Buddhism transcends the Tao

[Siliconvalley1]

We started a discussion to discuss the differences and similarities between Advaita and Buddhism and the discussion also paved way for differences between Taoism and Buddhism. Some of the claims made by our Buddhist brothers are these:

 

- Tao Te Ching is the most mis-translated work ever. I asked Thusness once to look through about 100 Tao Te Ching sample English translations of Chapter 1, and he said only 1 or 2 can make it, most just seem silly and off the mark.

 

- According to Lao Tzu, the greatest calamity is in having a body, thus he teaches the way of extinguishing the body to attain the realm of wu or non-being. Moreover, the greatest cause that burdens the body is in having knowledge, thus he teaches the way of abandoning knowledge to enter the realm of hsu[v] or emptiness. These teachings are similar to those of the vehicles of `Sraavakas and Pratyekabuddhas. He is like a Pratyekabuddha because he having lived in the time before Buddhism came to China, realized the truth of non-being by contemplating the changing nature of the world. Judging from the fact that he regards emptiness, non-being, and tzu-jan[w] or spontaneity as the final principles, his teachings are heterodox. But judging from the facts that his heart was full of compassion for the salvation of the world and that he attained the realm in which man and heaven mutually penetrate each other and in which being and non-being mutually reflect each other, he is also like a Bodhisattva. From the viewpoint of experience or skillful means, he was really (a Bodhisattva) appearing in the form of Brahmaa in order to teach the world. From the viewpoint of reality, he was the one who had attained the samaadhi of emptiness through pure living according to the vehicles of men and heaven.

 

- Also, this idea that Hinduism and Buddhism is included in the Tao is something akin to a view that everything is one. No everything is connected. Buddhism is a path out of Samsara, out of the Tao. Hinduism is a path within Samsara, so one with the Tao.

 

- Brahman, Tao, God, these are all samsaric concepts. We have very intensely deep attachment to these concepts that exist since beginningless time. Freedom from Samsara is much harder than most paths make it out to be. Though the Buddha said his Dharma is so simple a kid could understand it, but he said, "Could" understand it, not "would" understand it.

 

- I have seen the Tao directly, and then I transcended it. Not permanently, but I have that direct experiencing.

The Tao is a cosmic essence, sorry this also is dependently originated and without inherent existence. I realized it was a mistaken interpretation of mystic experience and moved on.

 

. So what really is the use of Taosim?

. A stop gap to get to the Buddhist teachings? Does it help on the way?

. Or are we good directly jumping to the "correct" teaching?

. Is there is a separate audience for these teachings - like a more qualified one for Buddhism?

. Is Tao a concept that is unneeded and the cause of not reaching a state of ultimate non-duality?

. Or, are we really misinterpreting the Tao and Taosim?

 

These can be discussed in the Advaita thread but makes more sense to have a separate one with focus on the Tao.

Edited May 28, 2009 by Siliconvalley1

[forestofemptiness]

Comparing spiritual traditions is like comparing languages. When you say, which is right and wrong, you are not even asking the right question.

 

If people spent ten percent of the time they spend on collecting, arguing, debating, and analyzing spiritual concepts on putting the path into practice, in both theory and practice, then everyone would see how silly all of this is.

 

. So what really is the use of Taosim?

. A stop gap to get to the Buddhist teachings? Does it help on the way?

. Or are we good directly jumping to the "correct" teaching?

. Is there is a separate audience for these teachings - like a more qualified one for Buddhism?

. Is Tao a concept that is unneeded and the cause of not reaching a state of ultimate non-duality?

. Or, are we really misinterpreting the Tao and Taosim?

[mat black]

 

- According to Lao Tzu, the greatest calamity is in having a body, thus he teaches the way of extinguishing the body to attain the realm of wu or non-being. Moreover, the greatest cause that burdens the body is in having knowledge, thus he teaches the way of abandoning knowledge to enter the realm of hsu[v] or emptiness. These teachings are similar to those of the vehicles of `Sraavakas and Pratyekabuddhas. He is like a Pratyekabuddha because he having lived in the time before Buddhism came to China, realized the truth of non-being by contemplating the changing nature of the world. Judging from the fact that he regards emptiness, non-being, and tzu-jan[w] or spontaneity as the final principles, his teachings are heterodox. But judging from the facts that his heart was full of compassion for the salvation of the world and that he attained the realm in which man and heaven mutually penetrate each other and in which being and non-being mutually reflect each other, he is also like a Bodhisattva. From the viewpoint of experience or skillful means, he was really (a Bodhisattva) appearing in the form of Brahmaa in order to teach the world. From the viewpoint of reality, he was the one who had attained the samaadhi of emptiness through pure living according to the vehicles of men and heaven.

 

- Also, this idea that Hinduism and Buddhism is included in the Tao is something akin to a view that everything is one. No everything is connected. Buddhism is a path out of Samsara, out of the Tao. Hinduism is a path within Samsara, so one with the Tao.

 

- Brahman, Tao, God, these are all samsaric concepts. We have very intensely deep attachment to these concepts that exist since beginningless time. Freedom from Samsara is much harder than most paths make it out to be. Though the Buddha said his Dharma is so simple a kid could understand it, but he said, "Could" understand it, not "would" understand it.

 

It is said that Lao Tzu was a reincarnation of Mahakashyapa, a former Brahman, a chief disciple of Shakyamuni Buddha and the first Chan (zen) Patriarch.

 

"Lao Tzu lived in his mother's womb for eighty-one years and was born with white hair and a long white beard. The name "Lao Tzu" means "Old Child". He was in fact a reincarnation of Mahakashyapa. He was reborn in China because Shakyamuni Buddha had noticed that the Chinese had good karmic roots. Most of them did not believe in the Buddha, however, so Mahakashyapa was sent to China to found the religion of Taoism, which is similar to the Brahman religion of India and which cultivates purity of conduct."

 

Source: http://online.sfsu.edu/~rone/Buddhism/Platform%20Sutra.pdf

 

The samsaric concepts that you mentioned V, (Brahman, Tao, God) from my understanding they are used as expedients for those who are more easliy able to relate to them. ie, not everyone is ready for the most subtle teachings of the Dharma, so other expedients are used according to a persons' or a cultures' affinities and capacity to receive and abide by it. eg, Taosim in China, Hinduism in India, Christianity in other places etc.

Many of the chief figures in these religions are great Bodhisattvas who are using skill to teach beings according to their own culture.

 

The commentaries on the Shurangama Mantra by a monk, venerable Losang in which he quotes much of Master Huas' insights are very interesting. I have never been so enthralled to listen to a talk about religion, Dharma etc as much as when I hear these talks.

They put (for me anyway) a perspective and context into the various religions and how they ultimately fit into the wider Dharma.

From hearing them, I have a better appreciation for Hinduism, Christianity etc. As Ven. Losang says, "Buddhism includes all isms"

 

There are many files. I listened to them all. They are very very interesting. Even the first file alone is very informative. There is also some amazing sanskrit chanting of the mantra about half way into the files and explanation of the terms.

I won't say much more about them at the moment. If anyone is actually interested, they can listen the files.

 

They are here: http://www.shurangama.com/shurangama-mantra/index.htm

Edited May 29, 2009 by mat black

[Ramon25]

I think the last two post a coorect this topic does not even make sense. There are few ultimates just different shades of the same color. Also a large part of daoism is immortality/longevity not really freedom from samasara. Also why cant we turn this around and say that taoism trandsends Buddhism "because they teach the same thing right"? . It can also be said that it is more practical and gives a road map for acheiving immortalty instead of "hoping" for feedom from samsara, it addresses the health of the body and teaches us to intergrate our primal/sexual selves as oppose to denying it. Buddism can be very "go against, deny" With many aspects as oppose to taoism which is more ready to "intergrate". We could say all that but reallly what is the point, each spiritual path has something to offer. And in reality no one is for sure on what the ultimate truth is, so we all must explore the mystery as individuals. Also taoism does not end and begin with the dao de jing, so relying on it so much to compare the two is not really warranted.

All the best

Ramon

Edited May 29, 2009 by Ramon25

[Enishi]

Although at this point in time I don't really "know", I do think that Buddhism may have it right in regards to dependant origination.

 

Although the idea that there is an eternal, imperishable and unchanging foundation to reality does feel right from my current standpoint, it does seem odd that this eternal and unchanging essence would somehow emanate the temporal, illusionary existence of our day to day experience. Perhaps that which seems eternal is in fact empty and dependant on its temporal emanations, just as the temporal emanations are dependant on the eternal.

 

One recent thought I had is that when some mystics perceive various formless realms and platonic souls/ideas/aspects of God which they interpret as eternal, they are in fact seeing basic "patterns" of reality which give it structure, but are themselves empty and dependant on the ever changing mindstreams moving up and down from these levels.

 

Still, it also seems to me that if your main desire is to live a more integrated and balanced life without turning neurotic, various schools of taoism may be more useful and knowledgeable so far as "conventional" existence goes. Personally, I never liked the attitude of "omigod omigod, we need to become enlightened now or we might end up as a bug in our next life!". Yes, practice is necessary, but all things in their own due time. If we're eternal, why so serious?

[11:33]

Yes, practice is necessary, but all things in their own due time. If we're eternal, why so serious?

My understanding of this is that we live eternally, being reborn in samsara for eons. BUT, we only really understand the fact that we are trapped in this loop of our minds quite rarely. So cultivating purity of mind and thus cultivating to enlightenment is important NOW, because it is not everyday you truly realize that you are in fact caught in a illusion. You may forget next week, and not remember for another 400 lifetimes. True wisdom is the source of all true happiness. You may mistake intensity of focus for seriousness.

 

[Enishi]

Oh definitely.

 

My main point is that its best if you can integrate this practice into your life in a manner which is healthy both to you and those around you. At least that's the way I'm looking at it in regards to my own current situation. Even if I don't reach final enlightenment in this lifetime, every little bit counts is my philosophy.

[Lucky7Strikes]

- According to Lao Tzu, the greatest calamity is in having a body, thus he teaches the way of extinguishing the body to attain the realm of wu or non-being. Moreover, the greatest cause that burdens the body is in having knowledge, thus he teaches the way of abandoning knowledge to enter the realm of hsu[v] or emptiness. These teachings are similar to those of the vehicles of `Sraavakas and Pratyekabuddhas. He is like a Pratyekabuddha because he having lived in the time before Buddhism came to China, realized the truth of non-being by contemplating the changing nature of the world. Judging from the fact that he regards emptiness, non-being, and tzu-jan[w] or spontaneity as the final principles, his teachings are heterodox. But judging from the facts that his heart was full of compassion for the salvation of the world and that he attained the realm in which man and heaven mutually penetrate each other and in which being and non-being mutually reflect each other, he is also like a Bodhisattva. From the viewpoint of experience or skillful means, he was really (a Bodhisattva) appearing in the form of Brahmaa in order to teach the world. From the viewpoint of reality, he was the one who had attained the samaadhi of emptiness through pure living according to the vehicles of men and heaven.

Huh? What? Where are all these judgments of Lao Tzu coming from? "From the view point of reality"...because you have the view point of reality? And...from my understanding Taoism has deep foundations in integrating the body, as few have pointed out before me, and not extinguishing it. Also, abandoning knowledge is more of a devotional path. Cultivation without knowledge can lead one to his/her own illusions arising from past habits.

 

- Also, this idea that Hinduism and Buddhism is included in the Tao is something akin to a view that everything is one. No everything is connected. Buddhism is a path out of Samsara, out of the Tao. Hinduism is a path within Samsara, so one with the Tao.

None of these terms are "included" in one or another. What use is going around and saying "everything is one?" What use is going around and saying "everything is empty in nature? " These theories are there to help the mind gain right perspective and aid the seeker through various experiences.

 

- Brahman, Tao, God, these are all samsaric concepts. We have very intensely deep attachment to these concepts that exist since beginningless time. Freedom from Samsara is much harder than most paths make it out to be. Though the Buddha said his Dharma is so simple a kid could understand it, but he said, "Could" understand it, not "would" understand it.

All paths and concepts happen within Samsara. I'm not sure what you or those "Buddhists" are/were trying to say exactly. .

 

- I have seen the Tao directly, and then I transcended it. Not permanently, but I have that direct experiencing.

The Tao is a cosmic essence, sorry this also is dependently originated and without inherent existence. I realized it was a mistaken interpretation of mystic experience and moved on.

Yes it was your/their mistaken interpretation of a mystic experience... Although I am pretty much a beginner myself on these matters, judging from this/their post, I am pretty sure you/they have not "seen" the Tao directly.

 

In the Kalama Sutta the Buddha warns against accepting any teaching based on simple inclinations or traditions. It is good to do thorough research of a certain religion or tradition before making any claims using its terminologies. .

Edited May 29, 2009 by Lucky7Strikes

[Vajrahridaya]

All these paths are good and help evolve the being to the point where one is able to understand the Buddhadharma.

 

They are paths that teach the four immeasurables, this leads to higher rebirth and higher cognitive abilities.

 

They are good paths, Taoism, Hinduism, Mystic Christianity, Sufism, etc.

 

It's just that Buddhism is as perfect a religion as religion can get with a whole bunch of monkeys with opposable thumbs trying to understand it and writing commentaries on it.

 

Mostly that's just a joke.

 

Huh? What? Where are all these judgments of Lao Tzu coming from? "From the view point of reality"...because you have the view point of reality? And...from my understanding Taoism has deep foundations in integrating the body, as few have pointed out before me, and not extinguishing it. Also, abandoning knowledge is more of a devotional path. Cultivation without knowledge can lead one to his/her own illusions arising from past habits.

None of these terms are "included" in one or another. What use is going around and saying "everything is one?" What use is going around and saying "everything is empty in nature? " These theories are there to help the mind gain right perspective and aid the seeker through various experiences.

All paths and concepts happen within Samsara. I'm not sure what you or those "Buddhists" are/were trying to say exactly. .

Yes it was your/their mistaken interpretation of a mystic experience... Although I am pretty much a beginner myself on these matters, judging from this/their post, I am pretty sure you/they have not "seen" the Tao directly.

 

In the Kalama Sutta the Buddha warns against accepting any teaching based on simple inclinations or traditions. It is good to do thorough research of a certain religion or tradition before making any claims using its terminologies. .

 

There are certain concepts that lead directly to the state of liberation, to Buddhahood, these concepts are called Buddhadharma.

Edited May 29, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[Brother K]

Comparing spiritual traditions is like comparing languages. When you say, which is right and wrong, you are not even asking the right question.

 

If people spent ten percent of the time they spend on collecting, arguing, debating, and analyzing spiritual concepts on putting the path into practice, in both theory and practice, then everyone would see how silly all of this is.

 

 

I could not agree more.

 

I come at Taoism from a Ceremonial magickian stand point and my view is that ANY path actually FOLLOWED is worthy. They all lead hopefully to the permanent union with the Tao, God, other plane, what ever you choice to call it. The reason I came to this path is because most of the people in CM seem to spend countless hours arguing about the "correct" way to do something instead of doing anything, or even trying anything.

 

How many magickian does it take to change a light bulb? All of them, one to change it and the rest of them to tell them they are doing it wrong.

 

So lets not do that on this forum. I am new here and I am actually blown away because I am learning so much from people who actually understand the THEORY of what they actually PRACTICE. That is so rare in this world, lets just keep up the good work.

Edited May 29, 2009 by Brother K

[mat black]

All these paths are good and help evolve the being to the point where one is able to understand the Buddhadharma.

They are paths that teach the four immeasurables, this leads to higher rebirth and higher cognitive abilities.

They are good paths, Taoism, Hinduism, Mystic Christianity, Sufism, etc.

I agree. That's what I meant by saying that they are expedients, ways and means of gathering in and teaching according to a persons' or a cultures' affinities, capacity and current potential.

Edited May 29, 2009 by mat black

[xabir2005]

In my opinion, Tao Te Ching as taught by Lao Tzu is pretty compatible with Buddhism, more so than many teachings.

 

It does not teach an Atman/Self or a Brahman or an unchanging ontological essence separate from phenomenality. From first glance it might be mistaken that the Tao is talking about an ontological essence, or an unchanging Absolute, but it is not. Tao ('The Way') is simply the natural flow of things. Many aspects of their teachings are in line with the Dharma Seals.

 

To quote my friend 'Thusness' (who was trained in Taoism for many years) using Taoist terms: "the Pristine Awareness is the great Unmanifest Infinity. It manifests itself as phenomenon existence but conceals itself; this is its great reserve. Momentarily it creates and recreate, this is called the Change. Before yin and yang, this is called the Original. That Presence that can be felt but cannot be defined, this is called the Spirit. Movement without core and center, this is called Emptiness. To see what is as it is, this is called Wisdom. The Tao in its Self-So, this is called Thus."

 

"...In hearing, Tao is.

Seeing forms, Mind is.

No mind, Zen is.

In movement is where your practice is."

 

"The universe is this arising thought.

The universe is this arising sound.

Just this magnificent arising!

Is Tao.

Homage to all arising."

Edited May 29, 2009 by xabir2005

[Uncle Screwtape]

According to Lao Tzu, the greatest calamity is in having a body, thus he teaches the way of extinguishing the body to attain the realm of wu or non-being.

 

I am not sure he does teach us to extinguish the body. He does say that the greatest misfortune is the self, but then in the very next verse he speaks about valuing and loving the self, too. (Chapter 13.) It seems he is trying to make it clear to us that it is the self which we must work on.

 

By saying that without the self there would be no misfortune he is proving his point that the self is important, but nowhere does he say we should rid ourselves. In fact, the TTC and so much else in Taoism is about refining the self and, specifically, aligning it with Tao.

 

In the Three Realms of Taoism, the lower three realms of people, events and things are to be mastered before moving on to the next level of cultivation. They are not dismissed as mere illusion and simply negated. From the I Ching onwards, recognising the self's place in the cosmic order, refining it and working (co-creating) from this position of understanding is a common theme. If there is a difference between Taoism and other systems that might well be it.

[xabir2005]

I think he is refering to the 'mind-body drop' which is an important experience. To drop off all attachment to self, body, mind, etc.

 

Lao Tzu:

 

"And what is meant by saying that honour and great calamity are to be (similarly) regarded as personal conditions? What makes me liable to great calamity is my having the body (which I call myself); if I had not the body, what great calamity could come to me?"

[Uncle Screwtape]

I think he is refering to the 'mind-body drop' which is an important experience. To drop off all attachment to self, body, mind, etc.

 

If that is the case then I quite agree. The attachment to such things is relinquished. I think sometimes this idea is taken to an extreme and attempts ae made at total negation of the self, the world and everything in it; whereas Taoism, I believe, teaches us how to understand and work within these things to the benefit of ourselves and of others.

[Stigweard]

Ah the age old debate between Buddhism and Taoism where one tries to own the roots of the other. It must be remebered that this competitiveness was born out of the imperial debates where the loser had all their sacred books burnt.

 

So on the Buddhist side we have these teachings of Lao Tzu being a reincarnation of a Buddhist saint whilst on the Taoist side of the fence we have texts like the Hua Hu Ching which supposedly portrays Lao Tzu giving instruction to the young Siddhartha. It was exaclty this type of over classification of things that Lao Tzu was commenting about.

 

There is an Chinese saying:

 

Confucianism is my cloak,

Buddhism is my cane,

Taoism is my sandal.

 

Each has it's role to play in life and should be respected as equal treasures.

[Lucky7Strikes]

If that is the case then I quite agree. The attachment to such things is relinquished. I think sometimes this idea is taken to an extreme and attempts ae made at total negation of the self, the world and everything in it; whereas Taoism, I believe, teaches us how to understand and work within these things to the benefit of ourselves and of others.

I've read a few cases where people have taken the phrase "shed the body and mind" in an (literally) unhealthy manner. Being continually stuck on the phrase "I am not the body" can be a dangerous way for the damaged ego to conceal deep rooted senses of self-hatred (not to mention feeling superior over others). These teachings should always be taken in greater context.

Edited May 29, 2009 by Lucky7Strikes

[Ya Mu]

...

There is an Chinese saying:

 

Confucianism is my cloak,

Buddhism is my cane,

Taoism is my sandal.

 

Each has it's role to play in life and should be respected as equal treasures.

++++++++

It is truly a fallacy to try and separate these. These teachings are SO intertwined that to separate one would lose part of the whole. I am amazed at the SO Taoist or SO Buddhist, SO Christian, SO Zorastorian, etc. attitude so prevalent today. It is the sum of the parts that lead to the whole.

[Epicurious]

shit...weres ma balloon...all this hot air goin ta waste...havent you boys heard a global warmin...

[Vajrahridaya]

shit...weres ma balloon...all this hot air goin ta waste...havent you boys heard a global warmin...

 

I sometimes wonder why people come onto discussion boards? It must be somewhat neurotic to come onto a discussion board and disparage talk, debate and discussion?

 

Why not instead go look at a blank wall and find yourself?

[sasblamthanb]

____isms

____ists

[Vajrahridaya]

____isms

____ists

 

The first part is what defines the second part. Making the outcome different.

[Unconditioned]

I sometimes wonder why people come onto discussion boards? It must be somewhat neurotic to come onto a discussion board and disparage talk, debate and discussion?

 

Why not instead go look at a blank wall and find yourself?

 

Very interesting, I sometimes wonder why I'm on these boards debating too!

 

Where does it really lead?

 

Thoughts, more thoughts, more ego, I'm right your wrong... wait maybe you are right, I'll add that to myself, now I'm better than i was a few moments ago, etc. etc.

 

Accept, reject, grasp, grasp, wait don't grasp, oh crap I'm grasping at not grasping.

 

That's a lot of what I see here, in myself, and implied in some of the posts. Check how defensive we can get, that's a good indication we still think we have a persona

 

No ill will intended, just thought this was a good opportunity to point out an observation.

[Vajrahridaya]

 

That's a lot of what I see here, in myself, and implied in some of the posts. Check how defensive we can get, that's a good indication we still think we have a persona

 

.

 

Thats what these boards are good for so that we can be objects to ourselves and see where we are attached and grasping. Also to see how refined our understanding of the Dharma is. To learn more about the Dharma as well.

 

Whatever your Dharma may be.

[Ramon25]

++++++++

It is truly a fallacy to try and separate these. These teachings are SO intertwined that to separate one would lose part of the whole. I am amazed at the SO Taoist or SO Buddhist, SO Christian, SO Zorastorian, etc. attitude so prevalent today. It is the sum of the parts that lead to the whole.

That is SO taoist of you to say! I completley agree