the previous local traditions.

 

3. You seem to make a big deal about HOW taoism first got to america, but I can tell you now it makes not one whit of difference how it got here, so long as the core values remained.

 

That is exactly the point. You assume the core values can be picked up from reading the Tao Te Ching by itself. I don't make such assumption. O I test my understanding by going to people who have passed down the traditional meaning of it.

 

Does going to the bakery by foot make me any different than if I went to the bakery by car? The same core information that makes me "me" is still there - the transport does not matter.

 

No, but the first time you went to the bakery you went with someone who told you which shop was the bakery.

 

There is a risk if you go there alone that you go to another shop (say the shop of self delusional mushrooms). If many people go to the same shop you might be right that that is indeed the bakery. But if back in time there was a time where a single men found this bakery, and he did not know how a bakery looked like. He might have assumed that was a bakery, and then propagated the error.

 

Those are the cases where it is useful to confront your experiences with the people who use to go to the bakery before that one person, and check if the stories collide.

 

As I said, religions and philosophies evolve over time, and evolving Taoism is not an exception.

Indeed religions evolve over time. I never said this is not so. I am only saying not all evolutions are equally helpful to let you reach a place of equanimity, compassion, and balance.

[ZenStatic]

Well, I can say this. The "religion" which Mak_Tin_Si practices has no interest in me based on his writings and arrogance.

 

Taoist practices in my mind revolve around internal alchemy, that's it. No talismans, no rituals, no sorcery, blah blah.

 

An energetic, spirutal practice.

 

"No talismans, no rituals, no sorcery, blah blah." So how exactly do you plan to do internal alchemy? Qi gong and the like are very much a ritual action. The gathering in and moving of qi would also nicely fit into the realm of sorcery. But, the most telling thing you say is this "in my mind". I guess it is a good thing that your mind doesn't dictate actual reality. Have fun in your own dimension.

[Baguakid]

Yep, I only want to deal with purity. You have fun playing the wizard.

[Mak_Tin_Si]

As requested from the moderator of TaoBum, I have moved to this forum : http://www.daoismworld.com right now.

 

So if you want to talk to me or ask me anything about Taoism, please feel free to go over to this forum and enjoy the new forum. New members for discussion are also welcomed.

 

http://www.daoismworld.com

 

Mak Tin Si

Edited January 8, 2009 by Mak_Tin_Si

[ZenStatic]

Yep, I only want to deal with purity. You have fun playing the wizard.

 

Did you even read? The very things that you would do for internal alchemy, include elements of the same things you wish to throw out. So how exactly do you plan to cultivate?

[Baguakid]

ok, here's your chance. Would you (or anyone) please tell me how working with a Talisman would help me to cultivate?

 

I"m fairly dumb so please use simple, clear verbage.

 

Thanks.

 

Mak_Tin_Si, I have not yet had 缘分 with a Taoist Master, therefore I do not have a Shifu.

[Mak_Tin_Si]

As requested from the moderator of TaoBum, I have moved to this forum : http://www.daoismworld.com right now.

 

So if you want to talk to me or ask me anything about Taoism, please feel free to go over to this forum and enjoy the new forum. New members for discussion are also welcomed.

 

http://www.daoismworld.com

 

Mak Tin Si

Edited January 8, 2009 by Mak_Tin_Si

[Baguakid]

what do you mean "tried"? To draw, to make, to eat?

 

I know what xiantian and houtian means but have no idea what you are saying here. I told you I'm relatively dumb, please try a more simple explaination.

[Mak_Tin_Si]

As requested from the moderator of TaoBum, I have moved to this forum : http://www.daoismworld.com right now.

 

So if you want to talk to me or ask me anything about Taoism, please feel free to go over to this forum and enjoy the new forum. New members for discussion are also welcomed.

 

http://www.daoismworld.com

 

Mak Tin Si

Edited January 8, 2009 by Mak_Tin_Si

[Baguakid]

ok, well that adds meaning to what you are calling FU. So, I still don't see the connection to talisman. How does accessing universal energy connect to making a talisman?

[Mak_Tin_Si]

As requested from the moderator of TaoBum, I have moved to this forum : http://www.daoismworld.com right now.

 

So if you want to talk to me or ask me anything about Taoism, please feel free to go over to this forum and enjoy the new forum. New members for discussion are also welcomed.

 

http://www.daoismworld.com

 

Mak Tin Si

Edited January 8, 2009 by Mak_Tin_Si

[Pietro]

one small hint:

 

When you talk about energy in FU it is dfferent from energy from CHI GUNG. To have FU base in your body will enhance your CHI GUNG traning because it will lead to more knowledge about the universal energy and how you can withdraw and connect to more energy source to upgrade yourself and cultivate yourself.

 

In Chi gung, you can get energy from trees and the nature. In FU, you get energy from stars and planets also. So that will add a very good sauce to your plate.

Actually I am not yet fully convinced that you cannot dispense yourself from using FUs (is this how you make the plural?).

 

There are energy practices in the west, available to the general public, where you do use energy from the stars and planets. And they don't use FU, at least not in the way you have presented to us. They are being sold as Chi Gung and Nei Gung. In fact in every school I have been involved with they would start with energies around us, but eventually they would work also with energy of the stars.

 

Respectfuly,

Pietro

[Mak_Tin_Si]

As requested from the moderator of TaoBum, I have moved to this forum : http://www.daoismworld.com right now.

 

So if you want to talk to me or ask me anything about Taoism, please feel free to go over to this forum and enjoy the new forum. New members for discussion are also welcomed.

 

http://www.daoismworld.com

 

Mak Tin Si

Edited January 8, 2009 by Mak_Tin_Si

[Pietro]

I have saw mantak chia's book too, his view is like solar-system wise..

but you will not see the difference between REAL solar power and his unless you learned the real one.

 

I haven't just see them. I have practiced them, and I have practiced with another Master who is actually my current teacher who was also ordained as a Taoist Priest in China. And who often chants Taoists lithurgies while we are practicing.

 

But I would be interested to meet, if this was possible.

 

I am right now in St. John's, Newfoundland. And I have a plane back to Europe (where I normally live) on sunday evening from Toronto. I might arrive on Saturday or early on Sunday so that we have the time to meet.

 

Of course if it would fit you as well.

 

Regards,

Pietro

[Mak_Tin_Si]

As requested from the moderator of TaoBum, I have moved to this forum : http://www.daoismworld.com right now.

 

So if you want to talk to me or ask me anything about Taoism, please feel free to go over to this forum and enjoy the new forum. New members for discussion are also welcomed.

 

http://www.daoismworld.com

 

Mak Tin Si

Edited January 8, 2009 by Mak_Tin_Si

[asanjuan2008]

Thanks for your reply Pietro.

 

The fact that a religion is popular does not necessarily mean that it brings to any form of salvation. It can as easily bring to a form of escapism and self delusion. People thinking they have reached something then going home and they bite their dog, they slap their kids."But", they say, "all is ok, because all is part of the Dao". This is a way to use the Tao Te Ching not to reach something, but to avoid doing any internal work. I am not saying you do this (how could I know), but that this is a risk.

 

I would agree with you here, but your example of "escapism" and "lack of salvation" is not valid.

 

It doesn't matter what religion they subscribe to, so long as it helps them attain stability with themselves and the people around them. That does not mean a temporary stability, as you seem to imply in the example, but one that they practice and think of continuously.

 

So now we have people from different religions, they are all popular. Are they all equally good to let you be saved? Maybe. But then let us look at things under stress. Because many things which seem to work well under no stress fall apart under stress. Take people who have gone through major trauma. Rape, torture, seeing their children dying sudden and avoidable death. Those are trauma that can remain with a person for the rest of their life. Some of those religions will help you out of them, and some will not. Authentic Taoism will, I know this as a fact. Authentic Buddhism will. Authentic Chrsitianity will. Will their New Age counterpart work as well. I doubt so.

 

Maybe you should define "New Age", because although I don't necessarily subscribe to these thoughts, I do know some New Age systems are DERIVED from situations where life stress and the inability to cope with life cause the believer to depart from their current "authentic" faiths, which did not provide a strong enough framework for them.

 

I would also contend that labeling a faith as "authentic" is misleading, because there may not be such a thing. As I mentioned, since faiths evolve continuously over time, the only "authentic" faith is one that is still currently used. The Islam and Christianity practiced today (in its many sects and cults) is different than ones practiced when they first started (although Islam less so). Is Taoism any different? Which is the authentic, the original or the derived, which is the result of continued evolution?

 

This is to answer your question: why assigining a value to religion? To avoid spending time to learn something which you think will help you when thigs are rough, and then discovering that the boat is sinking and the safe jacket is full of holes. But now it is too late.

 

You are wrong here because faith is not a science, where many things are based on objective verifiable and measurable phenomenon. A faith can mean different things to different people, it's up to each one of us to find out our path. What may mean salvation for one person, can mean stultifying drudgery for another. What may mean satisfaction for one, may mean confusion for another.

 

You might think that you are getting what the authors of the Tao Te Ching meant. But can you be sure? Can anyone be sure? If there is a continuous tradition who have passed on the meaning along side the book you would know. On the side of many great texts there is an oral tradition that accompany them.

 

What I am saying is that when a tradition passes through the bottleneck of a single or few person who have to carry the whole tradition, and were not trained to do so, often the religion looses parts of its identity. And possible parts of its healing powers.

 

 

You make an interesting point here.

 

What this corresponds to is a a genetic bottleneck, where only a few individuals get through to a new environment, and the entire population is then derived from this initial bottleneck. I will point out though that in biology, evolutionary bottlenecks are quite common, and the existing population tend to diversify over time to become as vibrant or more so than the original population, and definitely is more adapted to the new lay of the land than the old one.

 

Which is better then, the new or the old, or it is the same? Both are adapted to the circumstances around them. Both are optimized so they can do the most good.

 

That is exactly the point. You assume the core values can be picked up from reading the Tao Te Ching by itself.

 

No, I assume the core values ARE in some form. The Tao te Ching is a start, but I wouldn't be here right now discussing things if I thought it was the end all.

 

Indeed religions evolve over time. I never said this is not so. I am only saying not all evolutions are equally helpful to let you reach a place of equanimity, compassion, and balance.

 

Evolutions by definition ARE adaptive at the current time, or they would not have happened ;-)

 

In the same way, people would not accept and DEFINE a new direction in a religion if it were not adaptive and useful (for them).

[h.uriahr]

bump