That was Zen, this is Tao!

[Antonius]

Mistaking the word “Tao” for Taoism

Before I reveal the answer to my last post, I'd like to clarify some of my earlier statements about evidence in regards to the word "Tao." Sifu Stier and Mike B provided evidence showing where the word “Tao” appears in Buddhist texts, implying that this shows a Taoist influence on Zen.

[By the way, Mike B is my junior classmate under Sifu Wong. This shows that the accusation of “gang mentality” is inappropriate. Shaolin Wahnam members follow and practice the philosophy and teachings of Sifu Wong to the best of their abilities (logical, or they wouldn't learn from him), but everyone is free to air his or her opinion -- as evidenced on this forum.]

What is not widely known, even among Western scholars, is that the word “Tao” is not exclusive to Taoism, just as the word “God” is not exclusive to Christianity. For example, when we find the word “God” in translations of writings from other religions, such as in Hinduism, Islam and also Taoism, this, of course, does not mean that these religions were offshoots of Christianity.

Another example: In the Chinese language, the term “de tao gao seng” literally means “attain-tao-high-monk.” This term is often used to describe a Buddhist monk of high spiritual attainment. “Tao” here means “Buddhist spiritual cultivation,” and has nothing to do with Taoism.

Actually, the use of "tao" in Buddhist texts is quite common. Although I would love to see the original Chinese for the quoted evidence, it's not really necessary. Nevertheless, if anyone would like to provide the original Chinese, I would be happy to use it to further substantiate my arguments made here, here, and here.

In the following quotations provided by Sifu Stier and Mike B, “Tao” refers to the Supreme Reality -- something that may be realized through Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism, Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, or any religion. Since the following quotations were taking from Buddhist texts, “Tao” therefore means “Emptiness” or “Nirvana" and has nothing to do with Taoism.

Try this for yourselves. For each of the quotes below, substitute "Emptiness" or "Nirvana" for each occurrence of "Tao". I think you will find that the quotes make much more sense using the appropriate translation:

It is so wonderful, so wonderful. The Realms of Buddha and Tao are inconceivable!

The Great Tao is beyond all similes. --Master Yi Hsuan of the Lin Chi Zen.

In our pursuit of Tao, we must not be attached to the Buddha, nor to the Dharma, nor to sanga.

Chao-chou: What is Tao?
Nan-chuan: Your everyday mind!

I believe it is precisely the failure to understand this aspect of the Chinese word “Tao” that has mislead many Western scholars to wrongly think that Chan Buddhism was significantly influenced by Taoism.

[barrys]

Is any of this supposed to be helpful to anyone? Just to clarify, I don't mean just Anthony's post I mean most of this discussion. If it is - how is it? And if it isn't, what is it for?

Barry

[Charles David]

Verbal Sparring

Hi Barry,

I think that what we are seeing here is an example of liguistic sparring and I myself find it quite interesting as it is an art that I would like to pursue in the future, if only to be able to protect myself in print or spoken words from those who might try to attack me.

[Antonius]

Judging from the number of positive emails I have received in regards to this thread, I would guess that it is helpful to many people on many levels.

The responses have been varied and interesting. Some said the thread has helped them to gain perspective on both Taoism and Zen Buddhism; others said that it has spurred them to do some interesting reading; others that it has helped them to clear blockages; and still others said that it has inspired them to both study and practice more.

Personally, I'm learning many things, but perhaps the most interesting is how to skillfully manage my time. Tomorrow is final exam number 8 for me, but I'm still full of energy thanks to the wonders of qigong and meditation.

[Sifu Stier]

Anthony:

What is the purpose of your continued aggressive presence in this thread? You made your points long ago, and have since been reiterating them again and again, 'ad infinitionis et nauseo'! From your first appearance in this thread on page 4, you have been argumentative, critical, disrespectful, and oftentimes poorly mannered. If you consider these comments as a personal attack, you might ask yourself why it is that these same kinds of comments have been given to you by several different people, not just by me, and only given to you, not to anyone else posting on this subject!!!

Please continue to consider all who hold a different view from your own as totally uninformed, deluded by abundant scholarship on the subject, and completely deceived by their own experience if you wish. I don't care! Why should I value the opinion of someone who blatantly disrespects me repeatedly in a public forum, but can't handle being called to account for his freely chosen behavior. I have nothing more to say to you on this subject, and therefore withdraw from the thread I began. Should anyone here wish to engage me in continued, peaceful dialogue on this subject matter, please contact me by private message or e-mail. I welcome your views.

[Chiahua]

would just like to welcome everyone to the largest thread on the forum so far.

Unfortunately the length of the thread seems directly proportional to the ire generated by it.

[Antonius]

Sifu Stier, I'm sorry that you feel that way, but you are wrong. I can handle being called to account -- in both the content of this discussion as well as the presentation.

“… has left me feeling constant defensiveness against escalating verbal assault in a group 'witch hunt' focused solely on me.”

Would you please quote specific instances where I have verbally assaulted or attacked you?

On the other hand, do you, Sifu Stier, as well as other members of the forum, consider the following statements to be verbal assault?

I see such 'bullying' tactics on your part, Antonius, as inappropriate

when the supposed Forum Administrator participates with such an overbearing, dogmatic, and 'pontificating' presence

The 'gang mentality' which some of you have so quickly and easily embraced has been a sorry spectacle indeed!

...I don't understand why any intelligent person would believe that Buddhism and Philosophical Taoism remained totally segregated for many, many centuries...

I was admittedly quite surprised by the unabashed egoism and stubborn arrogance which you are so attached to

To insist that it does demonstrates nothing more than an undisciplined ego insistent on 'one upmanship' again and again.

while arrogantly seated up there on your high horse.

Thus, your embarrassing 'delusions de grandeur' in no way authorize you to make such evaluations for me.

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

All those who perceive that I am have only their own attachments to personal discriminations and value judgements to contend with, only their own insecure egos to overcome.

[Darryl]

Moderators Post

Hi Sunyata,

I think the thread is excellent for many reasons and have never had a problem with people disagreeing with me on the forum. For a simple explanation - double Yin or double Yang makes a rather boring (though educational) forum. The specific topics can be an added bonus, especially if they get passionate replies from people who care about the subject(s) at hand.

Whenever we get a difference of opinion on the forum, I (we) are happy enough for it to be here. Whenever we get a very strong opinion (e.g. the existance of Internal Force thread, Shaolin vs Grappling and now this one) we ('we' including, but not limited to, the Instructors, Assistant Instructors and usually the Senior Students as well) are greatfull for the opportunity to learn more and present our views to others outside of the Shaolin Wahnam Institute. In doing so, we have to reappraise our own understanding of the topic at hand, say what we mean and (most importantly) not be afraid to fail (i.e. be proven wrong). If we are proven wrong, we are not bitter, angry or evasive, instead we usually thank whomever has helped us - openly and sincerely - and move on. Equally, if we are proven right, then we carry on from there without a qualm and move on.

This thread has been extremely educational for many people for a variety of reasons including the topics being discussed. While I (we) accept that the views held by Shaolin Wahnam are in the minority overall, we also have not either dreamt them up or are persisting in fighting a losing battle. Nor are we attempting to brow beat or intimidate visitors to the forum - we freely welcome new people to the forum, especially if they have information, experiences and understanding that we do not. However, if our views differ, we will ask for addittional information or a clearer explanation. If we are still not convinced, we would then ask for examples to substantiate previous statements. This is what has happenned on this thread and despite many comments to the contrary, this thread has remained an excellent example of the principles and ideals that Shaolin Wahnam represents - valuing direct experience over scholarly interpretation, with the majority of members acting with courage, conviction and in a courteous manner. Points are to be well presented, backed up by reliable evidence and able to stand up to open and honest examination. While the final descision will always be in the head of the individual, I am sure that this thread has been extremely usefull for scholars and practitioners alike.

Since the thread has not yet substantiated the other question of Taoism influencing Chan Buddhism, then the thread is still very much alive.

[Sifu Stier]

If the shoe fits.....!

Actually, Anthony, I do have something more to say to you. As an independent poster on these boards, I owe no personal allegiance to you or any of your loyal associates. As such I am free to be totally honest and forthright with you in expressing my feelings. And so, in answer to your question, NO, I do not feel that the feedback I gave you is a verbal assault, but rather a very honest questioning of your participation in this thread, and therefore completely warranted. I respect your right to hold any opinion on any subject as you see fit, just as I do for everyone posting here. However, I do not respect your use of your position as Forum Administrator to pick apart and refute or find fault with those of us who disagree with you, and hold yourself out as the 'final word of erudite authority' on this subject, preaching to everyone like we were small children in need of your 'learned' supervision and constant monitoring. This is very disrespectful to all concerned. I fully understand why so many more people have chosen to view these posts only, rather than actively participate by also posting themselves! I am sorry at this point that I subjected myself to all of this, and that what I initially envisioned has been sidetracked and derailed so far short of what it might have been!

[Darryl]

Forum Administrator

Dear SifuSteir,

I am acting as the Forum Administrator on this thread, not Anthony.

Previously, Anthony closed the thread in response to such comments and now, with an independant Moderator on board, he is instead speaking for himself.

so many more people have chosen to view these posts

This is common across all Discussion Forums and since this thread is so long (19 pages now) it is proportional to the usual number of browsers and forum voyeurs.

Now, as a Moderator, I am making a simple statement.

I do not feel that the feedback I gave you is a verbal assault, but rather a very honest questioning of your participation in this thread, and therefore completely warranted

Dear Sifu Stier and Anthony,

Please stick to the topics at hand and cease provoking the other . Let your posts speak for you, not your fingers. Any future posts that I perceive as finger pointing will be deleted from this thread and re-posted on a separate thread. Then, other readers can continue with the topics themselves and browse off topic threads if they choose.
Thank you

[Sifu Stier]

Fair Resolution!

Dear Darryl:

Understood and agreed! Thank you for your kind and fair resolution to this situation. Please accept my warmest regards.

[Andrew]

Darryl and all others --- please excuse this minor (hopefully) deviation but:

However, I do not respect your use of your position as Forum Administrator to pick apart and refute or find fault with those of us who disagree with you, and hold yourself out as the 'final word of erudite authority' on this subject, preaching to everyone like we were small children in need of your 'learned' supervision and constant monitoring. This is very disrespectful to all concerned.

A title is just that - whatever it may be.

I fully understand why so many more people have chosen to view these posts only, rather than actively participate by also posting themselves!

I also understand why --- apart from Darryl's excellent points.
1. This topic is beyond most peoples' knowledge and experience.
2. When someone does try and get some knowledge - or MUCH WORSE - decides that they might have understood something they get shot at.
3. When looking for some clarification of a post they get shot at again ... this is how I found your post

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

The question I asked was a genuine search for understanding. Your quote

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

did not help me in my search so I asked for some clarfication. I thought I asked politely .... but maybe I was wrong (as seems usual in this thread).

Sorry again for the deviation folks.

Andrew
P.S. Darryl if you find it appropriate to delete or move this post then please feel free to do so.

[Antonius]

I fail to see how I am pointing fingers. I am simply defending myself from verbal assault. I agree that it is off topic, but no more so than the attacks I have repeatedly received.

Sifu Stier has accused me of verbally assualting him and said that his own verbal assault was "therefore completely warranted." But not a single example of my assault has been shown here.

I have been gracious with Sifu Stier throughout the thread. I have always used his title respectfully. I have been courteous. I have even apologized several times for potential misunderstandings. Despite his repeated attacks, I was always polite.

But I have not verbally assaulted anyone here, despite the attacks and accusations launched at me. If I have attacked anyone, then it should be easy to paste an example here, as I did with Sifu Stier's verbal assaults. I will defer to the moderators if I break the rules, but I insist that evidence of my alleged verbal assault be presented if these accusations are to stand.

[Ovidius]

An interpretation

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

Maybe this could mean, in the current situation, that all the different methods, teachings and concepts are just instruments in both schools, Taoism and Chan. When you have used the instruments succesfully, then you should abandon them. The very existence of this conversation, in this thread, is a sign that we have not "understood the meaning" and abandoned the instruments. The instruments can be different, even contradictory or irrational, but the result is still the relief from not-knowing and the questioning mind calms down. When the mind has calmed, the instruments have done their job and they should be put aside.

Now, in this thread, we are asking if any instruments of Taoism conjoined to Buddhism to form Chan. From the perspective of the above interpretation, the question is both meaningful and not meaningful. It is meaningful because one must seek to find, or knock if wanting the door to be opened. It is also meaningful if we are looking for a solution that calms the mind instead of creating more turmoil. But the question is not meaningful since the instrumental answer given does not have to be true in a classical sense to lead one to the understanding and meditation.

"What you tell them is true, but what I tell them (the useful lies) is good for them." Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh (aka Osho) in 1975

[Marcus]

Hello all,

Back again from some much needed catch up time with my family after such an incredible time in Malaysia, thankyou again Sifu

I've continued to read and enjoy this thread and have learnt much from it there is something I would like to pick up on if I may:

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

As I said I have been following this thread from the beginning and I am still not convinced by any of the points made regarding the initial premise that Zen is a blend of Indian Buddhism and Chinese Taoism (or cross-fertilization )

I am in "adversarial mode" as I oppose the view suggested in this thread, is that a bad thing . It's important that students of the Shaolin Wahnam Institute realise that the widely held view that Zen is a blend of Indian Buddhism and Chinese Taoism is a misconception and not a fact. To borrow from a point made by Andrew, this is not the popular view, just as kung fu being excellent for combat and Chi Kung being used to cure "incurable" illness's is not the popular view. Yet I am certain that many Shaolin Wahnam students know these facts to be true from direct experience.

Kind regards

Marcus



Namo Amitabha Buddha Namo Amitabha Buddha Namo Amitabha Buddha