Here are some ideas I found useful. 1.Know the difference between learning about Taoism and living a life in harmony with the Tao: One is academic, the other applicable One pontificates, the other one practices 2. Read several (translations) of the Tao Te Ching. The oldest manuscript found are the Ma Wang Tui manuscripts , discovered in 1973. 3. Read several other notable Taoist works ie. Chuang Tzu, Lieh Tzu, and the Yellow Emperor’s Treatise on Internal Medicine. ( Eva Wong has several fairly interesting translations from the massive Taoist Canon collection on the subject of Longevity, Health and Immortality) 4. Find yourself a mentor who is willing to be your guide in learning about the Tao. Preferably, he MUST not have learnt about the Tao from an Academic viewpoint. Infact avoid reading ANY Taoism books written by academics. These are the ones that pontificate yet often miss the point. For this reason I favour reading Eva Wong ( a practising Taoist) but not Thomas Cleary ( an academic). Also books by Daniel Reid are excellent. 5. Study the lives of the well known immortals: Chung Li Chuan, Lu Dong Bin, Chang Sang Feng ( Tai Chi dude ) 6. Know the difference between religious Taoism ,Philosophical and Scientific Taoism. This is often hard. I’m a practising Taoist and a practising Christian . There is NO conflict. 7. Be wary of those Neo-Taoist who try to blend Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism.It is an adulterartion of the original teaching. I’m happy to explain more , but will not entertain any attempt to argue. Too much struggle, too much energy wastage. Seek to understand and you get somewhere. Seek to disagree and you get frustrated.
Gerard, Good points and I respect your view on Taoism. But unfortunately I have a different view on some things. SC: Thomas Cleary is a highly respected academic who has translated Taoist, Buddhist and Islamic works. I would hardly consider him to be a Taoist purist, unlike Daniel Reid and Eva Wong. Cleary is all over the place and one cannot deny the fact that his translation bias is coloured by all three. I prefer to remain as close to the source and practise Taoism as close as possible to the original unadulterated form. I think you may have good knowledge of but have a very poor understanding of Christianity. I read the bible and check it against church dogma. What the Bible says and what the Church interprets is not always in congruence with my own interpretation. The churches view is often colored by the prejudice of the day. Your biblical quotation is used to support a view differs from mine . Even in Taoism, the emission of semen is only recommended for procreation, but discouraged ( not prohibited) for recreation. There is no conflict at all with the bible. There are many other places in the Bible which are amazingly in synch with the Tao Te Ching, like references to being like a child to attain enlightenment, in the beginning there’s energy, giving up material possession for spiritual happiness etc etc. Didn’t Jesus say “ I am the WAY the truth the life “ ? The Way ? Huh?, as in The Tao ? Hmmmmm SC:Be wary of those Neo-Taoist who try to blend Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism.It is an adulterartion of the original teaching. Gerard: Why not, no belief regardless of its nature should claim that it behold the ultimate truth. That's shows a simplistic and narrow-minded attitude. The truth is unknow as Dao otherwise it wouldn't be the truth anymore. Even Daoists recognise that we know nothing like Socrates did SC: I do not like to mix and match philosophies. That itself is too simplistic to asumme to be optimal. It may seem very elegant to pick from the best and merge them all in one. But isn’t it a bit like putting a Volvo engine in a Toyota and replacing the petrol with alcohol. Could one really expect optimal performance form such a contrived concoction? Taoism and Buddhism have such conflicting positions at the most basic level. How could it be right to mix and mesh ? Taoists want to live forever. Buddhists want to die soon, reincarnate recursively till they reach Nirvana and disappear. Taoist want to exist, Buddhist want to disappear. Taoist want to stay in harmony with nature, Buddhist want to take the middle path. Taoist meditation circulate Chi, Buddhist drive Chi ( prana) in a vertical line up to the head. Taoism is about man living in harmony with Nature. Confuciansm is about Man living in harmony with Man. Confucianism is looked down upon by Taoists, because the former is about social rules, rituals, ceromonies, conduct of behaviour, tradition – the very contrived nature that opposess the spontaneous / natural character valued by Taoists. Don’t forget Confucious sought advice from Lao Tzu ( Taoist). Don’t forget Confucianism expects a child to die for his parents in a danger situation, and that women have an inferior position in society. Why do you think Shi Huang Ti, first emperor of China, tried to burn Confiucian books , but not Taoist books? In view of such fundamentally opposing principles , it would be unhelpful to mix Taoism, Buddhism and Confucianism together. Someone observed that the Chinese are “ Taoist in soul but Confucianist in behaviour” I’m not so sure if that’s such a good thing. They work (struggle) too hard and don't know when to stop craving money.
This is a valid point but I in no way see how doing one harms the other, how does understanding more about a religion in anyway hinder your practice? Unless of course you dont want your beliefs challenged... Surely learning to read them in their original form is preferable not translations? I translate myself and I can tell you that even the most skillful translator will find it difficult to keep all the nuances of a sentence intact when it is transferred to a new language. And Im sure this is especially relevant concerning religious and philosphical texts. Again, surely learning to read the original sources would be better only reading the works published by Western authors for a Western audience will mean that you only read works that are being marketed for Western audiences. And again, why is ignorance necessary to practice Taoism? You almost sound like the Inquisition- DO NOT read any books that might disagree with such and such ONLY study under someone who has NO familarity with other viewpoints... How exactly does this differ from someone blending Taoism with Christianity? Just trying to understand your viewpoint better And incidentally if your only prepared to listen to people who agree with you your not going to learn much- however you will get your beliefs reinforced, whether they are wrong or right. Perhaps its more beneficial to question your beliefs than suggest that if someone disagrees with you they obviously are not seeking to understand... This is inaccurate, however it is some of the criticisms labelled on Buddhism by people who have little understanding of it.
CKava: Originally Posted by soggycat Know the difference between learning about Taoism and living a life in harmony with the Tao: One is academic, the other applicable One pontificates, the other one practices CKava:This is a valid point but I in no way see how doing one harms the other, how does understanding more about a religion in anyway hinder your practice? Unless of course you dont want your beliefs challenged... SC: 1.Taoism is not always a religion. I am refering to the original non-religious , philosophical Taoism. 2. Its doesn’t harm , but but it will confuse. Academcs often tell you what needs to be done, but are unable to tell you how to do it. Originally Posted by soggycat Read several (translations) of the Tao Te Ching. CKava: Surely learning to read them in their original form is preferable not translations? I translate myself and I can tell you that even the most skillful translator will find it difficult to keep all the nuances of a sentence intact when it is transferred to a new language. And Im sure this is especially relevant concerning religious and philosphical texts. SC: I agree completely , things get lost in translation.If you can read it in it’s orginal Chinese form that would be best. But then again , how many of us here can read Chinese , let alone read ancient classical Chinese writing which is hard even for the ordinary Chinese ? Originally Posted by soggycat Find yourself a mentor who is willing to be your guide in learning about the Tao. Preferably, he MUST not have learnt about the Tao from an Academic viewpoint. Infact avoid reading ANY Taoism books written by academics. These are the ones that pontificate yet often miss the point. CKava:And again, why is ignorance necessary to practice Taoism? You almost sound like the Inquisition- DO NOT read any books that might disagree with such and such ONLY study under someone who has NO familarity with other viewpoints... SC: To answer you good question, let me quote from the Tao Te Ching: Those who often know much , understand little. Taoism is critical of “artificially knowledge” , it obscures “ natural knowledge” Taoism encourages letting go of artificial knowledge, acquiring emptiness. When you drag Buddhism and Confucianism into Taoism , you are contravening this in the most obvious and basic way. I thought of all people , a learned Taoist like yourself would have realised this. One is most welcome to read any book from any culture, any religion any philosophy, but if you want to be a Taoist, it would be better to put those aside else it would distract you from attaining stilness and the Tao. Focus , not scatter you attention. Originally Posted by soggycat Be wary of those Neo-Taoist who try to blend Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism. It is an adulterartion of the original teaching. CKava:How exactly does this differ from someone blending Taoism with Christianity? SC: Ah I see you think I’m blending Christian religion with Taoist religion . I’m not, and at no point did I say so. I said Taoism ( I regard it purely as philosophy ) is consistent and does not conflict with Christianity ( religion to me) Whereas, basic principles of Taoism will conflict with Buddhism and Confucianism. CKava:Just trying to understand your viewpoint better And incidentally if your only prepared to listen to people who agree with you your not going to learn much- however you will get your beliefs reinforced, whether they are wrong or right. Perhaps its more beneficial to question your beliefs than suggest that if someone disagrees with you they obviously are not seeking to understand... SC: You have a right to disagree with me, you also have a right to be wrong. I don’t belong to the popular “ mix and match” generation. I strive to be a purist and am of the view those who seek Taoism, must not be distracted by Buddhism or Confucianism. And those who seek Buddhism , should also not be distracted by Taoism . Also I'm sorry but I dont mean to be condescending, but did you really think I shd trust the wisdom of a 22 yo who has some 15 years less life experience than me ? Quote: Originally Posted by soggycat Buddhists want to die soon, reincarnate recursively till they reach Nirvana and disappear...Buddhist want to disappear. This is inaccurate, however it is some of the criticisms labelled on Buddhism by people who have little understanding of it. SC : Bull, my own father was a Buddhist, I grew up in such an environment, he is a learned man andcould read the original text in Chinese and English , so please don’t tell me something you have only remote knowledge of. Then again, the various forms of Buddhism are so different. If I am inaccurate , please tell me which part I got wrong? Also many ( not all)Buddhist got it wrong. Buddha was a man,who discovered the path to enlightenment. Yet many of his followers have deified him and worship him as a GOD. Buddha never asked to be GOD, nor did he claim to be one. If anything didn’t Buddha die from mushroom poisoning or something ? To me, Buddhism is a philosophy, like Taoism.
Gerard SC: Thomas Cleary is a highly respected academic who has translated Taoist, Buddhist and Islamic works. I would hardly consider him to be a Taoist purist, unlike Daniel Reid and Eva Wong. Gerard: Who cares, We must all thank him for translating Ancient Chinese into English. SC: Exactly, you don’t care about the background of the translator, and wholeheartedly accept everything as true and accurate. Is this how you decide on TRUTH? SC:I prefer to remain as close to the source and practise Taoism as close as possible to the original unadulterated form. Gerard: With all my respect u start 2 soundf a bit pedantic. It reminds me all the academics that linger all the different databases trying 2 prove something. My friend simplicity is best. And T. Cleary sound simple 2 me, even better than many of the traditional Daoists full of vague metaphors. They just rumbled 2 much. My friend Daoism got corrupted after the seven immortals, which explains why they were persecuted by the emperor at the end SC: Ah yes, if it’s easy to understand then that must be the TRUTH. And if it’s methaphors, avoid it. Ah yes , you are saying Cleary who doesn’t speak Chinese as a first language, has accurately translated all the methaphors. Perhaps he could teach Chinese in China to the Chinese too. SC:I think you may have good knowledge of but have a very poor understanding of Christianity. Gerard: Very good my friend, I was unfortunately raised in a Catholic, attended a strict unisex Spanish Catholic school most of my life (Marist school in Madrid); whereas you have been probably in touch with it recently (sorry if I am wrong) since u r Australian SC: My point exactly. It is a established fact CATHOLICS don’t know their bible (as well as Protestants). They are discouraged from reading the bible themselves, instead they are explicitly told to rely on the Priest to interpret it for them. In fact was mass conducted in Latin up until the last 100 years ? No one save a few would understand the sermon. Gerard, I know you mean well, but by telling me of you Catholic past I can see why you have such a view of Christianity. The Catholics have corrupted so much of what is in the original bible. SC:Be wary of those Neo-Taoist who try to blend Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism.It is an adulterartion of the original teaching. Gerard:I am one of them. Maybe I should be crucified as the Christ? SC: By seeking 3 paths, you end up with no path. By using 3 different maps, you end up going no where. I better be careful, the next time I squash a mosquito, I know I have killed a Buddhist. SC: I do not like to mix and match philosophies. That itself is too simplistic to asumme to be optimal. It may seem very elegant to pick from the best and merge them all in one. But isn’t it a bit like putting a Volvo engine in a Toyota and replacing the petrol with alcohol. Could one really expect optimal performance form such a contrived concoction? Gerard:Far from that when you mix different dog breeds they turn up to be smarter than the pure ones, don't they? SC: Unfortunately they are called mongrels and have very low value. Wonder why . SC:Taoist meditation circulate Chi, Gerardaoist meditational practices will also open the thrusting channel, which lead to the opening of the upper dantien and ultimately the Bai Hui SC:Buddhist drive Chi ( prana) in a vertical line up to the head. Gerard: Nothing wrong, same as Daoists SC:This is an incorrect statement. Taoists circulate Chi in an orbit , Buddhists drive it in a vertical line. You are displaying lack of knowledge about the most basic concepts of Taoism. Unless you read Cleary and he got it wrong ? SC:Taoism is about man living in harmony with Nature. Confuciansm is about Man living in harmony with Man. Gerard:Nothing wrong, r u just saying that u live in a cave in the Blue Mountains? SC: Now you are being facetious. General Sun Tzu( Art of War ) not only lived amongst men, he lead an army and was a Taoist of high attainment. Most enlightened Taoist live amongst society , but keep a very low profile. The low achievers hide in caves , because they cant handle the city life that affects their stillness. Sorry to blow up the myth. Didn’t Cleary say that ? [B]Gerard: CONFUCIOUS WAS A DAOIST HIMSELF SC : [/B] There is a misunderstanding. Did Cleary say that ?Confucious tried to learn the Tao , but failed. His attitude of creating artificial rules of social behaviour violates the most basic tenets of Taoism. Taoism is about doing things the natural way, not creating artificial contrived systems. Confucious was Confused. Lao Tzu achieved immortality, Confucious died. Gerard:Actually Daoism was also prosecuted and banned due to corruption and immoral practices SC: Your misunderstanding is due to your lack of historical knowledge . Daoism was suppressed after Kublai Khan ( 13th century) took power and favoured Buddhism over Taoism. Same as when Catholics persecuted Protestants and vice versa. SC:In view of such fundamentally opposing principles , it would be unhelpful to mix Taoism, Buddhism and Confucianism together. Gerard:I do and there is nothing wrong with me. I checked my tongue and it is still red! SC: Is that the sophisticated criteria of truth you apply ? Try checking your mind, is it empty ? Hope you remember in Taoism , one tries to Empty the mind, not cranium. Gerard:Soggycat, my opinion is that u have negatively influenced by Christian hypocrisy and ignorance. This doesn't mean that I have some hard feelings on u. Sorry if u find me offensive, but I try to b honest to the core SC: No, but it appears you try to be offensive more so than to be honest. But I could be wrong. So I offer you a dose of your own “honesty” It appears that you subscribe to the believe of “ mix and matching”. I don’t . I also read about Buddhism and Confucianism, but I do not incorporate those practices. Ultimately I believe those who seek enlightment thru Taoism should stay the path and not mix it with Buddhism or Confucianism. Similarly, those who seek Enlightenment thru Buddhism, should not mix it with Taoism.
Phew... quite long 1. How exactly do you know there was an 'original non-religious' Tao if you dont research what is authentic and what is not? 2. Academic studies of Taoism don't really have anything to do with trying to instruct you on how to practice. Thats not their point. Someone who studies the Catholic Church does not then become a priest. Id concede not many but I still think its best to study 'original' sources- you can take courses in Classical Chinese several of my flatmates in fact are. Well firstly Im by no means "a learned Taoist" I don't know or practice any Taoist practices so I apologise if I gave that impression. Absolutely though I am very familiar with this premise but there is a difference between being open to learning new things and restricting yourself to only sources of information that fit with your desires- surely thats not very Taoist? Well for your own benefit your giving me more credit than Im due Im only 20 but incidentally I think that a persons age is not necessarily any reflection of their wisdom or maturity for that matter. For a start you have had 15 years more to accumulate bad habits Oh and also again if you limit yourself to learning from only people who fit your 'ideal teacher' image your severely limiting yourself. What does the age of the person have to do with you? You learn things in your own body and you react to what other people say so if you learn something from a 6 year old its still you who understood it, the age or the character of the person who helps you see something is really not that important... Just a thought by the way when Western people practice Eastern religions they tend to strive for the 'Pure, original form' even to such an extent that they consider the forms practiced in countries where the religion originated from to be pervasions of the original message. You can see this highlighted quite well by the Pali Text society who decided that the 'Original, Pure' Buddhist teachings where only contained in those texts. The point is however that in the end the 'Pure, Original form' is a Western construct and dream. So when you try to seperate the 'Pure, Original form' from the cultural baggage I think its always important to recognise what criteria your using, if its simply what you think is the pure and original form id be wary and if your going simply by what can be authenticated as the oldest and untainted teachings Id be wary... If your father taught you this and was Buddhist, then he could well be one of those followers who "got it wrong". The view of Buddhism as a nihilistic religion was one created by missionaries when they first came into contact with the teachings this label has since been refuted. If you want to see what Im talking about I would suggest you read any introductory Buddhist book addressed to Western readers, Id recommend the Dalai Lama's books or if you want an academic one Donald Lopez's "Prisoners of Shangri-la" address previous misconceptions as well. Oh and by the way what original texts did your father read in Chinese? Buddhism originated in India and the most 'original' texts are the Pali cannon... For some examples of why I dont agree: If someone says I want to liberate you from suffering is that the equivalent of saying I want to help you disappear. Bodhisattvas. Nirvana is supposed to be a state of permanency this would seem almost be the opposite of disappearing? Buddhists dont just disappear when they attain enlightenement.
1. I think many people would debate this "established fact". 2. Actually they are encouraged to read the bible... Let me ask you this is it wrong to read the Tao Te Ching and then listen to a master who helps you understand the meaning? 3. They used Latin because they wanted to mantain authenticity and tradition but if you think they still do this you should go to a Catholic mass. And if you dont think they still do it and probably didnt do it in Gerards lifetime what are you complaining about? Things have changed. 4. Your response betrays you have a prejudiced and sectarian view- you would get on well with some people in Northern Ireland. Oh and you should maybe update your arguments alots changed since the reformation...
SC I am sure you know this is a generalised statement,so why not add "I feel that blah blah" rather then presenting this blanket statement as an absolute?You seem to do this often and it only opens your arguments up for ridicule. If I said: "all westerners disreguard the the socieo-cultural considerations in their interpretations of the Daoist translations available to them" You could well answer "well no not all".To make it more specific I could replace "all westerners" with "SC." Here is another example of your dogmatic veiws,You present what you have said as an absolute,willing to explain why(you feel) you are right,but not to accept any variation.While still attacking research and further research into such matters.
Ckava CKAVA:How exactly do you know there was an 'original non-religious' Tao if you dont research what is authentic and what is not? SC: If you don’t already know Taoism was originally a Philosophy before it was adulterated into a religion, that is an indication of the depth of your understanding. In which case I’m now more likely to suspect everything else you say about Taoism is highly unrealiable since you are unaware of the most fundamental points. It must be your lack of experience. CKAVA:I’d concede not many but I still think its best to study 'original' sources- you can take courses in Classical Chinese several of my flatmates in fact are. SC: This is really wasting my time. I already said I agree it is best to read it in original Chinese, failing which an English translation is the next best thing especially in view of the fact most non Chinese can’t read Chinese. Why are we belabouring the point when I have already agreed with you? Quote: Originally Posted by soggycat SC: To answer you good question, let me quote from the Tao Te Ching: Those who often know much , understand little. Taoism is critical of “artificially knowledge” , it obscures “ natural knowledge” Taoism encourages letting go of artificial knowledge, acquiring emptiness... Well firstly Im by no means "a learned Taoist" I don't know or practice any Taoist practices so I apologise if I gave that impression. Absolutely though I am very familiar with this premise but there is a difference between being open to learning new things and restricting yourself to only sources of information that fit with your desires- surely thats not very Taoist? SC : No, Taoism actually warns against acquiring “too much artificial knowledge” If you arent aware of that, please re-read the parts about “ LESS is MORE” in the Tao Te Ching. CKAVA:For your own benefit your giving me more credit than Im due Im only 20 but incidentally I think that a persons age is not necessarily any reflection of their wisdom or maturity for that matter. For a start you have had 15 years more to accumulate bad habits SC: Spoken like a true know-it-all youth. 15 years more experience also means 15 years of exploration, self discovery and learning from mistakes. I must nag myself not to debate with people of that age, it’s as exciting as telling a kid that he needs to eat his veggies because it’s good for him. Hmmmmm I wonder how many 20 year old philosophers made it big ? I think when you pick up afew more years of life experience, your perspective will change. I don’t see things the way I did when I was yout age too. I also thought and argued like you. Because everyone is right subject to the amount of information that’s available to that person at that point in time. Everything changes, hopefully in a progressive way. CKAVA:If your father taught you this and was Buddhist, then he could well be one of those followers who "got it wrong". The view of Buddhism as a nihilistic religion was one created by missionaries when they first came into contact with the teachings this label has since been refuted. If you want to see what Im talking about I would suggest you read any introductory Buddhist book addressed to Western readers, Id recommend the Dalai Lama's books or if you want an academic one Donald Lopez's "Prisoners of Shangri-la" address previous misconceptions as well. Oh and by the way what original texts did your father read in Chinese? Buddhism originated in India and the most 'original' texts are the Pali cannon.. SC: Firstly, let me point out your mistake. Buddha was born in South Nepal, not India. Secondly, you are recommending that I read about Buddhism from a Western book. What happened to your favour ed view of reading it in original language? CKAVA:Buddhists dont just disappear when they attain enlightenement. SC: Semantics: Buddhist achieve enlightment when they disappear from this world of suffering. They cease to exist when the reach Nirvana enlightenment. You seem to think I’m suggesting Taoism is better than Buddhism. I’m not saying that. I’m saying it’s best not to mix Buddhism or Taoism. If Buddha , and who would argue with him, thought that was a good idea, wouldn’t he have incorporated Taoist ideas into his teachings. After all Buddha was born circa 550BC, when Taoism was already in existence 1-2000 years earlier.
CKAVA: I think many people would debate this "established fact". SC: I think you should meet a few more Catholics and a few more Protestants before you come to any conclusion. CKAVA: Actually they are encouraged to read the bible... Let me ask you this is it wrong to read the Tao Te Ching and then listen to a master who helps you understand the meaning? SC: Of course not, this sounds like a really redundant question. I say a Catholic should read the bible for himself. A Taoist should read the Tao Te Ching for himself. Which part didnt you understand ? CKAVA:They used Latin because they wanted to mantain authenticity and tradition but if you think they still do this you should go to a Catholic mass. SC: If authenticity was their concern, then mass should be conducted in Greek or Aramaic the original languages of the Bible . Jesus didn't speak LATIN ! It was kept in Latin to allow the Vatican to maintain it's global control. Church and Politics make good bedfellows. Maybe you are too naive to understand that. I agree, it's not done in Latin anymore in most places, but I already said that earlier.
Hi my friends, there is too much yang in here with ying underneath. Be careful when crossing the river as it could be too wide to cross to the other side. I don't want to continue anymore as I can drown. Peace and love for everyone. Sorry Soggycat for arguing. Gerard.
1st post Personal jibes aside, again I would ask how did you become aware of the 'original non religious Tao' what do you base your knowledge on? Is it what you have read from books and if so why do you accept the opinion of those who wrote/translated the books? You dont value academic research so how do you know the translations your reading aren't translations of texts that have since been proved to have been written later than was originally thought. How do you know what your aquiring isn't artificial knowledge? After all you dont value researching the validity of what your reading. Ho Hum... I wonder what your response would have been if I had said im a 27 year old university lecturer it seems you do in fact put quite alot of value on external things: what I would have thought would majoritively only relate to "artificial knowledge". And quite right you should remember not to engage with "arguments" with people younger than you (and I would suggest older as well) because if you cant have your point of view questioned without having to resort to arguing then its something you should work on. Oh and lastly I didnt actually say you had spent 15 years picking up bad habits I actually menat it in a lighthearted way hence the maybe your pride got in the way of understanding my intention? Oh and off course its your right to believe that philosophers must be old men and I presume all that nonsense about returning to the open attitude of a child you don't agree with either? But I am glad you wouldnt consider me to be capable of philosphising Im much too practical for that 1. If you must nitpick he was not born in Southern Nepal as it didn't exist at the time, I was simply using India as a collective term for the kingdoms that existed in his era and the culture of that time was distinctly 'Indian'. 2. Well I assume you can't read the original texts (in Sanskrit, Pali or Tibetan/Chinese translations?) and secondly because I was giving you books which address Western misconceptions of Buddhism- which oodly isn't really addressed in early texts... Oh and I did say "if you want a Western author", I recommended the Dalai Lama before that. No 'they' don't... As I said to you before they 'exist' permanently however if you mean they aren't in this world anymore then yeah ok but you do remember that most people who enter Nirvana do so when they die? And enlightenment is quite different from Nirvana. But you are saying what you practice is closer to the "pure, original Taoism" than most in China right? 2nd Post Sorry soggy I lived my whole life in Northern Ireland Ive met more than my fair share of both... AND I again submit that you most people would disagree with your established fact. So what was this about "Find yourself a mentor who is willing to be your guide in learning about the Tao." I was attempting to point out soggy that despite your prejudiced view that the Catholic approach needn't be less valid that the Protestant one- why does their have to be a better way? By any chance is it because you are a Protestant? Holy moly yes Jesus didn't speak Latin but the services conducted in Latin could certainly be traced back a hell of a long time... Remember soggy the Catholic Church has been ruled from Rome for some time now and what language did they speak there? And I dont really get the point of your last post? Was it just a casual jab at Catholocism? I never debated that the Catholic Church in the past was highly political I was simply giving you the reason that was stated for why the mass was still performed in Latin.
Thats admirable Gerard. Though I think its important to recognise that if someone disagrees with our points and we get angry chances are its because we dont like having our illusions brought up. If we were 100% happy with our own viewpoint we would not get angry with people who tried pointing out holes in it as there would be none. Anyway put simply as I said before if we only listen to what agrees with what we think we will live very comfortably in our illusion and never have to address the reality of the world outside Personally I prefer having my illusion shattered than cementing them...
This thread has had some interesting discussion in it, and I asked my teacher about a couple of the points in contest. These are his beliefs on the subject as an accomplished qigong master-- nothing more. So preface this whole thing with a big "I feel that..." 1) Taoism is we practice it is contingent upon a free and clear energy system. The practice of qigong is much easier to DO than it is to understand, so he encourages us to not think too much while learning and practicing qigong. It is a process of letting go, not building up. The Tao Te Ching verse 48 illustrates the point quite clearly. This is why there is an emphasis on not taking an academic approach-- practicing spiritual qigong requires you to quiet your mind, which is a different goal from becoming ignorant. I would prefer to think of it as becoming wise. 2) Mixing Buddhism and Taoism may not work if you think about it in a purely philosophical sense, but many have found that the mental practices of buddhism combine quite nicely with the physical practices of taoism. I personally believe that both paths lead to the same place, ultimately, and that the differences mainly lie in the view of the body. I don't think it is an abberation to mix them, though I wouldn't recommend many of the buddhist qigongs either. Ultimately, I think S.C. has a good point in that there is a big difference between practicing taoism, and studying taoism. As a philosophy, it is wonderful to understand, but it is a whole different thing to do the physical practice.
Thanks for the very friendly put post Hwardo But I hope you realise Im not disputing the fact that their is a difference between 'practicing' and 'learning about' I simply think that one does not necessarily have to interfere with the other. For example, some people on my university course studying Taoism and Buddhism were annoyed that their wasnt any "practice" performed and I think this is because they are making a fundamental mistake- academic study is not intended to be a substitute for practice, they are operating in different fields. However, I think if your aware of this distinction then having an awareness of the origins of Taoism, the different ways it is practiced and performed, some of the issues that it has had- both in the academic sense and in the internal philosphical sense and how others who have practiced or been involved have thought about it- can actually enhance your practice as it prevents you from creating a dogmatic perspective of your practice i.e. that your practice is the one true way... (And Im using the example of Taoism but you could apply it to any religion). So in summary; No, academic study or even non-academic study (something that doesnt seem to have been addressed) can not replace actual practice. But they can help provide greater awareness.
I totally agree-- I think that the potential for growth is much higher with all the insight that is available through academic study. In a way, it provides us with a template or a map for our practice. Two sides to every coin, huh?
I'm demonstarting my application of " Wu Wei' and not pursuing in any pointless action. There 's just too much pseudo intellectual academic arm chair wisdom thrown around this thread , it's stifling me. My words speak for itself. Thanks Hwardo for the enlightening comments about Taoism and Buddhism, and thank you all for the supportive private emails some of you have sent to me . Now I understand why my teacher said it is so hard for people to attain the Tao.
