Advertisement
Ryan brought up a point of traditions and rituals on another thread. Which stimulates a real ... "I haven't looked at that enough" ? The more formally 'religious' a practice is the more rituals there are. Most of us (maybe everyone over a certain age) have some childhood rituals that we observed with our family.
Where does ritual fit in for Taoists? Is it good to have constant form or just the energy (essence) of the ritual need to be constant. (ex. saying grace at meals... Thankfulness for food, the abundance of the world isn't said with just one prayer.)
Where does ritual fit in for Taoists? Is it good to have constant form or just the energy (essence) of the ritual need to be constant. (ex. saying grace at meals... Thankfulness for food, the abundance of the world isn't said with just one prayer.)
posted by:
|
SF Bay Area
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sun, June 27, 2004 - 2:45 PMI think that their usefulness depends on the individual. I think they can be instrumental in serving as constant reminders of our devotion to a set of morals and way of life. And I think they can bring great comfort as well. But like anything else, if they are little more than habit, without substance or meaning, then what is the point? I think too, that it is possible to reach a certain point where one doesn't need the little physical reminders, that you reach a point where you are living the essence of it and using the rituals would be like Michelangelo using finger paint to paint a masterpiece. -
-
Essence
Sun, June 27, 2004 - 9:03 PM
"However, though the gradual path is good,
it is only beneficial if the gradual progress
is correct. If it is not correct, it is not good.
Among those in the world who practice
material or sexual alchemy, those who
cling to emptiness or stick to forms, there
are those who do their practices all
thier lives without stopping - they are
certainly progressing gradually, but thier
progress is not correct. So they waste their
lives, growing old without achievement.
What is the good in that? So it is necessary
to proceed gradually in the correct manner,
thoroughly investigating truth, completely
realizing essence, to arrive at the meaning
of life. From striving entering into nonstriving,
from effort arrriving at spontaneity,
everyone can attain the great Tao."
taoist i-ching -
-
Re: Essence
Mon, June 28, 2004 - 4:46 PMThank you. A very spot-on perspective.
(bow)
-
-
Formless Tao...structured ritual
Mon, June 28, 2004 - 10:18 AMBefore I get ranting I just want to say I agree with AOGR concerning rituals generally.
Now, to rant...
This will probably annoy Ryan (although that is not my intention) but for the Tao to only be expressible in certain religious forms and certain rituals strikes me as ridiculous. The Tao is all encompassing, unknowable, formless. If there was a single set of religious observances which utterly defined the Tao then the Tao it defined would not be the Tao. If only a limited defined range of rituals are the only rituals available to a Taoist then the Tao begins to get very small, limited, structured.
To limit the Tao to chinese culture only is to miss the point of the Tao, how can something uncontainable be contained? Obviously the Tao sprang from chinese culture, and the complex practices indigenous to this are certainly an expression of the Tao, but surely they can't be the only expressions of the Tao.
Let me put it this way, does the Tao care if you were ordained in a five day ritual with all the observances? The Tao is spontaneous and so should its observances be, if you are truly moving with the Tao then everything you do will be sacred, so why bother with extra rituals?
Just my opinion of course, I've always been a follower of the wayward school of Taoism. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Formless Tao...structured ritual
Mon, June 28, 2004 - 10:31 AMThe Tao is all-encompassing, for sure, and any Taoist would agree that it expresses itself in limitless forms.
What we are discussing here is not the Tao, but the WORDS "Taoist" and "Taoism", which imply something much more specific than the Tao. You can follow the Tao however you want, because there's nothing outside of it. And there are many other words equivalent to the Tao, in other languages. But the word Taoism connotes a specific way of relating to the Tao, a specific religion which, like the word Tao itself, originated in Chinese culture. To be a Taoist, you basically have to be a Taoist priest, monk, or nun. It's that simple. This isn't some big philosophical debate, that's just what the word means. Before the Taoist religion was founded, there was no school calling itself Taoist. The followers of Lao tzu and Chuang tzu were called Lao-Zhuangists, though they also had different ways of thinking then you might expect.
A good website for people who want to get an introduction to Taoism as it it actually exists (and not as westerners wish it would be) is the Taoist Restoration Society: www.taorestore.org -
-
Other words for Tao
Mon, June 28, 2004 - 10:47 AMI ask this because I honestly don't know of one. What words are there in other languages which are the equivalent of Tao?
I define Tao as meaning many things at the same time. Firstly the Tao is all, every thought, feeling, rock, moutain, bird, etc. It is also the unfolding of events the way they unfold. It also means being in sync with the unfolding of events. The english equivalents would be <existence/way/path/opening/unfolding>
English fails me to truly explain what I mean, but that about sums it up. I don't know of any word which also means that. -
-
Re: Other words for Tao
Mon, June 28, 2004 - 5:02 PMRyan, Ghost,
The purest Taoist I know, doesn't know how it's spelt. He is ever present, simple and loving like a child. He declined a copy of the Tao... how perfectly, he didn't want to add ("In pursuit of knowledge, every day something is added; in pursuit of Tao, every day something is dropped.")
Besides the kunundrum(sp?) of how to define Tao - you have the essence of not doing; not naming/classifying; not learning facts.
I claim the word Taoist, Ryan. I won't give it over to any religion. To have "practices" to reveal and keep the Tao, is absurdity to me. How many Paths are there up the mountain to the Supreme Being? How many Paths are there to knowing Tao?
I'll revere all enlightened beings (Taoist, Christian, ...), especially those on their unique Path up the mountain. -
-
A new meaning for Taoist
Tue, June 29, 2004 - 3:12 AM"I claim the word Taoist,"
And why not, after all language is plastic. New words can be created and old words can take on new meanings
Taoist, Taoism
1> Having been ordained in a Chinese Taoist temple and the practice from such
2> One who follows their own path to the Tao, irrespective of cultural context, and the practice of such
There we go a new definition for Taoist and Taoism.
-
Unsu...
Re: Other words for Tao
Tue, June 29, 2004 - 9:14 AMScott- you seem to think I'm saying there is only one way to reach Tao. If that's what you think you didn't bother reading my post.
I'm not a Taoist and don't claim to be one. Perhaps that has helped me to actually understand some things about Taoism as it actually exists, rather than distorting the truth to fit my personal taste.
Taoism IS a religion and has always existed as such.
Lao Tzu was not a Taoist; he/they never claimed the word because it didn't exist. You can call yourself a Taoist but what you are doing is identifying yourself with a religion founded by Chang Tao Ling... and something tells me you never heard of Chang Tao Ling before I mentioned him. That's kind of like calling yourself a Christian but only following the Torah.
If you find ritual and spiritual lineages absurd, fine, let that be your opinion... but it is not Taoist.
Do you revere "enlightened beings" or people who just fit into your neat, westernized concept of enlightenment? You may think you're unique, but there's no shortage of arrogant whities claiming to adopt the religion of some faraway people, like Taoism, but completely rearranging it to suit their "individual" tastes. Meanwhile, the actual practitioners of Taoism are looked down upon as superstitious fools who have somehow corrupted the original purity of the Tao.
You don't even know anything about the Taoist religion, all you can do is make vague comments about organized religion in general. Maybe if you bothered to explore these practices, instead of making uninformed judgments about them, you might stand to learn something. As it is you are like any number of other poseurs pretending to be enlightened, and you'll probably end up finding some other new religion to exploit when you get bored with Lao Tzu.
Hey, if you're so determined to reject rituals and other external trappings, how about not labeling yourself Taoist (or anything else) at all? Throw Lao Tzu's words away. Just be. Your spirituality already has no substance, why not make it devoid of form as well? -
-
What is Wrong?
Tue, June 29, 2004 - 10:01 AM"Practice of the Tao should not be hasty, for
when one rushes one indulges in arbitrary
guesswork and personalistic interpretation.
recklessly forcing the issue without thoroughly
investigating principles of the Tao, seeking
to attain it all at once."
taoist i-ching
(You must) Learn to die before you die.
To desire enlightment is to miss the point.
It is complete detachment,
the death of everything you know.
You cann't have your cake and eat it to.
What is possible and what is practical
are two entirely different things.
"The dividing line between the primordial and
the conditioned is but a hairbreadth; on one
side is the primordial, on the other side is the
conditioned. Conditioned yin and yang always
interact, but their intercourse is not correct;
it has no conclusion, and goes wrong. For
example, there are ignorant people in the
world who join the energies of heart and
genitals, or join the active and passive energy
channels up and down the back and the front
of the body, or cause energy to rise up the spine
at midnight and descend down the front of the
body at noon, or gather energy from sexual
intercourse, or heat lead and mercury together,
or regulate their exhalations and inhalations -
all of these are recognizing the the artificial
as real, and trying to force communion;
imagining that they will thereby live long,
instead they are hastening death. This is quite
wrong, a serious degeneration. If practioners
of the Tao want to persist to the end, they should
first know what is wrong; in they know what is
wrong, they will not be deludes by depraved words
of false teachings. Then if they seek to persist
to the end, there is hope they will be closer."
taoist i-ching
"When practioners of the Tao activate the energy of will
and go directly forward, arriving at the remote by way
of the near at hand, this should be like the movement of
thunder; only then can they rise up with firmness, and
not be subject to compulsion by human desires."
taoist i-ching
I would not advocate Enlightenment nor even
Taoism for that matter. Quite the
contrary. Only to point out the Way
to a path that is wrought with
danger and peril. Enter at your own risk,
but be clear about one thing, freedom is
not what we think and neither is it a trophy.
And for those of us with no interest but in the
antithesis of this there is no challenege here
but that the veil has been lifted.
-
Re: Other words for Tao
Wed, June 30, 2004 - 5:01 AMRyan,
You say you aren't a Taoist, and maybe that is preventing you from understanding Tao as it actually is.
I understand the point you are trying to make, that there is a religion called Taoism and it is a specific religion with its own Holy days, Deities, and secret lore. That this religion was not started by Lao Tzu, but rather Chang Tao Ling (for the record I had heard this name before you mentioned it, spelled differently though) centuries later and was based on many texts not just the Tao te Ching. I also understand why people who are not following this religion but are calling themselves Taoist could irritate you. However I don't think you understand why we are calling ourselves Taoists.
It isn't to associate ourselves with the organised religion of Taoism.
I'm not adopting a "faraway" religious practice to gain a sense of lineage and legitimacy for my own beliefs. Quite the opposite. I call myself a Taoist because it is the name which makes most sense. Whether there was a religion founded by Chang Tao Ling or not I'd still be calling myself a Taoist. I'm not trying to legitimise my beliefs, I don't need to legitimise my beliefs. If you were a Taoist you'd understand that, I'm following own path and that is legitimacy enough, I don't need the thumbs up from an outside agency.
To use your analogy of Christianity and the Torah, to tell us we aren't Taoists because we aren't members of the organised religion is like telling a Christian they aren't Christian because they don't go to church every Sunday and take communion. A gnostic Christian is still a Christian. So we are Taoists.
You are correct that the organised Taoist religion has a whole host of cultural contextual issues. I'm not Chinese and not living in that culture so these contextual issues are not relevant for me. It is not productive for me to try and assume them. I don't look down on those you call actual practitioners as superstitious fools who haven't found the right path, I see them as fellows who are following their own, different path. We aren't rearranging Taoism to fit our own tastes, the Tao reveals itself differently to different people.
So if I'm not accepting the trappings of organised Taoism why call myself a Taoist? Would I have found a community (read: Tribe) of like-minded people to share my thoughts and ideas with if I'd refused to call myself a Taoist because I'm not a monk? Forget theory, the Tao lies in the reality and it's a little different for all of us.
"If you meet the Buddha, kill the Buddha"
-Ghost -
-
Re: Other words for Tao
Thu, July 1, 2004 - 10:31 AMI've been stay away from this thread but it's overall scope is just too precious. I truly do seek out the notion of new religion for nothing else than wonderment and a sense of the creativity involved. However this group does out of hand negate what could be an experience with Taoism and how it's practiced for an assumed Taoism as it sees fit. Members seek to redefine without knowing anything about what's being revised. Sorry but its revisionism on a level of extreme arrogrance. Might as well be burnt toast the way it gets buttered up here. The quotes that are thrown around actually disregard any notion of possible translational drift (can anyone here fathom the inherent gulf in trying to interpret any of these concepts?), have rampant cultural disassociations and lacking any actual relevance to chinese symbolic, cultural, or historic doctrine. I look forward to reading the next twenty "Taoist Quotes" as silly but somewhat satirical jokes. If you want we could chip in a few dollars and actually pay a Taoist shaman or diviner to try and relate to us something of significance. I actually have a few names that I could try and contact if need be. Yes pay cause they are engaged in making a very meager living and they would be providing a service. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.Unsu...
Re: Other words for Tao
Thu, July 1, 2004 - 12:00 PMThank you W.
To respond to Ghost... A Gnostic Christian is still a Christian, sure. Gnostics also knew about and revered Christ, however differently, and were intimately connected to Christianity from the beginning. Taoism in fact has many sects but they all are intimately connected to the tradition; they weren't dreamed up in a vacuum.
The "translational drift" that W. mentions is very important. The fact that someone cited the Stephen Mitchell translation as a decent one here indicates the level of ignorance. The Tao Te Ching on its own, without any cultural context, is an incredibly vague book. Taken by itself, it could be interpreted to mean practically anything. In the case of some translators, it could be translated into practically anything as well.
Someone quoted from the "Taoist I-Ching". Undoubtedly this is in reference to the book by Thomas Cleary. Thomas Cleary is well-known to give very distorted translations. If you look at just about any of his translations, you find occasional references to "business" and entrepreneurs- Cleary twists the meanings to cater to his yuppy audience. He rarely gives footnotes or any sources. He has no scholarly legitimacy and he is basically a spirituality profiteer. The same can be said for most of the authors who appear in the "Taoism" section of English bookstores.
-
-
Re: Other words for Tao
Sat, July 10, 2004 - 2:44 PMI am fairly new to Dao, and there is a saying that I do not quite understand.
"If you meet the Buddha, kill the Buddha"
Would someone please explain this to me???
-
-
Re: Other words for Tao
Sat, July 3, 2004 - 12:43 AMWhy is it so important to bind the boundless here?
The distinction between conceptual-philosophical Taoism and religious Taoism has been muddled since they began, but there is a distinction - why is it important for people to fit your particular labels and prejudices?
It's often the way of things to resent being shoved around. I advise against making it the practice in doing so here.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, July 1, 2004 - 10:26 AMI think we have a tendency towards orthodoxy so we ignore the numerous examples of unorthodox characters and actions one invariably comes across when learning about Taoism. I liken it to learning the technique for, say, hitting a baseball. You're taught a certain way and you're told that's the right way to do it. Then you see some slugger on TV doing it totally differently. You ask your coach why you can't do it the way that guy does it, and your coach says, "Because you're not him." There's the "right" way to do things, but that doesn't mean it's the only way.
It seems to me that despite all the rituals and esoteric practices of Taoism, any Taoist master would point to a simple peasant as the ultimate Taoist.
-
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, July 1, 2004 - 12:18 PMYou mean the simple peasant who's slaving away to make your food? Or burning up in a sweatshop making our clothes? Yeah, that must be bliss... hey, if we can keep portraying these peasants as enlightened types maybe they'll think they have a good life and so they won't revolt and we can keep getting cheap clothes!
So typical.
In the mind of the western "Taoist" hippy, Chinese must all be a stoic, spiritual people, gracefully accepting their lot.
You're not a Taoist master and you don't know what a Taoist master would say because you've never met one. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, July 1, 2004 - 12:44 PMI don't think that's what he was trying to say Ryan. But, it did sort of make me wince to hear anyone called a simple peasant. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, July 1, 2004 - 12:58 PMWell, the word "peasant" itself isn't derogatory, it just means someone who works and lives off the land. What is offensive is their exploitation, and the notion that someone would idealize it. -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, July 1, 2004 - 10:48 PMGet a group of the world's religious leaders together in a room and they will argue for hours over the intellectual doctrines of their faith.
Get a group of mystics together in a room and they will nod and laugh at one another.
~Ryan, I see that you have taken Cassandra's postings to heart at taorestore.org. =-} I think that you are generally correct, as far as the word 'Taoist' goes from the traditional point of view. From what I understand, in China only the ordained will call themselves Taoist.
However, there are those in the West who follow a 'Taoish' path, meditate on the Tao Te Ching and Chuang Tzu, practice Taoist Qigong and internal alchemy who have either chosen not to pursue Taoist ordination or have not had the opportunity . Do we need to make up a new word for these people? Taoishts, perhaps? I personally feel that Lao Tzu would be laughing at us, barking at each other and arguing about the finger, while the beautiful moon shines above. Tao is a reality beyond words and concepts, so why are we trying to put it in a cage? It can't be done . . . we are all followers of the Way, some find enlightened teachers to guide them in the practice, some stumble their way alone. We are all flowing to the ocean, no matter how deep or shallow our flow. all in my humble opinion, of course,
blessings~ -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sat, July 3, 2004 - 3:14 PMElfstar~,
(a humble bow)... beautifully spoken.
Joyful Blessings
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, July 1, 2004 - 10:45 PMAlso, I know that's not what he was TRYING to say. It's probably subconscious. The problem with these people is that they don't even bother to think about these issues. They live in their little world of expensive organic soy products and meditation classes and pretend poverty doesn't exist. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, July 1, 2004 - 11:54 PMWow, you are very very angry Ryan. What did Louis do to become "these people." Do you know him in your personal life off the internet and see where he lives and what he does to assume that he has no compassion for others? And before you attack me, you should know that I come from the poorest people on the planet. My family came here in poverty and lost ten children. Our family worked the railroads and the fields. I understand simplicity. We have ditchdiggers and doctors among our number and it never occurs to me to separate the two and neither should you. The minute you do, you become as grave a bigot as the one you percieve that does not understand. -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Fri, July 2, 2004 - 2:55 AMRyan,
"The Tao Te Ching on its own, without any cultural context, is an incredibly vague book. Taken by itself, it could be interpreted to mean practically anything. In the case of some translators, it could be translated into practically anything as well."
Exactly
The Tao Te Ching is a very vague book, it speaks in general terms it does not speak about specifics. I have two ways of interpreting it. Firstly I could abandon my own cultural heritage and immerse myself in the world of Chinese culture. Unlearn life as I was raised with and relearn a new way of life based on the culture found in China, join a religion founded centuries ago and with my new found cultural perspective follow the Tao. Or I can interpret the Tao Te Ching through my own cultural context. Because the Tao Te Ching is vague and speaks in general terms it can be interpreted through different cultures without losing its meaning. The vagueness is a strength, not a weakness.
I admit I've not read it in the original language, mainly because I'm not fluent in that language and I'm a poor linguist. I have read many translations and by reading what the translators say, and don't say. By comparing where they agree and don't agree. And through old fashioned contemplation, meditation and discussion with others (for example, here) on Tao the translators propaganda (intentional or not) can by stepped around.
Oh, and concerning Louis, I think the point he was trying to make is that whether you have the title of Grand Global Hoohah of Taoism or are a "simple peasant" is utterly irrelevant to how far along the path you've come, and so a "simple peasant" is as likely to be a Taoist master as anyone else. That's how I interpreted it (see, evidence of my own translational bias).
Dance in Beauty -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sat, July 3, 2004 - 8:12 AMThe heading speaks for itself. I scratch my head in wonder...
Cultural and spiritual sensitivities are very complex considerations. I wouldn't want to thwart anyone in their meaningful pursuits. However there is a point within to consider what is rightfully appropriate. Anybody that happens upon something that they don't or can't understand should be at least thoughtful of what is or isn't appropriate. This group as a whole has really hasn't wholeheartedly inquired about anything regarding what is somebody else's belief structure and/or culture. I can't think of any such revealing discussion here. What it is doing is some sort of selfserving one-upsmanship regarding vague concepts that are somehow existentially motivated and seen as some sort of release mechanism for the people involved. I would argue that Taoism as it is practiced is not existental in the manner so conceived, in fact it is quite the opposite it's a folk religion. The people posting here are on some sort of individual path, that's fine. But they have absolutely no inclination to understand or consider what the actual spiritual path is for those who choose to participate within a very unique and thriving organized spiritual body. I would even say they are so removed from it that they have very little notion of what that body represents or is seeking. I have seen a number of new religion considerations in Asia, actually they are almost everywhere, but none that purposely are clueless.
My point for the group is why reject what you say you seek and then insulate yourself with abstractions that that aren't yours? Abstract concepts are owned by those who struggled to codify and embed meaning into them, not by people who wonder about them or assume that they have the secret keys to unlock their meaning.
-
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sat, July 3, 2004 - 8:25 AMAbstract concepts are owned?
I do agree that cultural considerations are a huge part of understanding of a (spirituality, language, cuisine, music, art, etc.), and that willful ignorance of these things is almost always detrimental. However, it seems fairly off the page to say that it is necessary to belong to a specific organization, when both that organization and its basic texts make no such requirement.
-
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sat, July 3, 2004 - 3:33 PMGhost,
Thank you for touching on an aspect of several translations of the Tao & of Chuang Tzu's writings that tickle me. The topic of governance & rulers. There is a timeless and cross culture-ness thread of many great minds/writers about criticizing autocracy and exploiting groups in societies. Sadly, the lessons of corrupt leaders are always topical. I am very touched by #s 17, 18 & 80 in the Tao.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Tue, July 6, 2004 - 3:54 AMI've found that some rituals are instrumental in deflating a pumped-up ego. Anybody know what I mean? ie: That feeling of, "I know what's what, and nobody can tell me otherwise." Can anybody in this thread relate?
The title of this thread "...who needs them? Do we?" reminds me of a story about the Lone Ranger and Tonto chasing a bandit into a canyon. After many twists and turns, they lose the bandit, and the Lone Ranger looks up and sees a long line of Native Americans with arrows drawn pointing down at them.
The Lone Ranger says, "Looks like we're in trouble, Tonto."
And Tonto replies, "What you mean by 'we', white man?" -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Fri, July 9, 2004 - 6:41 PMTaoism's lack of formal rituals (or, quite possibly, my ignorance of them if they do in fact exist) has been both a blessing and a curse to me.
When I first started reading the Tao Te Ching regularly, and started identifying myself as a Taoist, I was immediately confronted with the question, "Well, what does THAT mean...I'm a Taoist? How can you deign to identify yourself with something so formless, nameless, shapeless?"
And then I started looking for ritual. Wondering where the Taoists hung out. Whether LA had a Taoist temple, with Taoists who had been Taoists longer than me, people who were better at Taoism than me and who could instruct me and guide me...
And it hit me. I was approaching the Tao like I approached everything else in my life...analytically, systematically, looking for people who knew more than me so they could teach me, so I could then teach others, etc. No wonder I was in despair! I was approaching the Tao like I would fixing a broken bike chain, or learning how to shave my head.
Now, I find ecstatic, blissful liberation in the Tao, and in my personally defined practices that comprise MY relationship to my own spirit, within the context of the Tao. I read the Tao nearly every day. www.daily-tao.com is a GREAT little site to get a random passage to read, ponder, explore. It has the Jane English translation, which resonates with me.
And so my rituals, if you can even call them that, are pretty simple. I read the Tao every day. I give myself about 5 minutes - no matter what is going on at work, no matter how ready-to-collapse-into-a-puddle-of-emotional-detritus-unless-I-save-the-universe my boss looks as soon as I walk in - I read the Tao. A random passage. I read it again. Then I live my DAY within its context. Sometimes I don't get it. Sometimes it doesn't resonate. Sometimes I think "bah I've read this one before, I know this one."
But I live within the context of that passage for the day, and sometimes I get it. A moment in the day where I find myself in the passage. Find myself in its meaning, or find an example of its teaching unfold in front of me.
It works for me. And if becoming a Taoist is inventing oneself as a Taoist, and choosing to engage in rituals that ground oneself, then I call myself a Taoist, and this is how I do it. -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Fri, July 9, 2004 - 8:03 PMMaybe this is the problem; people don't realize how dependent Taoism is on ritual and ceremony....perhaps understandably given the availability of information and no access to real cultural happenings. I can't recall any topics here touching on any reference to a specific ceremony or ritual, what they might be for or how it functions amongst it's community. The only thing I've come across is the sense that it's to be negated. That's what I keep finding as strange regarding the intent here. It's not much about exploring and understanding.
I don't know of a religion that has more rituals than Taoism, perhaps sankha up in Mongolia or the Samiland indigenous folk but it would be a close call. Taoism as it is practice has ritual embedded into it that is very visual, incorporates the family in a all-encompassing way and also intrinsically approaches all of its community in multiple ways.
Rituals...who needs them? Do we? Makes me cringe cause it really lacks a certain sense of spiritual understanding. Can't understand why folks need to smother something they have no idea of. -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Fri, July 9, 2004 - 9:48 PMWell, it sounds like a problem of education and awareness.
People can hardly be faulted for something they are ignorant of. If Taoism involves rituals, I don't know what they are. The Tao Te Ching doesn't go into detail about "what to do" like, say, the Bible.
So, if there are rituals, what are they? How can we find out? How are they taught? -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Fri, July 9, 2004 - 11:39 PMIn my understanding, the rituals of religious Taoism are taught to one after initiation into a particular sect of Taoism. Some involve the writing and use of talismans as a way of connection with the dieties. There are certain practices performed on the new and full moons, offerings and chants to the three wise ones, the eight immortals, Quan Yin. The offering of Incense is an important part of the daily Taoist ritual, where three sticks of incense (three is considered and auspicious number in Taoism, conferring long life and blessings) are held up to the third eye three times while an invocation of offering is sung. There are many other invocations and chants used in Taoist ritual as well . . .
I hope this gives some idea of the scope of Taoist ritual, although it barely breaks the surface of this beautiful practice. There are so many levels to Taoism, it's beautiful to discuss the variety and depth of Tao. In the end, all of the rituals aim to reunite us with our original nature and return us to oneness with Tao.
blessings,
~elfstar
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sat, July 10, 2004 - 8:07 AMThere are other texts. I not too long ago read a scholarly tome called Taoism, I can't recall the author's name, but I found it in the B&N Eastern Religion section, in this book it touches breifly on the many traditions Taoist practice each of which have many rituals and some with none. I am particularly interested in the Alchemy tradition, myself. This book is really a teaser, but it is a start. But what you are doing is your own 'tradition.'
One of the things I got out of this book that was most appealing is there is no concept of heresy in Taoism. You really can't go wrong. Being the Tao, living each chapter, that has got to be the best ritual practice. -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sat, July 10, 2004 - 2:48 PMI had asked a question, which may have been lost in the middle of this thread.
Would someone please explain the saying,
"If you meet the Buddha, kill the Buddha". -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sat, July 10, 2004 - 9:23 PM"if you meet the Buddha, kill the Buddha"
If you meet the Buddha, then you have come upon a thoughtform called "Buddha", and not the true Buddha mind. This is the same as 'Tao that can be named, is not the true Tao." The Buddha is a transcendant nature, not something one can 'meet on a dusty path'. If you meet the Buddha on the path, you must kill him because the true Buddha is within YOU, not outside. This is i.m.h.o. of course ~
blessings,
elfstar~ -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sun, July 11, 2004 - 3:14 PMBig, W., Elfstar~, Mikey ...
As Spock says..."Fascinating". The 'direction' of my questions was about whether anyone has found value in deepening their (taoist) spiritual development by using ritual... and if it's the most fruitful or even necessary path to that development. I have a certain relationship with ritual itself. I see them from many faiths/traditions and they run a wide range of impact on me... healing, devout, grounding, cleansing, rigidifying (madeup word), separating, group binding ...
I'd like to hear the stories of finding and releasing rituals that have furthered this group's spiritual path. I say 'this group' because we are a self-selecting group that resonates with the mysteriousness and undefineableness of Tao.
I find that reading the Tao te Ching and Hua Ha Ching increase my stillness and openness, and resonates with psychic practices that could be called rituals: tuning chakras, adjusting my energetic vibrations, running energy thru my space, clearing karma, releasing, connecting with other beings and spirit guides, releasing past life traumas. I've used tai chi clearing blocks and creating suppleness. I find a lot of value in joining Pagan circles in their rituals. I enjoy hanging out with Buddhists, but I find a lot of resistance to a thread of 'learning' in their practice. I 'think' that riding that Buddhist 'horse' of spiritual practice can only go so far.
Somewhere in this topic the aspect of attachment comes into view.
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Tue, July 13, 2004 - 10:14 AM"For example, take magical knives. Magrat had a complete collection of magical knives, all with the appropriate coloured handles and complicated runes all over them.
"It had taken many years under the tutelage of Granny Weatherwax for Magrat to learn that the common kitchen breadknife was better than the most ornate of magic knives. It could do all that the magical knife could do, plus you could use it to cut bread."
-Witches Abroad, Terry Pratchett -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Tue, July 13, 2004 - 11:05 AMI get the feeling that people find it easier to tip-toe around this. But it misses the point. Taoism is inherently inseparable from the context of Chinese (I'm not Asian). Yes you can move it in a direction of heresy (there are an infinite number of Chinese sects), no problem but to strip it of it's culture and human background seems to be completely alienating. The ritualisms of Taoism are something that isn't going to be directly comprehensible from another cultural standpoint. Yes, the existentialism that this forum finds so captivating is embedded within Taoism in a philosophical way, but it is there in a parallel way within the ritual and the sense of being of individuals within chinese culture. To unilaterally ignore it (a very American ongoing process) is something that should be questioned as destructive to the whole and labelled as offensive. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Tue, July 13, 2004 - 2:36 PMYes!
When a new Taoist sect forms, at least the founders know what they're breaking away from.
No, you can't fault someone for not knowing about something. But when they refuse to learn, and make pronouncements on subjects they know nothing about, then that is true ignorance. I don't care what you know or don't know, provided you have the desire to learn, which is sadly absent from these western "Taoists". -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Tue, July 13, 2004 - 3:28 PMSo, in your world, Ryan, I can read the Tao Te Ching, and find inspiration in it, but I cannot call myself a Taoist? -
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Tue, July 13, 2004 - 5:32 PM"Big"- The Tao Te Ching isn't the Taoist Bible. There are literally thousands of Taoist scriptures in an open canon. How can you pretend to be a Taoist when you have only been "inspired" by an English translation of one very short text? Sure, the Tao Te Ching is a very important text in Taoism, but you can only grasp that importance by making yourself aware of its place in the Taoist tradition.
If you want to begin learning about Taoism, there are some good introductory texts in English. I would recommend The Gold Pavilion by Michael Saso, The Taoist Body by Christof Schipper, and Taoism: Growth of a Religion by Isabel Robinet. -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Tue, July 13, 2004 - 5:56 PMThanks for not answering my question, by the way. I really love it when people don't answer my question, but INSTEAD take it as an opportunity to further humiliate and browbeat me because I don't know as much as you.
And thanks for being an asshole. I must have missed the chapter in the Tao Te Ching about being a self-righteous, condescending prick to whomever doesn't agree with you or know as much as you. You seem to have been "inspired" by it.
I never said that the TTC was the Taoist bible. It's the only Taoist text I've ever been exposed to, and I have wondered if there was more to it.
And I only ever said that I ~identify~ with Taoism, and the text that I know - however LIMITED in your view - and that I was open to the possibility that I was doing it all wrong.
You seem to be an expert, or at least better informed than me, on Taoism, which is great. But your approach to Taoism "novices" is nothing short of disgusting. Where's the open heart, the magninimity of spirit, the desire to educate? Why must you approach people with such vitriolic superiority?
If this "tribe" is going to involve you browbeating everyone who dares find inspiration or enjoyment in a Taoist text in a way that doesn't fit your extremely narrow view of "the way it should be" then I'm leaving.
Perhaps the non-existent moderator of this tribe may find some reason to ask you to tone it down. Because you're completely out of line. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Tue, July 13, 2004 - 6:58 PMNot only did I not employ insults in my reply, but I actually offered some helpful information about how you might begin to understand Taoism.
When I said the Tao Te Ching is not the Taoist Bible, I meant that you cannot find even the basic teachings of the religion just by reading that book in a cultural vacuum.
Again, I can respect someone who doesn't know much about something, but is willing to learn before they draw conclusions. If this is how you respond to an honest attempt to inform you about what Taoism actually is, what does that say about your eagerness to learn?
Are you going to bother looking up the books I talk about (which are perfectly good regardless of what you think of me)? Judging from your defensive reaction here, I doubt it.
I'm not a Taoist myself so if my demeanor doesn't conform to your conception of how a Taoist should act I really don't care.
-
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Wed, July 14, 2004 - 12:17 AMOh my . . . the air is getting tense in here. Ryan, if you really wish to help people understand Taoism and support them on their way, then wouldn't it be better to support them from behind, as lao tzu suggests? You seem to be looking down disgustedly upon these 'western Taoists' who are so ignorant of the western translations which YOU have gained understanding from. Yes, the reading you reccomend is good. So is a lot of other writing and translation of Taoist text. One ninety year old Taoist master said "Just study the Tao Te Ching and Chuang Tzu . . . all understanding of Tao is within."
The goal for all of us, all sentient beings, is return to Tao. We are all here to help each other on this return journey ~ the Tao fills what is empty (humility) and empties what is full (arrogance). One who claims to be so well versed in Taoism (even if you are not a Taoist yourself) should understand the basic tenent of humility, the power of humility and keeping to the low places, the feminine.
That being said, I generally agree with you, that it is worthy and important to look into Taoism as it is practiced and understood in China. If one is truly meant for the Taoist path, a true teacher will manifest. I suggest those who are truly interested in the Tao find a Qigong or Tai Chi teacher and enter the teaching through your body, as well as your mind.
blessings~ -
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Wed, July 14, 2004 - 1:15 AMIf you would like to read something in Chinese then there are really no limits to what could be recommended to you.
But I'm assuming, perhaps incorrectly, that Big and others don't speak Chinese.
The books I recommended aren't just translations, they are detailed descriptions of Taoism as it is practiced today, by people who have been deeply involved in the religion. Saso and Schipper are in fact ordained Taoist priests.
Tai Chi and Qi Gong are disciplines which were indeed developed within or around the Taoist tradition but often times the classes offered in the west are a bit adulterated. A Tai Chi teacher I had once was a fervent Catholic who dismissed Taoism as pagan nonsense. As for Qi Gong, one must be wary of a number of groups which use the discipline to further some kind of personality cult.
The recommendation to "just study the Tao Te Ching and Chuang Tzu" might have made sense in a Chinese cultural context, but a Taoist master's interpretation of these books could be wildly different from what you might think. In the tradition of Taoism, Lao Tzu is viewed as a god, in fact he is the representation of the very Tao itself, a notion which might sound crazy to some who are used to the interpretation of Taoism as merely a philosophy devoid of beliefs or rituals.
Finally, if my attitude seems a bit gruff, it's because of a persistent arrogance among the western "philosophical Taoists", who aren't simply ignorant of Taoism but vehemently so. This is what Scott Dragon said: "Besides the conundrum of how to define Tao - you have the essence of not doing; not naming/classifying; not learning facts.
I claim the word Taoist. I won't give it over to any religion. To have "practices" to reveal and keep the Tao, is absurdity to me." And there you have it. Without even bothering to learn about them, Scott Dragon dismisses hundreds of years of thought and practice as absurdity. This is emblematic of the proponents of "philosophical Taoism". -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Wed, July 14, 2004 - 4:54 AMRyan,
I think you are having a problem viewing things from a different perspective. You sound a lot like the Taorestore website you recommended earlier, very narrow of view. As you have previously said you are not a Taoist and only really know the Tao from an intellectual stand point. This creates a rather gigantic blind spot. When you look at Taoism you see the Tao the way/path, etc. Then you go looking for more, because there must be more right? Regardless of which dates you use there are centuries between the occurence of the Taoist pantheon and the writing of the Tae te Ching. Where were the gods during these centuries?
Taoism sprang from many texts of which the Tao te Ching is only one. The philosophy of Taoism became the religion of Taoism and like any religion it needs its gods. Go anywhere in the world and you'll find pantheons, even Catholicism has become pantheonistic. It is the Tao of religion to create pantheons. If I lived in China and had the cultural heritage for the deities to mean anything then I'm sure I'd quite wholeheartedly be make offerings to them, but they are as real to me as Zeus and Odin, which is to say not real at all.
I'm a philosophical Taoist rather than a religious Taoist, if you must divide things that way (personally I'm happy calling us all Taoists, more inclusive that way). If you really insist on playing 'my-dad's-bigger-then-your-dad' we philosophers were here first.
W.
I sympathise more with your position than Ryan's. To disregard the cultural basis of Taoism through wilful ignorance is destructive. However I gain no more from Taoist rituals than I would gain from five daily prayers to Allah. I can only speak from my perspective but to attempt to follow a series of beliefs which I feel are no more true than a fairy tale is destructive self-delusion. Rather than try and force myself into a shape I don't fit, is it not better to find my own shape? Is not contemplation, meditation and developing awareness valid paths of Taoism? The Tao can be seen in all and a river is as wise a teacher as any should need. The rest is just detail. Interesting detail, and critical if you happen to be immersed in it, but it doesn't effect the Tao. I don't ignore the Taoist cultural heritage, it just isn't mine.
"Definition of a Religious War: When two groups go away and pray to their gods before destroying each other to determine once and for all who has the best imaginary friend" -
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Wed, July 14, 2004 - 12:15 PMThere was no "philosophy of Taoism" because the original school of Lao Tzu was never called Taoist. It was called the school of Lao Tzu, or Lao-Chuang. It's a simple historical fact. Therefore, when you ask "Where were the gods during these centuries?" it's a moot point. The Lao-Chuang school also did not arise in a cultural vacuum.
This has been covered before, and the fact that you bring up the same point again makes me wonder about your willingness to learn.
When the school of Taoism was born, it began with deities. What you are suggesting is that the original pure philosophy of Taoism later on became weighted down with alot of religious stuff, which is of course the position of some western academics such as Holmes Welch. It also happens to be false.
Your suggestion that what I'm saying comes from my not being Taoist is strange, as this is also the position of practicing Taoists. They really do require you to be initiated in a Taoist tradition before you are considered a Taoist.
Whether you find this point of view narrow or not has nothing to do with its truth. -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, July 15, 2004 - 5:18 AMRyan,
The original school was not called Taoist or Taoism and neither were your religious Taoists because they didn't speak english! It is a simple historical fact.
I know that you are blinded by your own point of view so I shall try this again and I'll explain it very slowly so you can keep up.
Nowhere in the Tao te Ching are deities mentioned. There is a mention of heaven but no deities. Somewhen following the formal development of Taoism by Lao Chuang the Taoist pantheon came into existence. Are you with me so far? Now I already know the answer to this question, I'm asking it because it is clear you haven't thought about it: where did the Gods come from? Think about it.
They were folk religion that already existed apart from Taoism. When Taoism became a formal religion these Gods were incorporated. The presence or absence of the deities is not important to the central concept of the Tao. The deities are a peculiarity of being in China in that period in the same way Osiris and chums are a peculiarity of living in Egypt during the reign of the Pharoahs. Do you understand or are some of these ideas a little racey for you? Incidentally much of the religious stuff was added later, have you read a list of immortals?
The next point I covered earlier and the fact that you still haven't comprehended it makes me wonder about your willingness to learn. Language is plastic, the only languages which are not are dead languages and I'm pretty certain English is not a dead language. By Taoist I refer to:
a> The followers of the formal religion Taoism (in its many sects)
b> Followers of Taoist philosophy
You may disagree with my definitions, but I am so defining the words this way now (again), if you still choose to disagree with me then that's fine but understand you are disagreeing about the definition of words (which makes me think you must be a lawyer, no-one else does things that pointless).
I commented about you not being a Taoist as Taoism is clearly an intellectual exercise for you (correct me if I'm wrong). The Tao te Ching clearly states that the Tao you know is not the Tao. This leads me to the conclusions that you only partially 'get' Taoist philosophy and so it creates a blind spot in your perception, I'm not criticising just trying to help you see it. What I said was not that what you say is because you aren't Taoist, what I said is that because you aren't Taoist you are missing some of the point of Tao.
I hereby declare myself a Taoist. I am not trying to gain approval from an organised Taoist group, I simply follow the philosophy of the Tao. I am, therefore, a Tao-ist. I assume you are fluent in English and so you should understand the underlying structure that produces that word. And, frankly, any Taoist who says, "you can't be a Taoist you haven't had the sacred initiation," Isn't a Taoist either (since that contradicts the underlying philosphy of the Tao, it's like having a Christian sociopath).
-
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Wed, July 21, 2004 - 10:45 AMYou think I haven't thought about any of this? All the arguments you make are old ones, repeated ad nauseum by all sorts of wannabes.
Your argument contains several wrong assumptions.
One is that a philosophical school of Taoism gradually evolved into a religious one, slowly incorporating gods. In fact, there is a very definite point when Taoism was founded, and that was when Chang Tao Ling founded his Five Bushels society. The religion included deities from earlier Chinese folk religion, as well as shamanistic practices and the philosophy of Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu.
Taoism may be an English word, but it is a translation of the word "tao chiao" which means "Taoist religion". The schools of Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu were called just that. The word "Tao Chia" is a later fabrication by academics who saw the religion of Taoism as a bunch of superstitious nonsense and a perversion of what they thought was the original purity of "philosophical Taoism", the so-called "Tao Chia". In fact "philosophical Taoism" does not exist.
A further wrong assumption you make is that somehow the Tao Te Ching is the ultimate authority on what Taoism is. In fact it is a very important book but one among many, and it is not the only book attributed to Lao Tzu in Chinese tradition.
Furthermore, to Taoists, the Tao Te Ching does in fact clearly mention deities. The fact that you don't read it that way is because you are completely disconnected with the Taoist tradition and so have no idea how to read the book.
I am not a Taoist not because I don't understand Taoism, but because I believe Taoism, like all religions, has its place and its time in history which has now been surpassed.
Finally, when you say: "And, frankly, any Taoist who says, "you can't be a Taoist you haven't had the sacred initiation," Isn't a Taoist either" you have just dismissed the entire Taoist tradition, thus revealing your own prejudices. You continue to suggest that I am narrow-minded when in fact you are the one who continues to dismiss an entire tradition you know next to nothing about.
Go ahead, call yourself a Taoist. I would prefer though that you call yourself a McTaoist though, because the joke is slightly funnier that way. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Wed, July 21, 2004 - 11:20 AMOne more thing- what is being passed off as "philosophical Taoism" actually has more in common with the western philosophy of Epicureanism than with Taoism. For those curious about the philosophy of Epicurus, there is an excellent website here:
www.epicurus.info/ -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, July 22, 2004 - 8:44 AMI can see why you'd think that.
However epicurean teachings are, essentially, don't worry be happy. That is quite a way from Taoism.
They are similar in that both teach that you shouldn't hold on too tightly to desire, to accept things that occur, to be simple in your pleasures. They both have an underlying feeling of go-with-the-flow. However the epicurean perspective is self-centred, it teaches that you should act in such a way as to avoid encountering stress. The epicurean world is one of stress avoidance. In contrast Taoism teaches to give of yourself. To be like the Tao, give and ask nothing in return, for only by becoming empty can you be filled.
Epicureanism teaches to avoid fame and gain because it brings stress.
Taoism teaches to avoid fame and gain as they only serve to distract from Tao.
The core difference is that ego is the center of epicurean teachings, avoiding causing stress to self. Taoist teachings reject ego and instead teach to be and to do. An epicurean thinks of themself first, a Taoist of themself not at all.
-
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Wed, July 21, 2004 - 10:41 PMare you chinese? are you fluent in chinese? are you an elvis impersonator? What do you mean philosophical daoism doesn't work? How come ou use the old romanization of chinese words. Does your shit stink too? You know, the dao is in the shit too.
If this posting is useful, where is the useless?
Ahh, life and the myriad things.
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, July 22, 2004 - 4:42 AM"You think I haven't thought about any of this?"
Yes. Now more so than ever.
I'll try again.
You are not correctly understanding the words that I am saying. I am not suggesting that Taoism began as a school of philosophy and slowly became a religion. If you had read the previous post rather than skimmed it you would understand that. I am telling you that Taoism began as a philosophy (the philosophy of the Tao Te Ching) called Tao Chia. Following this many other books were written, many of them without direct inspiration from the Tao Te Ching. At the same time there were folk religions in China, and yes, shamanic practices. These all occurred in China at the same time.
These were brought together to form a religion, Tao Chaio. Following the usual tribulations and changes that all religions go through this became the religion you know as Taoism. The deities that were incorporated into the religion are the deities that happened to be there. However 'Taoism', covers a larger group than simply the religion, it is the sloppiness of English that makes this indistinct.
"In fact "philosophical Taoism" does not exist." It clearly does, I can `see` it from here. Whether you wish to accept it or not it is quite clear that there is a school of philosophical Taoism, if there was not we couldn't be having this conversation. Try asking a philosopher if clarification is needed.
As for the status of the Tao Te Ching, I don't claim it as the only, or even the most important book. I claim it as the first. However since the authorship is in doubt it is moot to discuss other books by the same 'author'.
"Furthermore, to Taoists, the Tao Te Ching does in fact clearly mention deities." Then quote some to me. If you can show me the reference to specific deities then I'm happy to be corrected. I'm here in the pursuit of truth, neither I nor anyone I know who has read the Tao Te Ching has come across reference to any specific deities. General references to heaven, yes. But not individual deities. If you can correct us then go ahead.
"I am not a Taoist not because I don't understand Taoism, but because I believe Taoism, like all religions, has its place and its time in history which has now been surpassed." Which is exactly what I mean when I say you don't understand Taoism. The philosophy of the Tao, the underlying essence is timeless. It's time can't pass, it is out of time. The truth of the Tao applies now just as much as then. If you would let go of your list of deities and stop exclaiming "What you say is false!" If you would relax and listen with an open heart I can show you. However as Stan Gooch put it, "things have not only to be seen to be believed but also have to be believed to be seen." Until you open your mind to the possibility of what is there you will never see it.
"You have just dismissed the entire Taoist tradition, thus revealing your own prejudices." I did not dismiss the whole Taoist religion. I am quite heartily accepted by Taoists as one of them. I'm sure you can find someone who is of the Taoist religion who will call me heretic, but the majority of Taoists I've met are quite happy to call me Taoist. The only person who has ever told me I can't be a Taoist is you, and as you've already admitted, you are not a Taoist ;)
Call me a McTaoist if you wish, I'm only trying to help you. As I stated earlier I don't need confirmation that I'm a Taoist, I am. I only seek to make your way easier, if you don't wish it then so be it.
Dance in Beauty -
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, July 22, 2004 - 10:21 AM"I am telling you that Taoism began as a philosophy (the philosophy of the Tao Te Ching) called Tao Chia."
This is nothing new. I have read the work of Holmes Welch, and I probably know your side of the debate better than you do.
Again, you ignore a basic fact- the word "tao chia" is the invention of modern academics. The school of Lao Tzu was called the school of Lao Tzu.
"Whether you wish to accept it or not it is quite clear that there is a school of philosophical Taoism, if there was not we couldn't be having this conversation. Try asking a philosopher if clarification is needed."
We're arguing about it, so it must exist. Does that mean if I start arguing about unicorns, they exist too?
And I love how you think all philosophers think the same way. Have you actually read any philosophy, besides your corrupt "translations" of Lao Tzu? And no, watching the Matrix movies does not count.
"If you can show me the reference to specific deities then I'm happy to be corrected. I'm here in the pursuit of truth, neither I nor anyone I know who has read the Tao Te Ching has come across reference to any specific deities."
You're obviously not in search of the truth, since you continue to draw conclusions on subjects about which you know nothing. If you had bothered to read any decent book on Taoism, you would know well before I mentioned it that the Tao Te Ching is interpreted as mentioning deities.
No, specific deities are not mentioned by name (nor did I say they were), but there are countless references them. A line often cited in Taoist rituals: "The Tao gave birth to One. The One gave birth to Two. The Two gave birth to Three. The Three gave birth to all of creation." This is a reference to the birth of Lao Tzu, Yin-Yang, and then the Three Pure Ones. Again, all of this is explained in some detail in any number of good books on Taoism, which you refuse to read. Can you argue with this interpretation of the Tao Te Ching? Yes, provided you know what you're talking about. As it stands, this interpretation has far more validity than any of the nonsense you are digging up in the new age section of Barnes and Noble.
"The philosophy of the Tao, the underlying essence is timeless. It's time can't pass, it is out of time. "
I do understand that principle, and I disagree with it. All religions purport to be timeless, and they are wrong. It may be news to you, but it is possible for someone to understand a concept and disagree with it at the same time.
It find it touching that you act like you have something to teach me, when you so obviously know nothing about the subject. Your wisdom is about as profound and authentic as fortune cookies. All that talk about humility goes out the window now that you're finally served a genuine slice of humble pie. -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, July 22, 2004 - 7:37 PMbooks are the writings of dead people long gone. What purpose do they serve. I can't even teach my kid how to make a proper wheel.
don't know, can't say.
remember, knowledge is limitless, but a life limited.
I love Zhuangzi. Does that make me a butterfly?
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Fri, July 23, 2004 - 3:54 AMRyan,
While you keep your eyes shut you will never see the light.
It would appear you've already decided what I'm saying and so won't actually listen. You seem to believe that I have read one copy of the Tao Te Ching and the work of Holmes Welch and based an entire philosophy on it. Please don't project yourself on to me. The truth is you know nothing about me and you have no idea what I've read or not. Despite what you think, you don't know my side of the debate better than I, I know this because you don't even understand my side of the debate.
For example, I didn't state that the philosophical school of Taoism exists because we are arguing about it. I stated that the philosophical school of Taoism exists because I am arguing from that perspective. If it did not exist then I would have no place to 'stand'. You are unable to see it because you choose not to. Please read what I've written carefully, you are missing the meaning. Equally, I didn't state that all philosphers thought the same way, I stated that a competent philosopher will be able to point you in the right direction to find the Taoist school of philosophical thought.
"I do understand that principle" no, you don't. You think you understand the principle, but by your words I can tell that you do not. You have the surface, but you miss the depth. So busy looking at trees you miss the wood.
As for your deity quote, vague doesn't even begin to describe it, if that's the best you can do... A clear explicit reference from the Tao Te Ching, please.
I don't doubt that you've read books, however the aquisition of knowledge is only the begining, not the end. Take the time to contemplate what you've read and reach for the deeper meaning. Most chinese philosophical thought has more than one meaning, look for them all.
'When people are alive they are soft and weak. At their death they become rigid and hard. So those that are rigid and hard take the company of death, those who are soft and weak take the company of life.'
If you wish for more guidance then just ask.
Dance in Beauty
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, July 15, 2004 - 8:44 AMThe writer Dr Johnson was once standing in a street where the houses came closer and closer as they reached towards the sky. He saw two women hurling abuse and vegetables at each other, almost within frying-pan range from the topmost floor of two houses on opposite sides of the street.
"They can never agree," said the good doctor, "for they are arguing from different premises." -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Mon, July 19, 2004 - 2:32 AMArguements come from inflated egos. Correct me if I'm wrong. Isn't there a poem in the Tao Te Ching about: that which becomes inflated will certainly pop? It's neither bad nor good, it simply is what is, according to Lao Tzu, I think.
Was Doc Johnson well-fed with a big pan of stir-fried veggies? -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Wed, July 21, 2004 - 4:32 AM"Taoism: The English term 'Taoism' is ambiguous. It is used to translate both the Chinese term 'tao chia (the school of the Tao)' and 'tao chiao (the Taoist religion)'."
-Tao Te Ching, glossary (trans. D. C. Lau, Prof. Chinese Language and Literature, Chinese University of Hong Kong)
"Truthful words are not beautiful; beautiful words are not truthful. Good words are not persuasive; persuasive words are not good. He who knows has no wide learning; he who has wide learning does not know.
"The sage does not hoard. Having bestowed all he has on others, he has yet more;
"Having given all he has to others he is richer still.
"The way of heaven benefits and does not harm; the way of the sage is bountiful and does not contend."
- Tao Te Ching, 81. -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Mon, November 8, 2004 - 8:45 AMAbout the question of "If you meet the Buddha, kill the Buddha", I've heard explained as, Once you think you've got it, rest assured you don't. Sort of along the lines, the expert thinks he's an expert, and thus can't learn. Only the beginner can learn.
So, if you stop evolving spiritually, then you no longer are enlightened.
About the original question of the place for ritual, I meditate every day at least once, and many times twice. Speaking as a person who partakes in ritual, I can answer this question this way. "discipline is easy, It's the living that's hard".
The question might also read, why be engaged in discipline, when the outcome is unknown?
Or the question might be asked, why do something that gives unknown results the same way more than once?
I am reminded each time I sit in meditation of life without thought. It actually exists,, and I'm always shocked each time this is discovered. Even after several years of this,, the amazement is still there with almost every mediation.
So, do I meditate in order to be amazed?
Is it to relax the mind since it's too busy thinking all the time?
Well, with ritual, it's the doing of it that matters, and not the rationalizing of why it's done, or even what you might get after you do it....
Speaking of which,,, it's that time..
Best,
Dave
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Fri, December 10, 2004 - 4:22 PMWe can always find ways to agree and disagree about the same topic, the rituals must have some kind importance but they do not make or break tao. It strengthens ties for the practitioner but tao is not the possesion of a select few nor it is unappropiate to have been born somewhere else and stil feel it. It is bottomless. -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sat, December 11, 2004 - 1:12 PMReally depends on how far you insist on taking things and the manner in which you end up borrowing them. Taoism is a living religion that is people driven and cultually based. Not many in this forum seem to be willing to acknowledge that and there aren't any indications from the postings that anyone is willing to explore it.
To paraphrase the reaction it's been just gimmie that old-time toasim circa 5th century(?). Then there's just these never ending references to translations which have little to do with Taoism I know that they have a text page and chapter, but so what they are borderline meaningless. They seem to be more from folks that wish to adapt something to their own purposes and needs than to promote understanding.
It is the same arguement that can be applied to the false usage of the Native Americans Movement and Religions. There are many examples of highly visible "spiritual" people who have no support or relation to the ongoing culture (these people end up being hated by the very people they claim to draw from).
I do understand the profound lack of meaning that our own western culture engenders but I think that you can more meaningfully explore other cultures by sharing and developing appreciation and understanding rather than by wholesale usurping and assumed knowledge.
It's kinda funny that in China, Mickey Mouse and Disney are very big on a level that is pretty much akin to the cultural soulseeking that we have going on here (some Chinese almost seem to want there to be a spiritual basis for Mickey other than corporate greed). I'm sorry to be so harsh but at no time has anybody in this forum asked "what is important to these people" or "how do they live". Hence I find it to be a subtle form of racism. I know folks here are going to hide behind the notion that they are only interested in the philosophy and that so and so author has carefully translated out such and such text. But I afraid it's all a bad joke unless you undestand just how difficult it is to tranlsate the Chinese character and culture over to english or to endeavor in what the culture is actually about. There are very few that could begin to tranlate the specific meaningful context of a cultural text in the manner that these authors and advocates so proudly claim.
And as the last poster so spiritually states..."It is bottomless" To which I can only ask..."In which direction do you actually intend to go?" -
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Wed, December 15, 2004 - 11:39 AMYou said it much better than I could. Thank you. -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, December 16, 2004 - 11:51 AMHey Ryan, this could be the closest we've come to agreeing all thread ;)
W.,
I agree with everything you are saying about Taoism in China. I also agree that 'Taoist texts" are often translated to convey the message the translator wishes to convey rather than to provide a faithful translation. I also agree that to understand Taoism you have to see it within its own cultural perspective, simply transplanting concepts without thought of the context for those concepts is a disservice to the very concept you're trying to transplant (as well as the 'bed' it's being removed from).
I even understand how difficult it is to translate between chinese and english. The key problem being that unlike languages with the same contextual basis (e.g. languages of the same family) english and chinese have a totally different underlying way to view the world, it's not just a matter of matching the nouns and the verbs, but rather a need to take on whole different paradigm of viewing the world (language governs thought, and when a new language is used the brain has to think a different way, If the language is radically different then so must be the thought pattern). I've spent many years trying to get inside the mindset of the chinese. I don't think I've fully achieved it yet, but at least their humour is funnier now.
Understand what comes next is written from that perspective.
The rituals of Chinese practiced Taoism mean nothing to me. I can understand the reason for ritual and learn the culture behind it, but spiritually I do not connect with it. The lists of spirits and rulers are no more meaningful to me than a catholic's list of saints. In my centre I have no faith in it. I'm no more convinced by the folk religion than I am any other religion. By the "Taoism is the folk religion of China and no more" definition I'm not a Taoist. I am from outside the Taoist context looking in, and to believe in the folk religion of Taoism you must be inside the context looking out.
My context has no meaning to the Tao.
Whether I am Chinese are not doesn't effect the Tao. There is no barrier preventing me from trying to move with the Tao regardless of my point of origin. To try and twist myself into the shape of a Chinese Taoist would be a futile exercise in contortion because I am not a Chinese Taoist and when begining to move with the Way I'm pretty certain the first step is not "lie to yourself about your nature." Having read Taoist books I see the wisdom in the philosophy and embrace it. If I live with the Tao, am I not a Tao-ist? I'm not the folk religion Taoist, but I'd say we're cousins. A different use of the word Taoist, but still in the same spirit.
Please understand I'm not discounting the cultural context out of hand, in fact I'm not disgarding the cultural context at all. But I'm not discarding my own cultural context either. I seek the synergy between my context and Tao. There must be one, the Tao's pretty big :) Understanding chinese culture is all well and good for interpreting the Taoist texts, but it's a lousy place for me to start on the Way because I'm not over there, I'm here.
It could be that you utterly disagree with what I've written but don't discount it as psuedo-spiritual slumming.
In answer to your final question: I'm starting here and I plan to go that Way.
Dance in Beauty -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sat, December 25, 2004 - 2:06 PMpardon me for jumping in here but i find this discussion...well i found this discussion.
i think one thing to recognize which may have been missed here is a separation of classic taoism from modern taoism. when you talk about the taoism by example of fu xi was there ritual? lao tzu, chuan tzu. there have always been masters and students but there has not always been a religious practice. in fact historically speaking the religious practice is a new phenomena to taoism. the first taoists were not taoists. they had no practices, no rituals, no gods. all they had was what was presented to them by nature, and they used this as a guide. those which followed them learned from their teachings how to observe and become a participant in the cycles of nature. there are still taoists like this in china. they are quite recluse, go by no name and in many cases have not been seen for many years. on the other hand a more public face of taoism has been constructed under the umbrella of a religion. this religious taoism like so many other religious entities has a political function. they construct cannons of taoists texts, maintain the history, etc. these are things that the modern society seems to deem necessary for the maintainance of tradition. but is it really necessary for taoism? -
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sat, December 25, 2004 - 8:40 PMtrans-taoist anti-ritual
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sat, December 25, 2004 - 9:22 PMI have to wonder what you mean when you say that Taoism has a "political function." Even Lao Tzu's book had such a function. There is nothing inherently good or bad in something having a political function.
Perhaps you are referring to the way some modern Taoist temples are subsidized by the Chinese state, but it's wrong to make a blanket statement that all or most of the Taoist communities in China are tools of the Chinese government.
It's also strange to maintain that Taoist religion is "modern" when in fact it has been in practice for nearly 2000 years.
-
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sun, December 26, 2004 - 5:01 PMOk, can rituals functionally exist in anyway except an 'egocentric' way without culture and all the "people baggage" that they carry with them? Some folks here might be in the position that they've gone through their own cultural rituals which one normally disregards and they have never been thru meaningful rituals put out by another culture and grouphat has an inherent meaning attached to them. Many here on the tribe have seen staged rituals in their local speakeasy or alternative bar or perhaps at a desert happening...it rung their bell and now hey are hurtin to apply it to something in their lives. I'm very understanding of all that. But I think people should try and be more considerate and look for the ongoing beliefs of others in which to invest these urges and perhaps lift them up to a point that they can more successfully get along in this world. Many of the cultures we find so interesting live on shit so small it would make you whince if you actually knew. Many of the people I've truly admired lived in conditions that I could not adapt to or didn't want to (kinda embarassing for both parties).
Ghost, I understand what you are trying to do in your own personal practices of sprituality. As I read over your comment one can easily point out that you are selling yourself short. The language barrier is too high so you disregard it. The culture is not yours so you don't have anyhing to do with it. The Chinese just don't think about things in your way (the right way)....??? All that they do is silly except for little bits and pieces you break off from the whole. What sort of way of understanding is that other than "your way". You are selling yourself short and distorting any sense of understanding that could be acheived.
Won't you rather be focused on something you can't understand and find it beautiful and appealing rather than imposing yourself in a foolish way against something that you can't understand. I should guess you would not prefer to create your own little world out of somebody elses rather than try and understand the points with which we have to ponder about ourselves and others (but you seem to be saying the opposite of what you're actually doing). I'm not sure what you could study and not wind up with the same fundamental ailments. Animist religions have a very different focus than Western religions and I suggest you consider where they are coming from so as to give yourself a point of reference as to where to start.
You've gotten into a notion that Taoism is a roadway. Your driving down the road at your own whim and you've decided to stop at the nice highway reststop. So as your response to the final question indicates....You started here and you took off that way; but did you actually get anywhere?
If anyone cares to make this discussion on ritual more useful perhaps turning to a good reference point such as the old essays of Victor Turner or George Simmel might provide for a helpful turn in the road. Although I'm starting to appeciate the short sweet play by play comentary that Mateo has been helping with. Hopefully he can nicely wrap mine up in five words or less. -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Fri, December 31, 2004 - 10:18 PMW.
I think I may have overstated my case slightly.
It isn't that I don't want anything to do with the culture. Quite the opposite, I'm very happy to be involved with their culture (as mentioned previously I've spent time with "genuine" Taoists to try and learn about the Tao from them.) I certainly don't believe that my way of thinking is "better" than theirs because of the language I use. Language is simply a communicative tool that has the unfortuate consequence of guiding thoughts along particular routes as dictated by the language.
I don't disregard the Taoist religion as silly and only pay attention to the parts I like. It's simply that I can no more make myself believe that a Taoist deity exists than I can that Thor is real and standing behind me. My cultural standpoint rejects it. Now I could force myself to believe but that would be coersive, and the Tao is not coercive, it has no need to be. What I'm trying to get at is that my mind does not control my heart, my heart control what I feel. To claim to believe in something I do not is an insult to myself and the thing I claim belief in.
As for Taoism as a road way I see it more as a starting point, where you are now, to the end of the current cycle but there is not one route, there are many routes as varyed as the people that follow them. Some will follow similar routes and see each other along the way, others will not, but it doesn't change the path.
Have I got anywhere? Yes, I am a better person today than I was a year ago. Subjective , probably, but I think few, if any, would argue.
Your insights are interesting, I also have some comments to make about rituals but it's very early on New years day and I'm tired. I will return when I am more awake.
Dance in Beauty. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sat, January 1, 2005 - 11:41 AMDance in Beauty.
now tha tis a tai chi taoist ritual
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, December 16, 2004 - 9:36 PMlife could be could be condidered a series of rituals -
-
Unsu...
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Thu, December 16, 2004 - 9:38 PMthose who speak of thetao...
not speaking as ritual -
-
Re: Rituals.... who needs them? Do we?
Sun, December 26, 2004 - 7:10 PMPerhaps there will come a day when we will relinquish the need to convince others we are RIGHT & they are wrong! Afterall, if no one is hurt in the matter, then what is the matter?
-
-
-
Unsu...
Proabaly already said...
Mon, December 27, 2004 - 3:21 AMbut I find myself drifting off due to the lengthiness of this thread...
Aren't rituals mainly for the one performing them, to program one's intention if you will, and once the intention is set - experience follows (in all of its various forms), no matter what path one chooses? -
-
Unsu...
Re: Proabaly already said...
Mon, December 27, 2004 - 2:44 PMtrans-intentional experiential taoist para-ritual -
-
Re: Proabaly already said...
Fri, April 29, 2005 - 10:46 PMmuch talk--much exhaustion, keep your thoughts within
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
-
-
