That was Zen, this is Tao!

[Sifu Stier]

Imagination is more important than knowledge!

Hello Chia-hua:

Correct. Once the energy directing and controlling visualization has been successfully implanted in the subconscious mind, the manifestation of it will automatically continue indefinitely. In the example you pose of the Small Heaven Circle or Micro-Cosmic Orbit, once the visualization of the energy movement and function, etc., is successfully programmed into the subconscious mind, it will automatically activate with the commencement of any training exercise, initially by merely intending for it to do so, and with continued follow-up programming will eventually be automatically activated at all times 24 hours everyday, 7 days every week, 365 days every year.....indefinitely! It will not be necessary to consciously imagine or visualize the process perpetually. Was this not also true of learning to tie our shoes, use chop-sticks, ride bicycles, drive automobiles, recall information and experiences from our memory bank, and virtually every other regularly repeated activity we normally engage ourselves in? This is why "Imagination is more important than knowledge"!

[Chiahua]

If the food's ready, I'll eat.

...since we also read the literature of both, I believe that we are in a better position to understand the two traditions than scholars who merely read about them.
...
But isn't analyzing texts what scholars do best? I think it's worthwhile to remember that both Zen and Taoist texts point at experiences that are beyond words. In this regard, a purely theoretical understanding of Zen or Taoist texts is inferior to an understanding based on direct experience.
...
In both Zen Buddhism and Taoism, direct experience of the lessons is of the utmost important. Without direct experience, the lessons are empty.

I don't disagree with the points made here at all. I'd like to clarify that the nature of the understanding aimed at is necessarily different from the nature of understanding that a scholar aims at, and are used for different purposes. The aim of scholarship in this case is to clarify the story that is left behind by the archaelogical record, and a scholar necessarily chooses to limit him or herself to what is written. Yes, it is sort of bizarre when the bulk of the teachings are beyond the words and yet scholars choose to work with what is left of the written record (which is not impervious to the ravages of time). One of my former professors presented an analogy when talking about reading Sutras and other such texts in translation: it is like looking at the back of a tapestry. You can see the general pattern of the tapestry, but you don't see the true beauty that lies on the other side.
If one's aim is practice of Ch'an or Taoism, then yes, scholarship is insufficient. However, if one is interested in the intellectual history or philology, then one needs to read and study. Heart to heart transmission is vital for practice, but for tracing the history of a movement the written record is vital.

...More importantly, why was their form of meditation so different than that found in Zen?
...If Tao and and Hui Yuan founded the Zen school, why is Zen characteristicially different from Sarvastivada?

Could this be explained by the development of the different schools of Zen? According to my understanding there was a Northern or Southern school of Zen, the Northern school being rubbed out by the Southern school. Just some wild speculation.

Happy day,
Chia-Hua

[Sifu Stier]

Is it Soup yet?

Certainly, the importance of the Classical texts in describing what to do and how to do it is very important to all who live in different times and places than the originators of the methods and the scholars who documented their teachings, but even the most venerable and accomplished scholarship cannot supercede the equal or greater importance of validating the teaching and the practice methods through direct, personal experience under the guided instruction of a competent teacher who has already succeeded in doing both. Hence, the ancient Chinese tradition of the 'Scholar Warrior', a legendary ideal of combined scholarship and practice experience, a superior man of both action and intellect. Masters such as the late Sifu Sun Lu-tang are excellent examples.

[Chiahua]

soup or salad, or both!

I suppose I was trying to say that not everyone who studies Taoism or Zen is doing so because they want to understand it as a practitoner would. Some people just want to trace the different doctrines and their evolution and stuff. When there are no living practitioners of a given school, that's the best people can come up with, by going back to the archaelogical (and by extension, the written) record. It's interesting in its own right. As for what is the "best understanding", then that depends on what one's goals are... I would like to have understanding of both personally.

[Sifu Stier]

The best of both worlds!

Quite so indeed! I have always loved the academic study and the experiental learning through practice both to be sure. Like you, I want ever greater understanding from both perspectives. And why not? It's all good!

[Sifu Stier]

Post Script!

Isn't it interesting and significant that originators of most of these time honored methods advocated the combined system of academic study and experiential practice? Their Wisdom was very sound and logical as it allows the practitioner to structure the experiental learning and practice according to the directions and information in the Classical Texts (Ching) such as those listed in the Outline of Skillful Writings (Yi-Wen-Lueh), while simultaneously providing a means of validating and authenticating the writings through the direct, personal experience of the practices described in the texts!

[Michael Durkin]

Dear SifuStier,

To quote the part of that post where you question Anthony on the 2nd January (post number 290) :

Would you please comment from your own experience with Zen meditation as to how your expressions of the external constraints previously mentioned above reflect the Buddha's teachings regarding the abandonment of ego and personality in order to get to the heart of the matter? Thank you!

This discussion isn't about the "Buddha's teachings regarding the abandonment of ego and personality". The reason why Anthony may have ignored it was because it was simply off topic. This kind of request would be better off in a new thread and not here where it distracts from the main topic. You have been asked many times to stay on topic. I wouldn't be surprised if Anthony and the other moderators are just getting tired of telling you to do so.

The aim here is to discuss:

1. Whether Zen is a blend of Indian Buddhism and Chinese Taoism.
2. Whether there is a chasm between scholarly speculation and direct experience.

This discussion really needs clarity and focus, which in some cases you aren't providing. Ironically you want to get to the heart of the matter by going off topic. I'm not saying your efforts are wasted, but I think some of the off topic additions you have brought to this thread, as interesting as they are, would be much better used in a new discussion. Because of the great length of this discussion, off topic additions only increase the length of the thread. They do not help in clarifying the above two aims.

Also, may I offer my opinion on your misunderstanding from this quote below:

You think that Taoist meditators have devoted their time and efforts, in many instances like my Sifu's through long lifetimes, to learning these techniques solely for the pupose of memorizing a guided visualization technique, and that each and every time they meditated it was necessary for them use a visualization technique in order to enter any meditative state? What a hoot!!

The point I think you are missing is that Anthony wasn't disagreeing with what you said about visualisation generally being used in the beginning stages, or that your practice was only about visualisation techniques. Anthony just presents evidence of visualisation being used in advanced techniques. More importantly, from recognised, mainstream Taoist classics, not his biased choice of "beloved books".

For you to try and claim that Anthony is saying that all the effort of yourself and your Master(s) in Taoist training were "for naught" is not fair. He's not attacking you or your Master(s). You forget that Anthony has stated that we (including myself) in Shaolin Wahnam have been lucky to have Taoist teachings from our Sifu, including practices with visualisation. If we believed visualisation was a waste of time, why would we we practice it too? From what I have experienced, and from what you have written, I believe we correctly understand that visualisation is a means to an end, its certainly not the end in itself.

If this discussion continues, it is likely readers, for example yourself SifuStier, will start misinterpreting and taking offence unfairly. Therefore I think it would be a good idea for a summarisation and a conclusion. New, more defined topics can start from there.

Take care,
Michael

[Antonius]

Dantian Breathing vs. The Void

You think that Taoist meditators have devoted their time and efforts, in many instances like my Sifu's through long lifetimes, to learning these techniques solely for the pupose of memorizing a guided visualization technique, and that each and every time they meditated it was necessary for them use a visualization technique in order to enter any meditative state?

I don't know what other Taoist meditators do. I only know what I have been taught by Sifu Wong, what I read in Taoist classics, and what I do.

In my experience, yes, every time I do Dantian Breathing, I use what I would call visualization. But that word falls short, and is not always a totally accurate way of describing what is happening. I could easily substitute the word "realization."

The first few minutes of Dantian Breathing involve more of a "conscious" visualization to get the ball rolling (pun intended -- energy ball, nudge, wink), but after that, I just let go. But even after I let go of the visualization, I am still using visualization. For example, when I make the transition from "breathing" to "being breathed," I am still using a visualization technique. I would not call it "conscious" visualization at this point, but it's still visualization.

On the other hand, my experience with Zen meditation is completely different. Meditation on the Void is another animal entirely, and that is precisely my point. Indeed, a strict Zen meditator would shun both "realization" and "visualization" in his practice. Both would be considered distractions.

When I meditate on the void and make the transition into nothingness, there is nothing. No thought. No sound. No smell. No breathing. No being breathed. Just beautiful nothing.

In my experience, Zen meditation on the void is markedly different than Taoist meditation. These experiences seem to be confirmed by the classics of both traditions. I have also confirmed these experiences with Sifu Wong, who agrees with me about the differences between Zen meditation on the void and Taoist meditation.

[Chiahua]

Aren't there several varieties of Zen meditation, some of them being more advanced than others? The "focus on the void" method would be considered the most advanced of the meditation techniques, no?

[Andrew]

Back to the crux of the thread.

There has been a lot of confusion and off-topic posting in this long thread. Even some of the more recent posts have been way off despite regular requests to stay on-topic. To try and get back to where we should be in terms of ON-TOPIC, I thought it would be useful to compile Anthony's most important arguments in one place. These posts are the ones which I feel display the onus of this thread better than any others.

Overview
ShengYen
Offshoot
Three Buddhist Traditions
Majority Isn't Always Right
Quick Review
Sunyata's Review
Zen and Taoist Meditation
The word "Tao" Part I
Influences
Differences & Similarities
Let's Have Some Fun
The word "Tao" Part II
Differences in Writing
Simple Language, Profound Meaning
More Fun
Language Before Bodhidharma
Chi Kung exercises influenced by Zen, and by Taoism
Symbolism?
A Parable
Yin-yang vs. Buddha Nature
Buddhist Taoists, Taoist Buddhists
Blending or Coexisting?
Anthony's Direct Experience
Direct Experience in Zen and Taoism
More on Visualisation

Please note that we must stay on topic to get anywhere in any discussion. The longer a thread becomes, the more important it is to stay on the main topic(s). I would like to request again that any further deviations from the main themes be avoided.

Andrew

[Antonius]

Aren't there several varieties of Zen meditation, some of them being more advanced than others? The "focus on the void" method would be considered the most advanced of the meditation techniques, no?
Edit/Delete Message

Sunyata: Yes and no. Different types of mediation, like meditation on mindfulness, which is widely used in many Theravada schools, or investigation into reality, which is widely used in many Mahayana schools, are also practiced in Zen.

But the typical type of meditation in Zen -- practiced from the lowest to the highest levels of attainment -- is meditation on the void. Indeed, the term "meditation" may not be exact here. It is actually more like "not thinking of anything". This is why Zen practice is sometimes called "outside the tradition" (meaning outside the main meditation methods traditionally used by most other Buddhist schools.)

[Antonius]

Wu Wei and the Void

once the 'seed' of the visualization has been planted in the depths of the sub-conscious mind and establishes a permanent 'root' there, the continued use of the visualization is no longer necessary as the deeper mind will perpetually work to manifest the visualization until it is similarly programmed to do otherwise.

Sifu Stier: Here I think you are referring to the progression from "you wei" (conscious visualization) to "wu wei" (spontaneity). We also practice this in Shaolin Wahnam. For example:

In Dantian Breathing, we first "think of" breathing in good energy and breathing out negative energy. (“Think of” is another example of a word that can be substituted for the term “visualize”.) We do that about 3 or 4 out of 10 times. This 3 or 4 times thinking about the breathing process is “you we”. The other 6 or 7 times, when the desired breathing process goes on spontaneously, is “wu-wei”.

Amazingly, Sifu Wong's students learn to do this not at an advanced level, but often in their first year of practice! I think it's very kind (and wise) of Sifu not to keep secrets or make us wait until advanced levels for this. He allows students to experience "wu wei" even as beginners. And the results are amazing!

But both "you wei" and "wu wei" are significantly different from void meditation in Zen. So even spontaneous "wu wei" is still different than the void. Since, as you yourself mentioned, the visualiztion is still performed at the subconcious level even in "wu wei", the meditation is still in the phenomenal realm. Thus, it is significantly different than Zen meditation, which is not in the phenomenal realm.

[Antonius]

Phenomenal and Trancendental

I remember Sifu talking about his beloved master, Sigung Ho Fatt Nam. He said that Sigung Ho eventually turned to Zen because of the paradox of Taoist visualization. I think I've tasted pieces of this paradox in my own practice.

Visualization, even at the highest levels where it becomes spontaneous and subconscious (wu wei), still leads back to the phenomenal realm. Sifu said that a chi kung master can enjoy the Small Universal Flow without using conscious visualization, or build a pearl at dantian (the golden elixer) without using conscious visualization, or that a Taoist master might even roam heavenly realms as an Immortal -- but these achievements, no matter how amazingly advanced, are still in the phenomenal realm.

Zen meditation on the void leads outside of the phenomenal realm to the trancendental realm. This is why Sigung Ho switched from Taoism to Zen.

[Andrew]

Here I think you are referring to the progression from "you wei" (conscious visualization) to "wu wei" (spontaneity). We also practice this in Shaolin Wahnam.

For those interested, this can also be related to the thread Breathing methods and control in Taijiquan . Jeffrey's posts 65&66 there are extremely interesting in this respect (as well as others).

Andrew

[Sifu Stier]

Devoid of the Void!

Anthony:

Meditation methods of virtually every kind lead practitioners to the Transcendental Realm at the highest levels, whether they be Advaita Vedanta methods, Islamic Sufi methods, Greek Othodox Contemplative methods, Taoist methods, or Buddhist methods. Similarly, each begins in the phenomenal, material realm and returns to same at the conclusion of each meditation session. Returning with gradually ever more identification with the Transcendental, and ever less attachment to the Phenomenal, but returning nonetheless. Thus, until such time as one becomes totally absorbed in One-ness with the Infinite, Transcendental Realm, the Source of All That Is without cessation, one lives the majority of life in a spiritually imperfect and incomplete state of consciousness which is devoid of the void!