That was Zen, this is Tao!

[Kaijet]

Hello all,
For me as a Buddhist who is everyday practising, not reading nor talking about (remember the told Zen nun story from me) there is no reality at all because of my expirience from meditation. Since over 15 years I´m going to 10 days retreats and I´m practising daily. I´m telling this so the people understand my stories coming from my expireince, not because I´m read this book or I heard this person sayed and so on....!
If you practising meditation one day you will come to a stage were the hole body is vibrating like atomic partical and you will feel nothing is real.
Why?
How can a body who is feeling itself as solid but it is only a peace of changing and moving tiny little peaces real?. Every second millions of so called Kalapas (Pali language) diying and new million get born.
Example: You buying a bulb to lighten your room you are thinking there is only one light in the bulb and you payed it allready. But why on the end of month the powerstation is sending you a bill? The same with a candle you are thinking you looking at the same candlelight all the time but why after few hours the candle is gone? Sometimes it looks same but nothing is like it looks like.
So discussion is good but it is also good to know after my writing here I´m also a complete changed person because I´m also not real. No matter in Chan way, Tao way or Buddhist way nothing is real thats the meaning of all great masters of the arts.
Great respect to all who are writing there meaning, knowledge and expirience but no respect to people who are not dealing respectfull with the opinions of others because thats not Chan, Tao nor Buddhist even the persons talking sometime like they are .

[Antonius]

Chan Buddhism was created in central China from the marriage of Taoism and Buddhism during the sixth cetury A.D. The health and spiritual aspects of the Taoist inner Chi work were seamlessly integrated into Chan's basic sitting meditation methods.

First of all, thank you Ovidius for providing a specific example. It is appreciated. Nevertheless, I find Sifu Frantzis' statement to be inaccurate. Here's why:

As I mentioned earlier, much of Shaolin Kungfu and Chi Kung has benefited from Taoism, like the concepts of yin-yang and dan tian. In my opinion, this is probably what Sifu Frantzis' teacher, Liu Hung Chieh, was referring to in regards to "inner chi work." Although I own several of Sifu Frantzis' books and have met him in person, I don't have the book you are referencing, so I can't be sure. In any case, I disagree with the quote above.

Taoist sitting meditation is considerably different from Chan meditation. Meditation is the central practice towards spiritual fulfillment in both Chan Buddhism and Taoism, but the way they approach meditation is quite different.

For example, Taoist sitting meditation makes extensive use of visualization. Chan (Zen) meditation focuses on emptiness. This point might seem trivial to a scholar (which is not to suggest that Liu or Frantzis are merely scholars), but to a meditator, it is a major point. Actually, it could be argued that it is the essential point.

The use of visualization, like in the example of golden elixir, is not Chan. Although visualization can lead a cultivator to very high levels, its accomplishments, no matter how advanced, are still in the phenomenal realm. Chan aims at the transcendental realm. This practice can be traced back not only to pre-Chan Mahayana Buddhism, but to the Buddha himself.

As another example, attuning with the seasons and being as natural as possible is a Taoist practice that concerns the phenomenal realm. In Shaolin Wahnam, the philosophy and practice in Standing Zen and Flowing Zen (Flowingly Still) concern the transcendental. Anyone who has been outside of the phenomenal realm and tasted the transcendental knows that the difference between the two is significant. Kai Sihing alluded to this in his post.

I would also like to point out that our Sigung Ho came to the opposite conclusion as Sifu Liu. Sigung Ho was a high-level Taoist practitioner, but switched to Chan Buddhism, among other reasons, because it reaches for the trancendental.

[Michael Durkin]

Dear Sifu Stier,

I mutually understand that you can agree and disagree with the same person, and that by giving encouragement and gratitude for sharing information you aren't implicitly agreeing or disagreeing with what they are saying.

"Had I realized that a Grand Inquisition was about to examine and analyze every stroke of my keyboard in search of supposedly incriminating 'evidence' with which to prosecute me"

Perhaps due to the ever increasing length of this topic it may feel like things are getting 'energetic', but I feel what you have said is getting a bit carried away. If you know that what you are typing isn't 'incriminating', you have nothing to worry about.

I don't think anyone has been "flogging" you for having "an alternative view". What I have seen is that Antonious has realised some differences when comparing the philosophy himself and Sifu Wong subscribe to compared to what you are saying. Antonious has then asked for you to explain those differences. He has also stated that there are questions he feels you haven't answered. He has also explained why he doesn't agree with your answeres in a constructive manner. There for I don't see any "flogging". People disagree, that's life, you can choose not to get upset about it.

I don't believe theres a "gang mentality" that's here for "fault finding" resulting in you feeling "defensiveness". Like Antonious, I am here to learn, question and discover. I can say that I have enjoyed reading yours and everyone's posts, I'm very glad they have been posted than not at all. I don't believe in burning any bridges and glad to see that your still here.

I would be interested to read from your knowledge and experience what joys your philosophy has brought you. In another thread of course, we'll be hung drawn and quartered for going off topic here

Take Care,
Michael Durkin

[julie]

Hi everyone,

If Te Shan still alive, you all would have received many strokes of his staff......

Ha ha ha......

Best regards,
Julie

[Jeffrey Segal]

Greetings from Sungai Petani

What an interesting thread we have going here! I wonder if any of our members would care to re-read the various posts to see all the wonderful examples of Zen and Taoism that we have on display right here.

Thanks to Panu and Anthony for steering us back towards meaningful discussion. I would sincerely welcome some more specific examples of Taoist influences on Zen. Not surprisingly, I share the view that Zen is Zen and Tao is Tao but that doesn't mean that I wouldn't be delighted to learn that is isn't so.

Without wishing to pour oil on any fires that may be burning in the hearts of some of our members, I would like to say that to the best of my knowledge and experience, Anthony Sihing's comments are indeed a fair representation of the Shaolin Wahnam Institute. I know for a fact that Sifu is proud of Anthony Sihing's posts here and elsewhere on the forum.

Excellent post, Kai Sihing.

A special greeting to all the brothers and sisters that cannot be with us here in Malaysia to celebrate the wedding of Wong Sau Foong and Teoh Swee Fatt. The Qigong review course yesterday was wonderful and I am particularly happy to see my Shaolinquan brothers enjoying their pushing hands today.

From the Heart,

[Sifu Stier]

'The Great Tao is beyond all similes! One turns in vain to East or West for something like it. It is much faster than sparks from flint, and the flash of lightening can never overtake it! If you will stop differentiating and grasping appearances, you will realize Tao in an instant!

By Master Yi Hsuan of the Lin Chi Ch'an Sect (Rinzai Zen Sect)
(From 'Five Lamps Meeting at the Source' and 'Finger Pointing at the Moon')

Another example of the intimate connection between Ch'an and Taoist thought in the mind and words of a lifelong practitioner and Zen Master!

[Antonius]

Another example of the intimate connection between Ch'an and Taoist thought in the mind and words of a lifelong practitioner and Zen Master!

Thank you for bringing an example. Nevertheless, this is something I have already covered and doesn't really show a connection between Taoism and Zen. The use of the word "Tao" by Chinese masters does not, in and of itself, indicate a connection to Taoism. As I said earlier in the thread:

Morphologically speaking, the word “Tao” is not a Taoist tem. “Attaining the Tao” is frequently used in Confucian writings too, and both Confucian practitioners and scholars understand that “attaining the Tao” in Confucian writings is different from “attaining the Tao” in Taoist writings.

The same applies to Buddhist writings.

Furthermore, as I'm sure you know, the Chinese character for "Tao" ( 道 ) can have many meanings. For example, in additon to meaning the "The Way," it can also be used to mean "to say." This is exemplified in the first line of the Tao Te Ching (Dao De Ching), which I quoted earlier in the thread:

道可道非常道 (Dao Ke Dao, Fei Chang Dao)

As another example, my own Chinese name, Ke An Dao ( 柯安道 ), has the word Tao in it. This, in and of itself, does not show a connection between me and Taoism.

[Sifu Stier]

The use of the word 'Tao' or its Chinese character in the context of spiritual and religious writings does not necessarily refer to Religious Taoism and/or the ceremonial rites and services thereof, but it most certainly does refer to the spiritual and philosophical concept of Tao as the context of the Ch'an Master's writings clearly shows. Of course, 'tao' could mean a 'road' or 'path'
or 'direction', and in combination with other characters for ideas of 'truth' and 'moral virtue' when used in more mundane and secular references. But such is definitely not the case in the spiritual writings from which the quotes were taken. The references are clearly referring to spiritual and philosophical ideas of Tao long established in Chinese Culture and in the mind of the author. Statements of the Ch'an Masters such as "The Realms of Buddha and
Tao are inconceivable" are not employing the word Tao to mean the 'road' to grandmothers house, or the 'Branch of the calm or quiet 'path' as implied in the characters of a Chinese name. Please, give me a break here! Frankly,
I don't understand why any intelligent person would believe that Buddhism and Philosophical Taoism remained totally segregated for many, many centuries and had absolutely no influence on each other. Anything is possible
under the sun, but some things are highly improbable! As a similar example, should I believe that Hellenistic culture and religion brought from Greece to Egypt in ancient times remained unchanged and untouched in its exposure to pre-existing Egyptian culture? If you really believe these improbable scenarios to be true, please contact me about some dry land in Louisiana that I'd like to sell to you! LOL!

[Mike B]

Hi Jeff - glad to see you guys getting on with the important things in life like practice and enjoying yourselves I am glad Sifu is well and not shedding tears over us lesser mortals squabbling!

Anyway I did suggest (unsuccesfully) that we all reconvene and separate threads (a good example of which is Kai's splendid post about his deep experience not getting enough attention here (Taisihing Kai - I had a feeling of U Ba Khin's school there if so pleased you are training across traditions!)). However as you guys wish to bash on... At least the table and chairs have been righted and a clean tablecloth applied...

Also I do entirely agree with Kai that we are All!! wasting our time squabbling rather than practicing.

It would be nice to know what the standard of proof is here - its a bit difficult seeing after 199 posts people suddenly having a damascene conversion and saying their prior view was wrong!

Just as a matter of logic, once again, one does not show the absence of similarity/relationships by pointing out that there are some differences so I do not believe I have yet seen a *refutation of the Bruce Frantzis view*.

This correct linguistic point covering the use of the word Tao gets to be a toughie if taken too far. I think one needs to apply some common sense. It does show though at another level the basic point that rather like adjacent watercolours the three great Chinese philospohies all blended into each other at the margin.

For me personally by far the most persuasive argument is a comparative study of the changes undergone in Buddhist thought when Indian Buddhism became Chinese Buddhism and the Chinese Ch'an school and then the Japanese Zen schools - eg I mentioned earlier the tathagatagarba concept. However this falls foul of the criterion that study is not taken seriously here and also the relative lack of knowledge of this big topic in terms of having a reasonable debate (which is maybe why this was one of the ones that fell by the wayside).

I did discuss this topic with my friend the Zen monk this week who thought it 'obvious' - not that thats much help by way of proof LoL.

Anyway some more examples of direct quotes - more or less may be more or less persuasive to different people but I have to say after a time the sheer weight begins to mount:

1) From http://www.thetao.info/tao/buddha.htm (the page also has some info one where confusion has arisen over apparent but not real similarity over the differing concepts of emptiness I mentioned a while ago) "In China, Buddhism and Taoism, grew up together. In fact, according to the Platform Sutra, transcribed from the words of the great Zen Master Hui Neng in the 8th century, Taoists attended to least one, and probably many other, of his lectures. "

2) A current example showing the continuing fusion thinking from the Sixth Patriarch Zen Centre (CA):

Venerable Hyunoon Sunim "With Zen, when something arises you are uninvolved with it and when it disappears, you are still uninvolved with it. So in those situations it doesn't matter to you. If we can correctly realize these principles, then we will engage in less unnecessary suffering. So this is a way of the Tao. "

Also "The combining of Zen and Taoism is not new. Bodhidharma practiced Taoist yoga in India. He brought Buddhism to China where it combined with Chinese Taoism to produce living Lin Chi (Rinzai) Zen. The great Korean Zen Master Won Hyo combined both practices in the Silla dynasty 1300 years ago, practicing the same Sun-do breathing we teach here today. Japanese Zen Master Hakuin strongly emphasized the importance of Taoist breathing techniques for Zen practitioners.

In the search for awakening to our Essence Mind, Zen meditation is a direct spiritual path. With awakening, all that remains is harmony, love, peace, compassion and wisdom. But with poor healthy or energy and emotional imbalances, many obstacles arise for deep sitting meditaton. Modern day Zen practitioners unknowingly are not utilizing the benefits that Taoism can bring to their practice. Also, Zen has wisdom which goes beyond the harmonizing benefits of Taoism, but Taoists do not realize this Zen wisdom and for them it is easy to become attached to their own energy.

With wisdom and pure intention, if we combine Zen and Taoism, we can enter a correct spiritual path with balanced health and purified mind, and achieve great awakening."

A good repository of Zen/Ch'an teachings is at http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/zen-writings.htm - in the introduction of which is written "A collection of Taoist writings are also available, as Ch'an was heavily influenced by them and often draws upon them". Please don't disrespect the site due to that comment nor as I quote it 'one one side of the debate' as for those Zen followers who are interested in reading the works of masters it is a veritable goldmine.

3) An example of crossover (from the 'Zen teachings of Mazu' trans. Thomas Cleary):
"The Tao

Right this moment, as you walk, stand, sit, and recline, responding to all situations and dealing with people - all is the Tao. The Tao is the realm of reality. No matter how numerous are the uncountable, inconceivable functions, they are not beyond this ealm. If they were, how could we speak of the teaching of the Mind-ground, and how could we tell of the inexhaustible lantern?"

4) An example of monks roaming over both Zen and Taoism study

There is an excellent translation by Guo-gu Shi of 'Essentials of Practice of Enlightenment for Beginners' by Master Hanshan Deqing [1546-1623] In the footnotes he writes:

"Hanshan Deqing [1546-1623] is considered one of the four most eminent Buddhist monks in the late Ming Dynasty [1368-1644] ... most importantly, for his Chan practice. In all of the history of Chan, there is not a single master that has written in such detail about his own practice and experiences, especially in describing the enlightened state of mind... Like other Ming Dynasty Buddhist monks, he also wrote many commentaries on non-Buddhist works such as Lao Zi and Zhuang Zi, as well as other Taoist and Confucian text " [Mike's note it is brilliant stuff - anyone interested in reading about Zen enlightenment experiences of Masters should really read this webpage - http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/zen...ightenment.htm ]

5) An example of complete intertwining of the two:

"Sayings of the Ancient Worthies", fas. I (Ku tsun-hsiu yu-lu).], translated by D.T. Suzuki:
Someone asked Ma-tsu: "How does a man discipline himself in the Tao?"

The master replied: "In the Tao there is nothing to discipline oneself in. If there is any discipline in it, the completion of such discipline means the destruction of the Tao. One then will be like the Sravaka. But if there is no discipline whatever in the Tao, one remains an ignoramus."

"By what kind of understanding does a man attain the Tao?"

On this, the master gave the following sermon:

"The Tao in its nature is from the first perfect and self-sufficient. When a man finds himself unhalting in his management of the affairs of life good or bad, he is known as one who is disciplined in the Tao. To shun evils and to become attached to things good, to meditate on Emptiness and to enter into a state of samadhi--this is doing something. If those who run after an outward object, they are the farthest away [from the Tao].

...

The Sravaka is enlightened and yet going astray; the ordinary man is out of the right path and yet in a way enlightened. The Sravaka fails to perceive that Mind as it is in itself knows no stages, no causation, no imaginations. Disciplining himself in the cause he has attained the result and abides in the Samadhi of Emptiness itself for ever so many kalpas. However enlightened in his way, the Sravaka is not at all on the right track. From the point of view of the Bodhisattva, this is like suffering the torture of hell. The Sravaka has buried himself in emptiness and does not know how to get out of his quiet contemplation, for he has no insight into the Buddha-nature itself."

A separate section:

6)"A monk asked: "Why do you teach that Mind is no other than Buddha?"

"In order to make a child stop its crying."

"When the crying is stopped, what would you say?"

"Neither Mind nor Buddha."

"What teaching would you give to him who is not in these two groups?"

"I will say, 'It is not a something.'

"If you unexpectedly interview a person who is in it what would you do?" finally, asked the monk.

"I will let him realize the great Tao."

Or:

7) A monk asked: "How does a man set himself in harmony with the Tao?"

"I am already out of harmony."

Mike

[Michael Durkin]

Thank you Mike B for your post and link to Master Hanshan Deqing practice.