That was Zen, this is Tao!

[Antonius]

Differences and Similarities

I would like to thank Barry for highlighting to the crux of this thread:

Any answers would give me some indication about whether they are different paths to the same thing or different paths to different things.

I have been arguing that Taoism and Zen are different paths to the same place. Others have been arguing that Taoism and Zen are similar or shared paths to the same place.

I have offered specific examples of how Zen is a distinctly different path than Taoism. Others have offered mostly general examples suggesting that Zen and Taoism are blended together. I have given specific examples of the differing methodologies between Zen and Taoism, as well as examples of the differeing philosophies. Others have given general examples of similarities between Zen and Taoism (citing these as proof of cross-fertalization).

It's worthwhile to note that general similarities can be found between many of the world's religions -- an exercise that shows that many (or all) of the world's religions ultimately talk about the same goal. This exercise does not, however, show that all of the world's religions are cross-fertilized.

The many similarities between the word's religions show us that they are all paths to the same goal. The specific differences between the world's religions are what make them each a unique path to that goal.

[Sifu Stier]

Historical Rivalry Continues Today!

It is a well known fact that a mostly friendly rivalry has existed in Chinese culture and society between the various Buddhist and Taoist Sects for many, many centuries. I can say from my own experience of living in Hong Kong for a number of years time, and regularly travelling to Singapore, Macau, Taiwan, and even the PRC, that such rivalry continues even nowadays. It was interesting to note while I was there, however, that Chinese culture, and the Chinese psyche, generally speaking, is so steeped in Taoist thinking that philosophical concepts of the Great Tao, Yin and Yang, Five Elements, Ten Celestial Stems and Twelve Terrestrial Branches, and so forth, permeate every part of Chinese life including, but not limited to, Chinese Astrology, Feng-Shui, Traditional Medical Practice such as Acupuncture and Herbal Medicines, the planting and harvesting of crops, and so forth. I found this 'ethnic identification' with these concepts to be so all encompassing in Chinese society as to be a great part of what it means to the average man and woman on the street to be a Chinese. Even those who are Buddhist monks and nuns share and express their connection to Taoist concepts as a natural part of their self-identity as a Chinese. As such, I found that most people there tended to relate to foreign ideas and practices such as Western Medicine, European Philosophy, and foreign political ideology by comparison to traditional Chinese thinking regarding such things. It's nearly impossible to avoid references to Taoist culture anywhere in the Chinese sectors of the Orient, with the possible exception of the modern People's Republic of China. The same seems to hold true among Chinese enclaves outside the Orient, such as the large Chinatown communities found in larger cities abroad. Therefore, having seen, heard, and experienced this cultural phenomenon first hand, I can't imagine that Buddhism or any other 'ism' not originally native to China could possibly escape the influence of classical Taoist thought. And I hope everyone here understands that I am not making references to Religious Taoism and its various rites, rituals, or beliefs, but to Philosophical Taoism only. For anyone to deny and dismiss the influence of Taoist conceptual thinking on anything Chinese, including Chinese Buddhism, is in my opinion both inaccurate and ignorant!

[Darryl]

Ground rules for continuation

Good evening everyone, I'll be your Moderator for the evening and would just like to welcome everyone to the largest thread on the forum so far.

So far, in a nice and simple little summary, we have two main views -

1) - The 'Oil & Water' view
2) - The 'Melting Pot' view

It would seem that I have managed to find two contradictions by selecting a duality to demonstrate singularity and singularity to demonstrate duality. Luckily, it's all just words. The actual thoughts (non thoughts?) should be the focus (lack of focus?) of this debate.

This has the potential to still be an excellent thread and since it's gone this far, it can still go farther. However, I do agree that it should be kept at a Moderated level, without people having to bang their heads against brick walls or feel that things are still not getting through to the other side. Since I have neither side (and don't really care anyway), I feel that I am in an excellent posititon to wander around and point fingers .

First bit of finger pointing,

For anyone to deny and dismiss the influence of Taoist conceptual thinking on anything Chinese, including Chinese Buddhism, is in my opinion both inaccurate and ignorant

A stated opinion is fair enough, but to keep the thread moving towards new territory we can accept that there are two very different views being expressed in this thread and that both have their place (within Moderation). As such, lets accept that the common ground is that there are two differring positions and move on from there.

Typically, a debate occurs when one person states a view, provides an example to back up their view and then waits for a continuation or rebuttal from another person. At the moment, we have many rebuttals, some excellent posts but a rather clunky continuation. However, given that the majority view is not always the accurate view, equal consideration should be given to the minority view and the possibility entertained that stranger things have been known to happen.

[Ovidius]

A perspective

First, thanks to everyone for a wonderful thoughts and thanks to Anthony for reviving the thread!

So much has been said, I'll try to comment them later because I have in my mind something else...

two main views -

1) - The 'Oil & Water' view
2) - The 'Melting Pot' view

Having read descriptions about what Taoism is I cannot make a conclusion that it is entirely a unitary doctrine with a certain set of practices and beliefs that can be classified as "Taoism". What do you think? To say that Taoist practices are aiming to "Tao" or "Immortality" may not be strong evidence against this because "Tao" is used also in Buddhist literature (as it is stated here) and Immortality is also the aim of Christianity (Immortality in Heaven) and many other religions practices. In this way, it could be said, that almost any practice (including witchcraft etc.) that exists in China could be put to "Taoism box", and to support this putting into "Taoism box", we can surely find a suitable verse from Daodejing. In this way, when we speak Taoist practices and the whole network of beliefs, they could be interpreted to be so wide that they cover also the tenets of Chan Buddhism. But not the other way, since Chan is a narrower view. (This is not to say that "Chan is not as complete" or that "Taoism is a wide open doctrine".)

If this is true, then if you are a Taoist, you can easily accept Chan as one instance of "searching the Tao", and enjoy the supporting evidence of "Melting Pot" view. But if you identify yourself more as a Chan Buddhist, then you most likely differentiate Chan from Taoism, because it looks too broad and colourful concept to have anything to do with Chan, and you enjoy supporting the "Oil & Water" view.

[Antonius]

Lets have some fun

While the opposition continues with generalizations and personal attacks (ignorant?), my Shaolin Wahnam schoolmates and I give specific example after specific example showing that Zen is Zen and Taoism is Taoism.

In summary: Zen is simple, direct, and effective. Taoism, of course, is also effective, but it is arcane and symbolic.

Let's have some fun with this thread. Reproduced below are two different passages chosen at random -- one from a famous Zen source and the other from a famous Taoist source. Can you tell which is which? I'll leave it for a day or so, and then provide the answer. (Please don't spoil the fun for others by giving the answer away.)

Passage 1

In the North Sea, there is a kind of fish. Its name is Kun. Kun’s body is extremely huge, its length extending to unknown thousands of miles. Suddenly it changed into a bird. Its name is Peng. Peng’s back is even bigger, its width extending to unknown thousands of miles.

When it exerts with force, Peng flies up from the sea to the sky, and its wings are like gigantic clouds at the horizon. Whenever storms arise in the North Sea, the Peng bird fly to the South Sea. The South Sea is void without boundary. It is not created by man’s work. It is created by Heaven and Earth, so it is also known as the Lake of Heaven.

Passage 2

Yue An asked a student: Chi Chong made one hundred carriages. He retained the front of the carriage but removed the back, then removed the spokes of the wheels. What remained of the carriage?

(Note: Chi Chong was known in classical China as an expert in making carriages.)

[Sifu Stier]

Cultivating Inner Balance!

"Usually, without being aware of it, we try to change someone or something other than ourselves. We try to order things outside us. But it is impossible to organize things if you yourself are not in order"

Shunryu Suzuki Roshi (Soto Zen Master) from 'Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind'

[Andrew]

That is a wonderful quote. Thanks Sifu Stier.

I read 3 important things from it regarding this thread - my interpretation of course:

it is impossible to organize things if you yourself are not in order

- One should first achieve good health and mental clarity (just some of the wonderful benefits of our Chi Kung and Kung Fu - including Taijiquan - training) before trying to convince others that the Arts we practice are capable of helping the practitioner achieve such. In the same way, one should have experience of an Art before talking authoritively about it.

Usually, without being aware of it, we try to change someone or something other than ourselves. We try to order things outside us.

- One should review ones own beliefs and views before considering an attempt to change others' beliefs and views.
- One or more claims were made in this thread which do not coincide with beliefs, views nor experience of others. I think it was/is in defence of existing beliefs and experience that many, including Shaolin Wahnam instructors such as Anthony post(ed). When one's beliefs, knowledge and views, based on extensive personal and, most important, practical experience (and not just hearsay or scholarly research) are challenged then it is fair and correct to defend them.

We know that some of our views - such as that genuine Kung Fu can be used effectively for fighting or that genuine high level Chi Kung can overcome incurable diseases - do not reflect the views of the vast majority. Personal experience has proven those seemingly outlandish and minority views to be true. Because the literature written by so-called experts refutes those claims does that mean we should accept their word. Our job is not to persuade others that our view is correct but to give those with an open mind and open heart the opportunity to experience these benefits for themselves. If our knowledge, experience and/or views are openly challenged it is our right and responsibility to defend them.

Andrew

[barrys]

In my experience in a number of aspects of my life, attraction is preferable to promotion. Also, my limited understanding of Zen is that "facts" are missing the point.

A chap in the nineteen thirties had an experience that changed his life so profoundly that he wanted to tell the world about it. He went around preaching the rightness and wonder of his experience both politely and with passion. His experience was that nothing came of it - no-one was helped. He changed his approach. He shared his experience with those he thought might find it helpful. Some people weren't attracted to this mans way of life sufficiently, others were. Those people saw a man who was living a life they weren't capable of and were prepared to do what he had done. The word spread slowly and gradually, and came to help many people across the world. He also passed this aspect of his experience on - passed it on by direct transmission.

I have seen it in action. I have watched people who were hopeless and desperate be attracted by people who had been there also and managed to turn their face towards the light. It is a humbling experience. No-one preaching, only giving. More than that - recognising that preaching to another can deny them the one thing you hope to pass on to them. It is sometimes difficult, even then, to stop myself.

In my humble opinion, right is irrelavant. What works is what is important - and what seems to work is both subtly different and exactly the same for each individual.

Thank you all for continuing this post and helping me come to examine my own experience and what I have learned from it.

Last post before OZ - honest,

Barry

[Sifu Stier]

Names and Terms!

The Soto Zen Master Liang Chiai said: "Buddha and Tao are but names and terms. Why do you not expound upon the Teachings? The leader of the assembly inquired: "What does the Teaching tell us?" The Master said: "When the meaning is understood, words are forgotten!"

[Andrew]

I'm sorry Sifu Stier but I fail to see the relevance of the above quote. Without understanding the context in which it was made it is impossible to make any judgement on its meaning. The word "Tao" is used but there is, as far as I can see, no implication - and certainly no evidence - of a union between Buddhism and Taoism to be taken from the quote.

Andrew

[Sifu Stier]

Seeing the Forest through the Trees!

Andrew:

You spoke truthfully indeed! There is very, very much that you fail to see. Apparently you and others here are so attached to, and therefore stuck in, an adversarial mode that you 'can't see the forest through the trees', just like the person to whom the Master's quote was originally addressed! Perhaps some small understanding of the quote's relevance will come to you in a 'Sudden Realization' later on. My heartfelt empathy and compassion go out to you!

[Darryl]

Moderators Post

Hi folks,

Apparently you and others here are so attached to, and therefore stuck in, an adversarial mode that you 'can't see the forest through the trees'

Typically, a debate occurs when one person states a view, provides an example to back up their view and then waits for a continuation or rebuttal from another person.At the moment, we have many rebuttals

Dear SifuStier,

In the spirit of keeping this thread fluid and alive (along with compassion and empathy), can you continue with an interpretation of how your quote relates to the topic at hand in a way that will allow the debate to continue.

As your comment's are more symbolic in nature, I am presuming that you are currently in a very 'Taoist mood'. As Andrew apperars to be looking for specifics, I am presuming that he is currently in a 'Zen mood'. As I have just finished my dinner, I am in a 'happy mood' .

One heartwarming quote I found many pages back is

I am neither a Buddhist or a Taoist, per se, so I really don't have any personal investment in such arguments one way or the other

As the thread's Moderator, I get to separate sqabbles, give out lollipops and maintain a happy playground. Lets see if we can all play together .

Thank you

[Sifu Stier]

'We look at it and do not see it;
Its Name is The Invisible.
We listen to it and do not hear it;
Its Name is The Inaudible.
We touch it and do not feel it;
Its Name is The Intangible.
These three cannot be further inquired into,
and hence merge into One.'

I never intended for this thread to be a 'debate', but rather a comparative discussion. I am not the opponent of anyone here. All those who perceive that I am have only their own attachments to personal discriminations and value judgements to contend with, only their own insecure egos to overcome. It has been clearly demonstrated thus far that blind men cannot see; deaf men cannot hear; and that those who tenaciously hold onto only their own limited view cannot grasp anything else!

Certainly, given the supposed expertise of those demanding interpretation of quoted Masters, you should be more than able to figure it all out without my humble assistance. I merely offer you some food for thought which you may do with what you will, and more power to you all.

[Chiahua]

In this way, it could be said, that almost any practice (including witchcraft etc.) that exists in China could be put to "Taoism box", and to support this putting into "Taoism box", we can surely find a suitable verse from Daodejing.

I think that's part of why the Daodejing is so brief. Maybe the author(s) wanted to create a work so versatile, so flexible, that it could provide useful wisdom to those who want to investigate. For example, the notion of "polar opposites". You can read this idea into many situations; whether or not reading "polar opposites" into a situation (combative, intellectual, creative) depends on what opposites are drawn, and how such a construct is used...
Sifu Stier, it's interesting that you found Taoism to be a strong influence in Hong Kong, because I always thought that capitalism and the almighty (Hong Kong) dollar was the strongest influence on that island .
But seriously, despite being an American Born Chinese (ABC) and not truly qualified to speak of such matters, I feel that in terms of cultural influence it's always been a matter of expediency for the common folk. That is to say, within the culture you have different beliefs fulfilling different functions during an individual's life. A person may go to a (religious) Taoist temple for good luck on a business venture, and the same person may go to a Buddhist temple to pray for the well being of a departed loved one's spirit, and the cult of ancestor worship is a daily morning ritual (for Grandmama, at least).
I just love gross generalizations!

[Antonius]

When the meaning is understood, words are forgotten!

Sifu Stier, with all due respect, I fail to see how ignoring the polite requests of moderators by repeatedly resorting to personal attacks illustrates an understanding of either Zen Buddhism or Taoism.

Quite frankly, I don't see why you persist with these allusions to war and "adversarial confrontation". This is a discussion, and a polite one at that. There is no flaming. There is no abusive language. The discussions are intelligent and articulate. And except for your repeated personal attacks, no one here has attacked anyone else personally. All of my so-called "attacks" have been firmly on the subject at hand -- the only exceptions being when I have been forced to moderate you.

You have been and remain welcome to express views different from my own and different from my Sifu's views. You are welcome to compare and contrast Zen and Taoism -- the original purpose of this thread. You are welcome to offer rebuttals to my arguments. The only thing you are not welcome to do is to continue using personal attacks as a "rebuttal."