Atheism and Taoism

You're asking the wrong person!

...I said "Not really"

It was you who said "Do you want to" ... so deduce the answer from that!

Ask Melvin Helitzer.

 

.



From the recent exchange it seems your knowledge of buddhism is
on a par with your understanding of JKD .

 

That's a fair assessment.

 

Considered, are you trolling? You could have picked up more on Buddhism in a Wiki article.

You do know your credibility is about 0. Shouldn't you be starting school soon?

 

sheesh. Remind me never to talk about religion!

 

Why? It was obvious to anyone who had any experience with Buddhism or Daoism that Considered didn't. He wasn't asking questions or presenting a point of view based on his experiences, he was telling people they were wrong and he was right simply because he said so. It appeared he was doing it in the hopes of starting a major brouhaha simply for his entertainment which is pretty much the definition of trolling.

Talk about religion all you want but be ready to defend your positions with well thought out and reasonable arguments. We may not agree but your positions will be respected, for the most part.

 

etc.

M1k3j0bs, you are clearly neither a Buddhist or a Taoist. Even your "sanshrit" statement on the other thread highlights that.

It seemed like a fairly decent conversation to me.

 

I never said I was, I find the topics interesting and like to discuss them. I have a secular mindfulness practice that helps me deal with my PTSD. Mindufulness has its basis in Buddhism. As for me not being a Buddhist how could you even begin to come to that conclusion based on a few posts in a martial arts forum.

I could have been Soto Zen where the focus is just sitting or maybe Pure Land where the focus is chanting the Namu Amida Butsu or one of the schools where the focus is sutra study.

I do believe in codependent arising and impermanence but not so much the eight fold path and all that goes with that.

In addition when you say I am not a Buddhist do mean being a monk or perhaps ordained? What about as a householder/lay follower?

See what I did there? I not only answered you but provided explanations about why I said what I said. How about giving us some information on your background and why it lead to your sweeping, generic and undocumented conclusions?

Perhaps a little metta practice would help.

By the way, call me Mike.

 

Also, if you are interested in Daoism I highly recommend the Dao of Star Wars. It uses the familiar concepts of the force and Jedi as a bridge to the teachings of Lao Tzu.

 

Might give that a read.

I thought Dao was all about Pooh sticks. What do I know?

(I read the Tao of Pooh a few weeks ago. I didn't think much of it...but it did encourage me to read Winnie the Pooh, which was far better!)

 

Depends what you mean by practice and religious trappings. What is there to practice? if that practice is a 'way of being' or as a personal philosophy, then sure. Tao with a small t is after all "the way"; as it's told, to follow the tao is to follow the way. Philosophical Taoism, Taoism with a capital T, is in my view, essentially (a) Monism. Curiously when you check the wiki page on Monism, Taoism is not even mentioned

Tao is said to be the source of all things, can you learn to accept and possibly even revere the Tao as the mysterious and primordial source of all things?
If so, just don't give it a gender and call it God.

Zen in the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

 

I'm reaching way back into undergrad for this (circa 1992), so my recollection may be faulty. But I seem to remember our teacher (Dr. Henry Rosemont, if anyone feels like Googling him) drawing a distinction between philosophical Daoism and religious Daoism. I think the terms he used--in Wade Giles (and I can't remember which was which) were Tao Jia and Tao Jiao.

I'm going to leave Memory Lane at that, since I'm probably stretching my memory beyond its capabilities already. But the distinction does make some sense to me. I could easily imagine people looking at original Daoism, with its philosophical concepts, and wanting something more solid to grab on to. "Yeah, the uncarved block. That's all well and good. But how do I guarantee good health?"

It kind of makes sense. People want a sense of self-agency more immediately than they want this higher-level feeling of understanding the universe as it actually is. They want relationships with forces they feel they can influence. Otherwise, they feel they're just along for the ride.

So it's easy for me to see how various practices get bolted onto more esoteric philosophical standpoints.

 

Understand Taoism: Origins was very interesting book, bit hard to read for ADD case like me, but I enjoyed it and recommend it for sure

 

I saw Taoism. So who wants to start the conversation?
Who thinks about being a Taoist priest?

 

A true Taoist priest doesn't think about it - he just IS :hat:

[/1st Lesson]

 

He must first consider it then learn of it's duties and then be one.

 

I suppose Daoism could be practiced to whatever degree you like, really. I remember being taught in college that many people were Confucianists by day (during their daily life in court) and Daoists at night (in their off hours).

I'm not sure I'd describe myself as an atheist specifically. I haven't committed one way or the other. I'm a wishwashist. But it seems to me that you could take a lot from Daoism, whether you believe in The Divine (in whatever form) or not. At its core, Daoism involves 1) cultivating the ability to assess things as they truly are and 2) interacting with them accordingly. The idea is that situations are more easily navigated if you're able (and, as importantly, willing) to see something for what it is, let go of your preconceived notions of what it is and how to proceed, and act in accordance with the way things are naturally going anyway.

Daoism is big on metaphor. I'm not. But there are a couple I find useful (or at least illustrative). There's a story of a butcher who has never had cause to sharpen his knives. Because he's so attuned to the cut of meat in front of him that his knives naturally follow the seams that are already there and his cuts seem effortless and perfect.

You asked for book recommendations: Mine would be Thinking Body, Dancing Mind. It deals with what the authors call "TaoSport" (a Daoism-based approach to sports training that can be applied to business, life in general, etc.). The one author is a Taijiquan teacher, the other a reknowned running coach. The book does a good job of using Daoist principles without a lot of philosophical vagaries and quasi-spiritual trappings.

For instance, being willing to quietly assess what your body is telling you after a workout and using that feedback to shape your next workout(s). A non-Daoist reaction to pain, for instance, might be to "work through it." Where the Daoist view might be that, in so doing, you're going against the natural flow of things, trying to impose your ego onto the situation. They might advocate taking some recovery time instead, then reassessing.

That example is probably pretty common sense and, obviously, some applications of Daoism are going to be more abstract and difficult to grasp than others. The implications for martial arts are probably some of the hardest to enact. (I'm certainly no whiz at it.) But likely of the most interest to you. So Daoism might observe that trying to impose a particular gameplan in a sparring match, when it's quite clearly being anticipated and countered, will yield worse results than being able to clearly evaluate the flow of events and come up with something more in keeping with the situation.

As a personal example, I'm 6'1" tall. Not short by any means. In many cases, it would be possible for me to use height and reach to my advantage, frustrating shorter foes by keeping them at range with long jabs and straight kicks.

Then I have a sparring match with the 6'4" FBI academy cadet who competes in amateur Tough Man contests and is quicker than anyone that size has any right to be. So, if I were to impose my preconceived notions onto that situation, I might try and stick with what past experience has indicated I'm good at. I might stick with long jabs and straight kicks. But this experience would shape up differently, given that my side kick is the same range as his regular ol' jab. So, assessing the situation honestly and trying to fit in with the reality of what's currently happening, I switch gears and concentrate on in-fighting. I focus on getting my forehead right into his chest and flurrying with body hooks and uppercuts. The results are much better.

That's one fairly obvious and not terribly profound example. It may not be very compelling. I'd say that, at the end of the day, the only way to know whether you'd find any value in it is to take it for a test drive.



Stuart

 

Just for your info,Stu-Al is a lot of fun to read and seems like a nice guy and all,but TC wise----dancer.With poor anatomical structure and execution as relates to TC.

In fact ,blending useless western dance aesthetics into his TC makes it...I dunno,not TC.

Sorry,man.Just can't help it sometimes.

 

No, that's fine. That was my impression of Chungliang al Huang. For a while, I had his book on taiji. (So I guess I shouldn't have said he was a taijiQUAN teacher.)

I stand by my recommendation of the book though, which is mostly written by Jerry... Otherguy.