The Dao De Jhing is a shamanistic treatise

[dawei]

thanks for the answer. I've got a few questions that I feel I could only someone like you, so I hope you'll indulge me:

 

1. Lao Zi mentions 'the ancient ones' and there is no doubt (at least in my mind) that he is part of a lineage of thought and energy experience, although maybe not himself a shaman. How was he exposes to the Great Way and would he be considered to have achieved his understands through meditation, awareness, energy experience, master/student? And was he simply in a shamanistic time or was he also taught (learned, understood) in a shamanistic way?

 

2. What other early writers, ancient ones, etc influenced him? I often read of the connection to Huang Di, as in Huang-Lao philosophy; he also went to Qing Cheng Shan in retreat, etc. Whereas some Confucians saw some of the ancients as Sage-Kings, daoist seem to portray them as part of the decline of the Way among men (and ruler). Is there any special connection between Lao Zi and Huang Di?

 

3. Any other understandings about Huang Di? I have read in the Xiang'er Manuscript commentary a different understanding of 'Straw Dogs' (DDJ5) that it was a custom in Huang Di's time to hang them on the door as a reminder to the people; later it was used as a ceremonial piece, then trampled and discarded to prevent the evil Qi it absorbed being used again. Also, Huang Di had a spiritual teacher in Xi Wang Mu (The Queen mother of the West); other stories say he sought out the sage Guang Cheng Zi on Mt. Kongdong to ask about the perfect Dao. Some say Lao Zi was Guang Cheng Zi (yet another connection).

 

Thanks in advance.

[suninmyeyes]

Dont have anything to say (as I dont have so much knowledege on the subject) ,except that I am enjoying reading this thread . Thanks everyone for sharing.

[flowing hands]

thanks for the answer. I've got a few questions that I feel I could only someone like you, so I hope you'll indulge me:

 

1. Lao Zi mentions 'the ancient ones' and there is no doubt (at least in my mind) that he is part of a lineage of thought and energy experience, although maybe not himself a shaman. How was he exposes to the Great Way and would he be considered to have achieved his understands through meditation, awareness, energy experience, master/student? And was he simply in a shamanistic time or was he also taught (learned, understood) in a shamanistic way?

 

2. What other early writers, ancient ones, etc influenced him? I often read of the connection to Huang Di, as in Huang-Lao philosophy; he also went to Qing Cheng Shan in retreat, etc. Whereas some Confucians saw some of the ancients as Sage-Kings, daoist seem to portray them as part of the decline of the Way among men (and ruler). Is there any special connection between Lao Zi and Huang Di?

 

3. Any other understandings about Huang Di? I have read in the Xiang'er Manuscript commentary a different understanding of 'Straw Dogs' (DDJ5) that it was a custom in Huang Di's time to hang them on the door as a reminder to the people; later it was used as a ceremonial piece, then trampled and discarded to prevent the evil Qi it absorbed being used again. Also, Huang Di had a spiritual teacher in Xi Wang Mu (The Queen mother of the West); other stories say he sought out the sage Guang Cheng Zi on Mt. Kongdong to ask about the perfect Dao. Some say Lao Zi was Guang Cheng Zi (yet another connection).

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Again I would have to beg him to come to ask about this. But I'll make some educated guesses, but I could be wrong!

 

"The Ancient Masters were always empty....." I think this does refer to the writings of sage kings (ancient shamans) gleaned from whatever oral or documented writings were available at the time. Evidence of such people is scant and he may have met up with spiritual masters in his time while he was alive. I think it is very likely. It is also very likely that he learnt forms of specialised Qi gong and martial art. For he once told me that he invented his own style of martial art. I would also say that he practiced meditation. Who he was taught by, as yet I do not know. He wasn't a shaman in the full sense as I explained earlier.

 

I have no understanding of the term 'straw dogs', it was never taught to me and does not occur in the version Li Erh taught me. My understanding of Wang Mu Neung Neung, is that she is the Jade Emperor's (Yu Wang Shan Ti) wife. I do not know any thing about the Yellow Emperor (Huang Di), but I do know there are far more ancient masters that are Immortals that generally people have never heard of. I once had the great honor to speak with an Immortal called 'The Old Wise Immortal of Flowering Blossom Mountain', he had been an Immortal for over 100,000 years! We know that spiritual, and energy practices stretch back a very long way!!!

 

If I can I will try and Beg My Master Li Erh to come again. It is quite difficult to get Li Erh to come as he is such a high Immortal. In the Temples where he is placed with other Immortals as 'bond brothers', shamans report that Li Erh is unheard of in coming to the begging of the shamans, so I feel greatly honored and don't want to ask for too much if you see what I mean?

[dawei]

Thanks again and yes, I know what you mean. I appreciate your comments.

 

Straw dogs is from chapter 5 of the Dao De Jing:

天地不仁以萬物為芻狗 , 芻狗 = straw dogs

 

I see you translated this opening as:

Heaven and Earth are ruthless,

They see the Ten Thousand Things as part of one whole.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Another thought on this great thread, is that the written radicals of Wu Wei, which is central to Tao Te Ching philosophy, refers to the ways of "Wu" Shamans .

[flowing hands]

There doesn't seem to be any more movement on the thread although I feel there's still more to come, perhaps we can move on and look at the DDJ in relation to shamanistic practices, religious Taoism and Temple Taoism like the walking over hot coals and the like? How do these relate to each other and where do they come from?

 

I'm sure there's lots of folks out there who know about these things that we can debate them!!!

[Marblehead]

I am limited as to how much I can post in this thread. I do know that there are some alchemic and religious Taoists here who could offer a lot to this discussion and the concept you offered in the thread title.

[konchog uma]

hi flowing hands,

 

one of my teachers can walk on hot coals. He isn't a daoist proper, but he says its shen that allows one to perform such feats. Refined shen that makes the jing of the physical body adamantine as it performs feats like that. To him the whole physicality is jing, just energy at its densest phase-state. So he doesn't mean semen or hormones or marrow, etc. He means everything physical.

 

I don't know if i can offer much more than that, but i am glad to hear that temple daoists do that crazy stuff!!

 

I thought that was a shamanic ritual but i guess that is what you are talking about.. shamanic roots of daoism. Very nice to learn!

 

blessings

[flowing hands]

Just to throw another thing into this discussion.

 

I think that philosophy implies a wish for the world etc. to be something different to what it is and so remains primarily a mindful meaning (lets not get into the mix of politics as well here).The DDJ is an observation of reality of what is there and so has great intent and potency for things to remain static and flowing accordingly. Philosophy along with politics tends to alter society create wars and differences.

[Friend]

still the globe is spinning whatever changes happens on the surface, somewhere LaoTzu said in his texts.

[flowing hands]

hi flowing hands,

 

one of my teachers can walk on hot coals. He isn't a daoist proper, but he says its shen that allows one to perform such feats. Refined shen that makes the jing of the physical body adamantine as it performs feats like that. To him the whole physicality is jing, just energy at its densest phase-state. So he doesn't mean semen or hormones or marrow, etc. He means everything physical.

 

I don't know if i can offer much more than that, but i am glad to hear that temple daoists do that crazy stuff!!

 

I thought that was a shamanic ritual but i guess that is what you are talking about.. shamanic roots of daoism. Very nice to learn!

 

blessings

Yes they do crazy things to demonstrate the power of the Immortals. Personally, I think this is not necessary, Its crazy enough to go into a trance and then be someone else, without walking over hot coals as well!!!! My Immortal Masters have never asked me to do these things, so I've never bothered with such things. The greatest craziness is all around us and within us... great magic beyond replication. I beleive that life is the greatest magic and is sacred. Lao Tzu's Dao has lasted 2,500 years and he never walked over hot coals!!!!

[寒月 Hanyue]

The Dao De Jhing was written approximately 615 BCE. Li Erh was part of a deeply rooted shamanistic cultural. His writings are not philosophy but reflections on a belief system and observations that encompassed all things. The roots of many culture's beliefs still today, like the Lappish race in northern Europe, are steeped in shamanistic culture. IMO if we are to understand and fully appreciate this monumental work, we have to first stand from a different position, a position that rarely is seen from the west and when it is, western overtones are then frequently applied to the understanding. Christian over tones and conditioning's frequently get in the way, from Christian based societies.

 

Here is the basis of discussion; is the DDJ shamanistic or philosophic add your opinion and why?

 

Interesting thread, sorry I didn't find it eariler.

 

I'm afraid the anthropologist in me won't let me comment within clarifying a couple of things, take or leave the info thats all fine, but at least you'll know where I'm coming from

 

Shamanism is not a belief system. It is a VERY mis-understood and, due to fascination resulting from 'pop' new-age books, overly appropriated aspect of cultures world-wide.

 

The beliefs or world-views of numerous cultures, past and present, can more accurately be described as 'animsim' or 'animist'. This is NOT "animsim" as it was originally laid down by Tylor, which was quite derogatory and was an evolutionary and in many ways quite a colonial view which has proven quite false. Animism as a wolrd-view is a 'cybernetic', 'ecological', or 'relational' epistemology. It is not, as also once thought, "natural" or "childlike", meaning childish fantasy that adults grow out of. It is a culturally developed and learned world-view, that children are born into and pick up from their peers and elders. See the work by Irving Hallowell, Nurit-Bird David, Graham Harvey and others.

 

Both 'shamanism' and 'animism' are Western academic creations, used to discuss the beliefs and practices of such a wide variety, that many have commented that the term 'shamanism' in particular is pretty redundant. That said, simplistically speaking we can correctly separate WORD-VIEW or belief from PRACTICE or expression of that belief. To put it another way, all shamans ARE animists, but not all animists ARE shamans. And it is the animist world-view with its perception and interaction of a vast web of inter-linked relationships that creates the situation of potentially needing a person such as a shaman. I say potentially, because not all animist world-views automatically result in the need for a 'shaman' within that culture.

 

Even in the indigenous cultures where the term 'shaman' may be more correctly used, the shaman, who they are, and the role they play is not what many people believe today. "Shamans" are for example only ONE of several spiritual people and healers that operate within the belief system. There is also much variance amongst the different tribes. All of these specialists are believed to have some form of help from the spirit world. Some examples are;

 

Otoshi (healers)

Bariyachi (mid wives)

Barishi (bone-setters)

Uligershin (bard)

 

So now I've dribbled on and probably bored you with all that, let's get back to the original question

 

IMO if we are to understand and fully appreciate this monumental work, we have to first stand from a different position, a position that rarely is seen from the west and when it is, western overtones are then frequently applied to the understanding. Christian over tones and conditioning's frequently get in the way, from Christian based societies.

 

I agree, but as put above. Understanding this world-view is not easy as "the published bullshit is wide and deep".

 

But, the central Chinese World-view remained intact for thousands of years, it changed and fluctuated through numerous permutations, but it retained a core essence. That was, until the last hundred years or so.

 

The ROOTS maybe in long lost and forgotten animist cultures, but the TRUNK remains. We just have to look past the leaves and some of the branches.

 

Here is the basis of discussion; is the DDJ shamanistic or philosophic add your opinion and why?

 

Well, how do you define philosophy? Because the term is generally understood to have meant something quite different in the West.

 

But lets back track slightly. There was far greater cross-pollination of ideas, concepts, beliefs, and principles between ancient cultures than we are often led to believe. None existed in a vacum. There are written accounts of Viking burial procedures witnessed and recorded by Arabs. There was massive interaction between the Greeks, India, and China. Look at the Mongols. I have a resource that lays out an argument for the existence of the Bagua trigrams PRE-CHINA!, it also shows them as they existed within the older culture. So nothing is ever static and is alwyas in relationship and interacting, things change, things become dropped or lost, things are adopted etc

 

Similarity and difference should be balanced and both appreciated. There is remarkable similarity in the belief systems of the indigenous peoples across the arctic circle from Asia to northern Europe. When paired down however many of the same motifs can even be found in, relatively more recent, religions such as Christianity. Does it mean that they are the same, in belief, and maybe more importantly in practice? No. Similarity matters, but so do the differences*.

 

Very simplistically, and I'm sure many would not agree, when stripped down, with cultural motifs removed and only the very loose framework of cosmological and cosmogonical aspects left in tact. There are strong similarities between the Judeo-Christian world-view and that deriving from ancient China. But it is the way these are understood, engaged with, put into practice, contemplated, and expressed in daily life that changes things so dramatically. And these are of course due to the cultural setting such world-views find themselves in. In a sense it is like looking at an anatomy book, and then all the actual people in the world and how that 'anatomy' varies in expression in reality.

 

So is China's world-view animist?, yes it is. Has it changed?, yes it has. Did it evolve in a self contained vacum?, no.

 

The Dao de jing cannot be removed from its historical or cultural context I whole-heartedly agree (that does not mean though, that you need a Phd in Anthropology/ History/Theology to read and benefit from it). If however that means you believe it to be a manual of "shamanism" then I would dis-agree. Was the author a shaman?, no. Is it necessary to study "shamanism" to understand the Dao de jing? no. I also do not see it as an academic and intellectual philosophical treatise either. It is a commentary of embodied wisdom coming from the traditions that existed at the time that retained the essence of the older animist world-view.

 

In Japan I was taught that if the master gives you the scroll day one you cannot read it. Because the view/perspective you will read it from will be based on your previous learning. It will, more often than not, lead you to incorrect understanding of the writings within the scroll. The secrets protect themselves. This can be taken in many many ways which I won't get into here. I mention it just to point out that whoever you are and whatever your background is, it will influence the view you have when you read old texts. You will SEE different things. As you grow, these may also change of course. I don't think it is an argument for incorrect or correct, if you are aware then it is not a problem and you know that saying IT means THIS, is kinda daft.

 

My question to throw out is;

 

Why did the older 'shamanic' practices evolve into what can, overly simplistically, be called the hermit and mystical traditions that ultimately led to 'Daoism'?

 

How do we get from A-B? From vibrant dancing and performances, climbing trees etc to zuowang (sitting and forgetting)?

 

Best,

 

* Even Joseph Cambell tried to explain, seemingly to no avail given what people go on about when they reference him. That while his work primarily explored the similarity of cultural myths, that there were differences, that they were just as important, and shouldn't be overlooked. It's just that his work looked at the similarity.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Snowmonki, how do you know that the author (or compiler of teachings) of the Dao De Jing was not a shaman? There are Taoist shamans who merely fix things by being present in a community, making the weather come into balance and various other things. It appears to me that this is the sort of achievement through wu wei that Lao Tzu speaks of quite often throughout the Dao De Jing. There is of course more to shamanism than this approach, but I don't think it can be overlooked in this context.

[flowing hands]

Interesting thread, sorry I didn't find it eariler.

 

I'm afraid the anthropologist in me won't let me comment within clarifying a couple of things, take or leave the info thats all fine, but at least you'll know where I'm coming from

 

Shamanism is not a belief system. It is a VERY mis-understood and, due to fascination resulting from 'pop' new-age books, overly appropriated aspect of cultures world-wide.

 

The beliefs or world-views of numerous cultures, past and present, can more accurately be described as 'animsim' or 'animist'. This is NOT "animsim" as it was originally laid down by Tylor, which was quite derogatory and was an evolutionary and in many ways quite a colonial view which has proven quite false. Animism as a wolrd-view is a 'cybernetic', 'ecological', or 'relational' epistemology. It is not, as also once thought, "natural" or "childlike", meaning childish fantasy that adults grow out of. It is a culturally developed and learned world-view, that children are born into and pick up from their peers and elders. See the work by Irving Hallowell, Nurit-Bird David, Graham Harvey and others.

 

Both 'shamanism' and 'animism' are Western academic creations, used to discuss the beliefs and practices of such a wide variety, that many have commented that the term 'shamanism' in particular is pretty redundant. That said, simplistically speaking we can correctly separate WORD-VIEW or belief from PRACTICE or expression of that belief. To put it another way, all shamans ARE animists, but not all animists ARE shamans. And it is the animist world-view with its perception and interaction of a vast web of inter-linked relationships that creates the situation of potentially needing a person such as a shaman. I say potentially, because not all animist world-views automatically result in the need for a 'shaman' within that culture.

 

Even in the indigenous cultures where the term 'shaman' may be more correctly used, the shaman, who they are, and the role they play is not what many people believe today. "Shamans" are for example only ONE of several spiritual people and healers that operate within the belief system. There is also much variance amongst the different tribes. All of these specialists are believed to have some form of help from the spirit world. Some examples are;

 

Otoshi (healers)

Bariyachi (mid wives)

Barishi (bone-setters)

Uligershin (bard)

 

So now I've dribbled on and probably bored you with all that, let's get back to the original question

 

 

 

I agree, but as put above. Understanding this world-view is not easy as "the published bullshit is wide and deep".

 

But, the central Chinese World-view remained intact for thousands of years, it changed and fluctuated through numerous permutations, but it retained a core essence. That was, until the last hundred years or so.

 

The ROOTS maybe in long lost and forgotten animist cultures, but the TRUNK remains. We just have to look past the leaves and some of the branches.

 

 

 

Well, how do you define philosophy? Because the term is generally understood to have meant something quite different in the West.

 

But lets back track slightly. There was far greater cross-pollination of ideas, concepts, beliefs, and principles between ancient cultures than we are often led to believe. None existed in a vacum. There are written accounts of Viking burial procedures witnessed and recorded by Arabs. There was massive interaction between the Greeks, India, and China. Look at the Mongols. I have a resource that lays out an argument for the existence of the Bagua trigrams PRE-CHINA!, it also shows them as they existed within the older culture. So nothing is ever static and is alwyas in relationship and interacting, things change, things become dropped or lost, things are adopted etc

 

Similarity and difference should be balanced and both appreciated. There is remarkable similarity in the belief systems of the indigenous peoples across the arctic circle from Asia to northern Europe. When paired down however many of the same motifs can even be found in, relatively more recent, religions such as Christianity. Does it mean that they are the same, in belief, and maybe more importantly in practice? No. Similarity matters, but so do the differences*.

 

Very simplistically, and I'm sure many would not agree, when stripped down, with cultural motifs removed and only the very loose framework of cosmological and cosmogonical aspects left in tact. There are strong similarities between the Judeo-Christian world-view and that deriving from ancient China. But it is the way these are understood, engaged with, put into practice, contemplated, and expressed in daily life that changes things so dramatically. And these are of course due to the cultural setting such world-views find themselves in. In a sense it is like looking at an anatomy book, and then all the actual people in the world and how that 'anatomy' varies in expression in reality.

 

So is China's world-view animist?, yes it is. Has it changed?, yes it has. Did it evolve in a self contained vacum?, no.

 

The Dao de jing cannot be removed from its historical or cultural context I whole-heartedly agree (that does not mean though, that you need a Phd in Anthropology/ History/Theology to read and benefit from it). If however that means you believe it to be a manual of "shamanism" then I would dis-agree. Was the author a shaman?, no. Is it necessary to study "shamanism" to understand the Dao de jing? no. I also do not see it as an academic and intellectual philosophical treatise either. It is a commentary of embodied wisdom coming from the traditions that existed at the time that retained the essence of the older animist world-view.

 

In Japan I was taught that if the master gives you the scroll day one you cannot read it. Because the view/perspective you will read it from will be based on your previous learning. It will, more often than not, lead you to incorrect understanding of the writings within the scroll. The secrets protect themselves. This can be taken in many many ways which I won't get into here. I mention it just to point out that whoever you are and whatever your background is, it will influence the view you have when you read old texts. You will SEE different things. As you grow, these may also change of course. I don't think it is an argument for incorrect or correct, if you are aware then it is not a problem and you know that saying IT means THIS, is kinda daft.

 

My question to throw out is;

 

Why did the older 'shamanic' practices evolve into what can, overly simplistically, be called the hermit and mystical traditions that ultimately led to 'Daoism'?

 

How do we get from A-B? From vibrant dancing and performances, climbing trees etc to zuowang (sitting and forgetting)?

 

Best,

 

* Even Joseph Cambell tried to explain, seemingly to no avail given what people go on about when they reference him. That while his work primarily explored the similarity of cultural myths, that there were differences, that they were just as important, and shouldn't be overlooked. It's just that his work looked at the similarity.

Well from what I understand, 'Wu' pictorgram has always mean't the equivalent of shaman or holyman, although the term shaman was not really attached to such people until strong influences came from the drum using shamans of Siberia into northern China. The practices have changed only slightly in many many thousands of years. What I do today is not that different to my ancient shaman fore fathers and mothers 10,000 years ago. The only difference being the language drawn and used and the use of paper conductors (Fu) of the fa which they didn't have 10,000 years ago, but its essence is the same. Now Li Erh was born into a society that was completely absorbed and devoted to shamanistic practices of spirit possession and healing, of martial arts, qi gong and self cultivation. I was taught a martial art style that dated 2,000 years before Li Erh. It is obvious to me that Li Erh was influenced by the general great interest in self cultivation and spirit based practices in that time without ever asking him.

Traditional practices do not have a drum, but perhaps a wooden fish, the drum as mentioned coming from Siberia. I have never used a drum and is not part of the traditional Dao practice of spirit/energy practice. Dao shamans do not travel to the spirit world as such, the spirit comes to them. In Siberian practices the drum was used to aid the shaman to journey to the spirit world. Drugs may be used to help on this visionary journey. Of course many a shaman has been mistaken by his/her own mind as unlike the Dao shaman he/she does not properly know whether the spirit has been communicated with.

 

The modern interest in shamanism is based on this. There are many people who take up the Siberian way and then use drugs and pretend that they have journeyed to the spirit world but in reality no such thing has happened. Plastic shamans is the modern label. Journeying the soul to the spirit world is a very high practice and not easily done. I have always practiced that the Immortal comes to me then there is never a mistake.

[ChiDragon]

Snowmonki, how do you know that the author (or compiler of teachings) of the Dao De Jing was not a shaman? There are Taoist shamans who merely fix things by being present in a community, making the weather come into balance and various other things. It appears to me that this is the sort of achievement through wu wei that Lao Tzu speaks of quite often throughout the Dao De Jing. There is of course more to shamanism than this approach, but I don't think it can be overlooked in this context.

 

It seems to me that your definition of Wu Wei is the exact opposite of what it is.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

It seems to me that your definition of Wu Wei is the exact opposite of what it is.

 

It's a complicated concept. How would you like to define it?

 

edit: I should add the phrase from TTC as support: "Take the action which consists of no action and order will prevail."

Edited April 18, 2012 by Harmonious Emptiness

[寒月 Hanyue]

Well from what I understand, 'Wu' pictorgram has always mean't the equivalent of shaman or holyman

 

It is tricky isn't it. Even in academic anthropological circles there is debate about where or exactly how the term 'shaman' came to be used as a classification. Also there is much varied opnion about which language and what the actual "original" (if there is such a thing) meaning of the term was. I have seen the same regarding the Chinese term 'wu'.

 

So depending on which definition/explanation I decide to take I can make various arguments over whether or not an ancient 'shaman' from the "Siberian/Mongolian" lands or an ancient 'wu' from "China" are referring to essentially the same thing.

 

Of course, you want to use information other than simply linguistic semantics, but then even doing that you get such variety its like a pick n mix shop.

 

All you can do is decide for yourself given the available information you have, there is no correct or incorrect or absolute regarding this IMO.

 

Best,

[寒月 Hanyue]

Snowmonki, how do you know that the author (or compiler of teachings) of the Dao De Jing was not a shaman?

 

Hahhaha I asked him

 

Seriously though. On the one hand I don't KNOW what/who he was either way, but then neither does anyone else. It will always be speculation, same as it remains speculation that there was only one author as you mention.

 

That said, If I want to put my academic head on. I can say no, based on the fact that strictly speaking for me a 'shaman' is a VERY SPECIFIC cultural term used specficially within a group of people that had a particular world-view and 'religious-healing' practices and practitioners, one of whom was, sometimes, referred to as a 'shaman'. Now, no matter which way you slice it they were/are not Chinese and whoever the author/s of the Dao de jing were they were not part of this ethnic group. So no he was NOT a "shaman".

 

That said, of course these days the term is used very loosly to refer to a whole plethora of things. Hence me going to the trouble to lay out where I am coming from. I spent years studying and investigating animism and shamanism at University, though my studies are not bound solely to those years. My opinion is an informed one, it is certainly not the only one nor the last word.

 

I have seen people write just as often the idea that Li Er was a 方士 fangshi. Which is something different to 巫 Wu. Though again I have seen BOTH terms rendered into English as 'shaman'? So I suppose its a free lunch

 

Ultimately, depending on what YOU mean by 'shaman', and as mentioned in my last post you can basically pick your definition even in academic circles, you can argue regarding what you feel/think/believe the author/s were however you want to. It however will never be fact, only speculation same as most of "History". It is all anyone can do.

 

There are Taoist shamans who merely fix things by being present in a community, making the weather come into balance and various other things.

 

 

See I have trouble with "Taoist shamans", and I am not levelling this specifically or only at you, it gets used alot in popular press too. But why not simply use the correct cultural,ethnic, and or historical term rather than muddying the waters? Who are you actually referring to here?(its a rhetorical question)Wu, Xi, Fangshi, Yinshi, Zhu, Daoren or yet others? There are MANY different terms. And which time period? It's not about semantics its just such a broad sweeping term that ultimately means nothing.

 

To me its like reading 'ball game'

 

I hope you get what I mean and take it the way I mean it too

 

From my pov nothing is being overlooked. Cultural context IS important, hence not understanding the propensity to muddle things with a loaded term (shaman) that carry much baggage and actually cause more confusion than clarification. I personally, and it is a decision for each individual, prefer to refer to people as they would have referred to themselves. It is that simple.

 

Who were the different groups of people?

What did they identify THEMSELVES as?

What was the cultural/political influence context at the time?

Where do the various threads of belief systems come from?

 

Best

 

 

P.s

Nobody has touched the question I posed previously;

 

Why did the older 'shamanic' practices evolve into what can, overly simplistically, be called the hermit and mystical traditions that ultimately led to 'Daoism'?

 

How do we get from A-B? From vibrant dancing and performances, climbing trees etc to zuowang (sitting and forgetting)?

 

I'll throw out more;

 

The Wu character 巫 used to refer to women. If the Dao de jing emerged from the Wu, how much 'female' influence went into Dao de jing? It is common for deities and gods across asia to receive 'gender-reassignment' depending on local politics (as well as appreciations of androgeny etc)so to speak. What about authors of "classics"?

 

What are your opinions on the idea of an etymological root from the 'Old Persian' "maghu/magus/magi" usually rendered as magician today!?

[Birch]

Throwing in this as an interesting site about possible terms and environments and times http://www.yijing.nl/i_ching/index.html

 

I was taught that 'Shaman' only existed in Siberia and that the term had been slipped to designate other people in other places.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Hahhaha I asked him

 

Seriously though. On the one hand I don't KNOW what/who he was either way, but then neither does anyone else. It will always be speculation, same as it remains speculation that there was only one author as you mention.

 

 

Sure. Personally, my speculation is that it could have just as easily been one person well learned in these various teachings who wrote them all down after having learned and lived with them over a number of decades. He may not have been the first to teach them, but was likely very well learned in them and other aspects of their application.

 

That said, If I want to put my academic head on. I can say no, based on the fact that strictly speaking for me a 'shaman' is a VERY SPECIFIC cultural term used specficially within a group of people that had a particular world-view and 'religious-healing' practices and practitioners, one of whom was, sometimes, referred to as a 'shaman'. Now, no matter which way you slice it they were/are not Chinese and whoever the author/s of the Dao de jing were they were not part of this ethnic group. So no he was NOT a "shaman".

 

That said, of course these days the term is used very loosly to refer to a whole plethora of things. Hence me going to the trouble to lay out where I am coming from. I spent years studying and investigating animism and shamanism at University, though my studies are not bound solely to those years. My opinion is an informed one, it is certainly not the only one nor the last word.

 

 

Yes, I'm using the term as a "catch all" to refer to people who heal using internal means and/or employ unseen forces for healing.

 

 

I have seen people write just as often the idea that Li Er was a 方士 fangshi. Which is something different to 巫 Wu. Though again I have seen BOTH terms rendered into English as 'shaman'? So I suppose its a free lunch

 

Ultimately, depending on what YOU mean by 'shaman', and as mentioned in my last post you can basically pick your definition even in academic circles, you can argue regarding what you feel/think/believe the author/s were however you want to. It however will never be fact, only speculation same as most of "History". It is all anyone can do.

 

 

True, on my part it can only be speculation, but there is reason to link the teachings in DDJ with spiritual healing.

 

Here is an excerpt from the following web page which I'm sure all interested in this thread will enjoy: http://www.dayuancircle.com/teachings.htm

 

"3. The spiritual healer is a shaman whose internal vision and/or spiritual accomplishment automatically rectify the spirits/energy around them. Their immediate presence heals those in contact and their existence itself pervades the environment (Space). They often live alone in remote wilderness areas. Their method is often described as "radiance". Their healing is largely unintentional or effortless (natural - wuweidao)."

 

This is the type of healing that I'm referring to. I can't remember where, but I've also read of a Taoist hermit being summoned to fix a drought and, essentially, this is all he had to do.

 

Seems to me, when reading the DDJ, that this type of knowledge saturates every chapter, and so it seems highly probably that Li Er was also a spiritual healer.

 

 

 

See I have trouble with "Taoist shamans", and I am not levelling this specifically or only at you, it gets used alot in popular press too. But why not simply use the correct cultural,ethnic, and or historical term rather than muddying the waters? Who are you actually referring to here?(its a rhetorical question)Wu, Xi, Fangshi, Yinshi, Zhu, Daoren or yet others? There are MANY different terms. And which time period? It's not about semantics its just such a broad sweeping term that ultimately means nothing.

 

To me its like reading 'ball game'

 

I hope you get what I mean and take it the way I mean it too

 

 

I'd be very interested to hear more of the differentiation of these and the other Chinese terms you refer to here!

 

 

 

From my pov nothing is being overlooked. Cultural context IS important, hence not understanding the propensity to muddle things with a loaded term (shaman) that carry much baggage and actually cause more confusion than clarification. I personally, and it is a decision for each individual, prefer to refer to people as they would have referred to themselves. It is that simple.

 

Who were the different groups of people?

What did they identify THEMSELVES as?

What was the cultural/political influence context at the time?

Where do the various threads of belief systems come from?

 

 

I agree. Unfortunately, this knowledge and terminology is not widespread enough for everyone, including myself, to communicate with effectively.

 

Best

 

 

P.s

Nobody has touched the question I posed previously;

 

Why did the older 'shamanic' practices evolve into what can, overly simplistically, be called the hermit and mystical traditions that ultimately led to 'Daoism'?

 

I guess the written words are like the leaves that we all get to see, while the branches and the roots are still there but not so apparent.

 

 

How do we get from A-B? From vibrant dancing and performances, climbing trees etc to zuowang (sitting and forgetting)?

 

 

I think meditation is part of any mystical tradition, it's just that we all don't get right up into the tree, so to speak.

 

 

I'll throw out more;

 

The Wu character 巫 used to refer to women. If the Dao de jing emerged from the Wu, how much 'female' influence went into Dao de jing? It is common for deities and gods across asia to receive 'gender-reassignment' depending on local politics (as well as appreciations of androgeny etc)so to speak. What about authors of "classics"?

 

Well most cultures with some Aboriginal mysticism seem to agree that women are more often born with the gifts, while men more often have to struggle for the comparable abilities, so it's no wonder that these "leaves" have understand feminine or Yin power.

 

What are your opinions on the idea of an etymological root from the 'Old Persian' "maghu/magus/magi" usually rendered as magician today!?

 

It all came from Khemet (possibly even influencing China), in my opinion, but that's a whole 'nother discussion (one I've pretty much given up having on forums).

[ChiDragon]

It's a complicated concept. How would you like to define it?

 

edit: I should add the phrase from TTC as support: "Take the action which consists of no action and order will prevail."

 

The definition of Wu Wei(無為) is "to take no action to interfere with Nature." Another words,

"let Nature take its course."

 

By this definition, it has a great contradiction with shamanism....

[Harmonious Emptiness]

dbl.

Edited April 19, 2012 by Harmonious Emptiness

[Harmonious Emptiness]

The definition of Wu Wei(無為) is "to take no action to interfere with Nature." Another words,

"let Nature take its course."

 

By this definition, it has a great contradiction with shamanism....

 

However, these people did not have to actually do anything. Because they were always in harmony with themselves, nature, and the universe, the weather would naturally fall into harmony when they were around. So nature would take it's course, which is to be in harmony amongst harmonious circumstances.

[flowing hands]

The definition of Wu Wei(無為) is "to take no action to interfere with Nature." Another words,

"let Nature take its course."

 

By this definition, it has a great contradiction with shamanism....

No I disagree, Wu Wei means to be alert and aware and to take no action if everything is taking its natural course.

This has everything to do with shamanism!

[flowing hands]

It is tricky isn't it. Even in academic anthropological circles there is debate about where or exactly how the term 'shaman' came to be used as a classification. Also there is much varied opnion about which language and what the actual "original" (if there is such a thing) meaning of the term was. I have seen the same regarding the Chinese term 'wu'.

 

So depending on which definition/explanation I decide to take I can make various arguments over whether or not an ancient 'shaman' from the "Siberian/Mongolian" lands or an ancient 'wu' from "China" are referring to essentially the same thing.

 

Of course, you want to use information other than simply linguistic semantics, but then even doing that you get such variety its like a pick n mix shop.

 

All you can do is decide for yourself given the available information you have, there is no correct or incorrect or absolute regarding this IMO.

 

Best,

I use the term Shaman to describe what I do, because most people have some understanding about that concept. As you say there are many terms that describe shamans, wu, fang shi etc, etc. There is no one term nowadays to describe a Dao shaman like me. There are names that mean 'spirit writer', medium, etc. and it depends on the origin of the practice. For myself, I am like the original wu, who will dance the healing invocation to heal many people at once, as well as do the fa fu and fa shui.

This category is mostly like the Chinese shamans of the past. The wu character depicts a woman dancing because women were the equal of men and that Dao is a feminine practice if one wants to divide these things up. "The soft and yielding will overcome the hard and the strong"

 

There is a parallel between hermits and shamans, there is no development from one to the other. Some sought spiritual insight by being completely alone with nature and then came down the mountains to teach and perform healing in the local village and collect some provision in return. Some stayed in the village. There is no A-B that I know of.