That was Zen, this is Tao!

[Antonius]

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

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

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

[Antonius]

Wu Wei and the Void

Originally Posted by SifuStier

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

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

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

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

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

[Antonius]

Phenomenal and Trancendental

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

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

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

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by Antonius

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

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

Andrew

[Sifu Stier]

Anthony:

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

[Andrew]

Whether these various methods achieve similar at their highest levels or not is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

The previous post was not on-topic. Everyone please refrain from deviating from the main themes again.

Andrew

[Sifu Stier]

Andrew:

My post was absolutely on topic in response to Anthony's comments in his post on 'Phenomenal and Transcendental'. Go back and read both of our posts again, back to back, to see the connection. Good luck!

[Luo Lang]

Dear Anthony Sihing,
many thanks for this deep inside information about Sigung Ho, also many thanks to Sifu for sharing this.

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

I can imagine that. After your explanation why, it also seems logical. But you agree with me that for most of us this realisation is very advanced, I dare to say too advanced, at least for the moment.
Achieving Small Universe is for a lot of us, including me, a very advanced level. So even if it's still phenomenal, it is a amazing achievement on a long way still to go.
So for the moment I am happy that I can enjoy both, taoistic and zen benefits out of our practice with our arts.
To be honest, out of my practice and experience I can't see the paradox because I am always so overwhelmed about new experiences that I don't analyse more to realise it. But as I said that is because I am a poor (rich ) beginner.

Respectfully

Roland

[Emiko H]

Dear Brothers, Sisters and Honoured Guests,

What a thriving, lively thread this continues to be.

I would like to take the time to fill any of our latecomers in on what aspects are being discussed at the moment.

The two most recent distinctions have been:

1. the fact that "Zen is not a blend of Indian Buddhism and Taoism": this has been explained by the fact that Taoism utilises various forms of visualisation (an approach based in the phenomenal world) along the rewarding path to achieve One Mind, whereas in Zen Buddhism, one is faced with the immediate objective of crossing over the threshold from the phenomenal world into the transcendental. While there are differing streams in Zen Buddhism, (some employing the use of 'koans', and others dealing strictly with 'zazen',) no aspect of 'you wei' or even 'wu wei' is employed in Zen.
In other words, the use of visualisations is a key element in Taoism that is not used at all in Zen. With two such differing paths, it becomes self-evident that these two philosophies may have harmoniously co-existed, but that they are not and have never been (forgive my humour) siamese twins.

2. the fact that there is a "huge chasm between scholarly speculation and direct experience": this has been well-summarised by the three following quotes:

i) "But isn't analyzing texts what scholars do best? I think it's worthwhile to remember that both Zen and Taoist texts point at experiences that are beyond words. In this regard, a purely theoretical understanding of Zen or Taoist texts is inferior to an understanding based on direct experience. " (post 281 by Anthony)

ii) "… even the most venerable and accomplished scholarship cannot supercede the equal or greater importance of validating the teaching and the practice methods through direct, personal experience under the guided instruction of a competent teacher who has already succeeded in doing both. Hence, the ancient Chinese tradition of the 'Scholar Warrior'…" (post 302 by Sifu Stier)

iii) "If one's aim is practice of Ch'an or Taoism, then yes, scholarship is insufficient." (post 301 by Chia-Hua)



I hope that this clarifies the points of interest for everyone.

Peace and blessings,


Emiko

[Antonius]

More Similarities and Differences

At the supreme level, everything is the same. This is called different things by people using different approaches -- Zen, Tao, Brahman, God, Allah, undifferentiated Energy, or simply Returning Home. But the key point is that the approaches are different.

The main approaches in Zen are meditation and gong-ans (koans). The main approaches in Taoism are meditation, spiritual sex, and golden pills. Zen cultivation does not make use of sex or pills. Taoist cultivation does not make use of gong-ans. Superficially, the only common factor is meditation.

But when we look deeper than the surface, we find a clear distinction even in that common factor! Typical Zen meditation aims at the void, whereas typical Taoist meditation makes extensive use of visualization. (Please note that I acknowledge that a few Zen practitioners also use visualization, and a few Taoist practitioners also aim at the void, but these are atypical and irrelevant to this discussion.)

Typically, Zen practitioners throughout history have aimed to return to Emptiness; Taoist practitioners have aimed to become Immortals. Returning to Emptiness is transcendental, whereas becoming an Immortal is still phenomenal. Both are worthy goals.

Some great Taoist masters also returned to Emptiness, symbolized by the three Supreme Taoist Deities - Lord of Cosmic Origin, Lord of Supreme Purity, and Lord of Supreme Void. But these are exceptional attainments, not typical Taoist attainments. On the other hand, a Zen cultivator aims at the Void right from the beginning. This is the Buddha's principle of "Directly pointing at the mind".

Let me be clear: I am not saying that one tradition is better than the other. That would be silly since I benefit from both traditions. I am saying they are different. That is precisely why I practice both -- to receive both of their benefits.

Nor am I saying that if you practice one tradition, you cannot practice the other. As mentioned earlier, while Shaolin Wahnam philosophy and practice is basically Zen, we also follow and benefit from Taoist philosophy and practice.

Indeed, we are lucky to have direct experience of both Zen and Taoist philosophies and practices. With direct experience of both practices, one can clearly see and feel the differences. This is what I mean when I say that there is a huge chasm between scholarly speculation and direct experience.