What defines a Daoist?

[kaaazuo]

To know another like yourself (a lovely thought) is one thing, to become another is something else. The former is a conscious awareness and therefore contrived; the latter, looks like unconscious transformation of a natural kind.

 

Kevin Costner's character, in the movie "Dances With Wolves" convincingly went "injun". This epic Hollywood movie tells us that knowing people of other cultures is not only doable but cross-cultural transformation is quite possible unless one is a bigot like those heartless soldiers in the US Army.

 

The question is, can a westerner "go injun" to become a Daoist? This implies more than putting on elaborate make-up to look like one.

Edited February 22, 2013 by kaaazuo

[Mark Saltveit]

It depends a lot on how you define authenticity. You could just as easily ask, "Can any modern person, in China or not, become a Daoist?" Because Daoism arose at least 2,500 years ago, and the difference between anyone living today in China, and the residents of Chu in 400 B.C.E. is much greater than the difference between that same Chinese person, and anyone else on earth today.

[Apech]

Isn't this true of every philosophy and religion in world history? Buddhism started in India, but we accept Chinese Buddhists. No one is arguing that Buddhism is India and India is Buddhism. No one argues that only Greeks can really understand Plato or Aristotle, or that only Israelis can understand Christ's teachings, or that every French person is Existentialist.

 

Or every Danish person either.

 

Religions and philosophies rise out of a cultural and always refer to it, but they get a name precisely when they take on an independent life of their own, and that is precisely when they become available to people from different cultures (and times). Christianity didn't "start with" Abraham., though Jesus spoke of Abraham's covenant that he was fulfilling.

 

religions and philosophies which survive adapt to the times ... if they can't do this through being so solidly entrenched to one time or culture then they die (or are destroyed by new religions and philosophies).

 

By kaaazuo's logic, a Chinese capitalist in Shandong today, who owns a heavily polluting factory, pays off corrupt bureaucrats and is a fervent Christian, whose parents were die hard communists and embraced the Cultural Revolution and hated Daoism as feudal superstition -- that capitalist is a Daoist. What sense does that make? Not everyone in a cultural feels the "thousand points of pressure," as beautiful and insightful as that image is.

 

I understood (perhaps wrongly) that Daoism was mostly a minority religion in its own time ....

[Apech]

It depends a lot on how you define authenticity. You could just as easily ask, "Can any modern person, in China or not, become a Daoist?" Because Daoism arose at least 2,500 years ago, and the difference between anyone living today in China, and the residents of Chu in 400 B.C.E. is much greater than the difference between that same Chinese person, and anyone else on earth today.

 

There is probably more cultural difference between a Chinese person of 2.500 years ago and a modern chinese person as there is between China and the West.

[Stosh]

It depends a lot on how you define authenticity. You could just as easily ask, "Can any modern person, in China or not, become a Daoist?" Because Daoism arose at least 2,500 years ago, and the difference between anyone living today in China, and the residents of Chu in 400 B.C.E. is much greater than the difference between that same Chinese person, and anyone else on earth today.

If the tradition is a recognition of a true state of affairs ( regarding the world and human condition) then folk of any age might recognize it . If it is just a cultural view depending on mindset then we might not 'get it'.

But the conclusion that folks are really so different, then from now ,or here from there, seems inference to me and -empty.

Certainly there are those today who believe they 'get it' ,, and they could all be wrong ,, but then again of all them folks back then ,, they could also have been wrong.

Since the effect is subjective , there is no way to prove or disprove 'getting it' , then or now, that I know of, without putting arbitrary -empty delineations on what traditions a person holds to.

[kaaazuo]

Can any person become a Daoist? This is a loaded question, like a stacked deck or a gaffed dice that has been tampered with for cheating. When one asks this question, and also surreptiously slips in Daoism as an ideology that anyone can drape around oneself like an embroidered robe to become a Daoist, one has already determined the answer.

 

It has already been stated that Daoism is not an ideology but a way of life that defines the behavior of the (Chinese) practitioner. Ways of standing, sitting, bowing and walking are part of Daoist etiquette that include social relationships peculiar to Chinese tradition. While preserving respect and dignity, the essence of etiquette, it is meant to protect against dishonor. Etiquette is not simply manners. Knowledge of this and its correct internalization is central to Daoist practice. Complete etiquette performance internalizes perfect inner strength. Knowing the way is easy but it goes no farther than remembering the form. Practice must follow through with dignity. At the level of dignity, there is no form, no teaching.

[Stosh]

^{Form is but an external dramatization of what may be a spiritual stance and one drapes it on similar to other illusions .}

 

^wikipedia

^{An ideology is a set of ideas that constitute one's goals, expectations, and actions. An ideology is a comprehensive vision, a way of looking at things (compare worldview) as in several philosophical tendencies (see political ideologies), or a set of ideas proposed by the dominant class of a society to all members of this society (a "received consciousness" or product of socialization).}

^{Etiquette without the ideology is truly hollow , a perversion}

^{whereas ideology may spawn ettiquete as described}

 

^{But thats just my opinion}

[thinker]

Ways of standing, sitting, bowing and walking are part of Daoist etiquette that include social relationships peculiar to Chinese tradition. While preserving respect and dignity, the essence of etiquette, it is meant to protect against dishonor. Etiquette is not simply manners. Knowledge of this and its correct internalization is central to Daoist practice. Complete etiquette performance internalizes perfect inner strength.

 

So in order to be Daoist I must stand, sit, bow, and walk in such a way as to conform to something called "Daoist etiquette"? Where in the world does that appear in either the DDJ or the ZZ?

 

And this is important because this etiquette incorporates social relationships peculiar to Chinese tradition? So in public I must continually move in such a fashion as to signal the social position that has been assigned to me by society? What if I don't accept what society thinks of me?

 

And conforming to strict rules regarding movement and posture protects me against dishonor? So I dishonor myself if I don't continually signal my socially-assigned social status? I can't just move in a way that naturally feels good to me?

 

It's really not my intent to either offend or cause an argument here, but to me this sounds like a fairly stringent form of Confucianism masquerading as Daoism, which I believe was formed as a reaction against the authoritarianism and rigid social codes of Confucianism.

Edited February 22, 2013 by thinker

[Birch]

And sometimes it's not even that easy to know oneself!

I got a notebook to 'purge' all the ridiculous things I hold in my subconscious.

[Mark Saltveit]

kaaazuo: It has already been stated that Daoism is not an ideology but a way of life that defines the behavior of the (Chinese) practitioner.

Stated by who? A Chinese practitioner? Someone with good posture and ettiquette?

 

One of the most essential elements of Daoism is rejecting rigid ideology and traditions. Another is to avoid distinctions and judgements, because they obscure deeper truths. I'm with Thinker here. I don't know who you are quoting, but it seems like either you mistake their meaning or perhaps their authority is suspect.

 

Who appointed them Laozi anyway? (Or Fu Xi, if you prefer.)

[kaaazuo]

So in order to be Daoist I must stand, sit, bow, and walk in such a way as to conform to something called "Daoist etiquette"? Where in the world does that appear in either the DDJ or the ZZ?

 

I tried to use English in a metaphorical style of classical Chinese. Obviously, that language failed me. "Etiquette" was the only word I could find. My apologies. Also, I was not speaking from foreign translations, or should I say "western imaginations" as Professor Kirkland put it.

[kaaazuo]

^{Etiquette without the ideology is truly hollow , a perversion}

^{whereas ideology may spawn ettiquete as described}

 

Ideology is man-made, an artificial contrivance. And without this script for learned manners, etiquette is a perversion?

I seriously doubt that this Wikipedia offering would be endorsed even by western philosophers on ethics.

 

Be that as it may, the traditional Daoist, namely me, sees ideologically-driven social conduct a perversion. It is such ideology that controls human behavior to maintain order in society be it a home or a Supermax where "meals are served through chuck holes in the cell door.

[henro]

In the west, Daoism is not in the culture, it is external and mostly taken as a philosophy to adopt, study, practice, and spend time trying to grasp its inner meaning and put it into practice. This corresponds to some comments I've made in the past that 'practice' is not natural and we don't get back to any resemblance of Wu Wei until we stop practicing and grasping and get back to living.

 

The idea to experience rather than study something which is external to one's culture is probably preferable but not doable for most as one's own layers of cultural conditioning prevents it on some level. Thus, one may be trying to un-brainwash themself from what is formed within.

 

If one was either able to really let the layers go or was more naturally predisposed to another cultural way, then it would probably be easier to adopt another way or let it soak in. Some are more gifted and it comes natural. For some, it may take a lot of practice.

 

Great post, and really resonates with my experience in China. One hermit I've visited over the years told me that when he lived in the monastery or down in the city he had lots of practices, forms, and meditations. But the longer he stays in the mountains the more time he just spends time being..... the practice becomes everything you do.

[kaaazuo]

One of the most essential elements of (modern) Daoism is rejecting rigid ideology and traditions. The opposite is true of traditional Daoism.

 

When there is a lack of discipline, even sitting up straight at the dinner table is rigid ideology. Good posture and etiquette, hard work and honesty, are rejected when such traditions are too hard to uphold.

 

Thus (modern) Daoism goes one way and traditional Daoism the other.

[dawei]

Thus (modern) Daoism goes one way and traditional Daoism the other.

 

I think that is inevitable... Maybe it is intrinsic to the singularity of Dao that the manifestation arise in multiplicity. We see it in many religions and even Buddhism. So I think the future may have many XXXX Daoist labels.

 

I am coming to at least two conclusions:

1. What is a Daoist? Let each person decide

2. What is Daoism? Let each person decide

 

I think the simplest idea is that no labels are necessary... but that is ironic as a Daoist has already accepted the label.

 

So, best to let everyone label themselves. This would include not using labels.

[shanlung]

I think that is inevitable... Maybe it is intrinsic to the singularity of Dao that the manifestation arise in multiplicity. We see it in many religions and even Buddhism. So I think the future may have many XXXX Daoist labels.

 

I am coming to at least two conclusions:

1. What is a Daoist? Let each person decide

2. What is Daoism? Let each person decide

 

I think the simplest idea is that no labels are necessary... but that is ironic as a Daoist has already accepted the label.

 

So, best to let everyone label themselves. This would include not using labels.

 

Ha ha ha ha!

Not that I think what you said will end this debate.

I cannot call even the heated words here to be arguments, but then, that is because it is me.

 

Might take a break to have a sniff and a sip of good Wulung tea.

 

Idiotic Taoist

Edited February 23, 2013 by shanlung

[thinker]

One of the most essential elements of Daoism is rejecting rigid ideology and traditions. Another is to avoid distinctions and judgements, because they obscure deeper truths.

 

I'm not sure if I would idealize Daoism this much. To a Confucian, Daoism may seem to have its own rigid ideology and traditions that need rejecting. After all, isn't the idea that we should strive to act in accordance with nature an ideology, even it not a very rigid one, that we don't reject? Perhaps to a Confucian this seems like a license to act like an animal, which tendencies they believe that we should try to overcome by practicing Confucian virtues.

 

I know that the overwhelming majority of Daoists believe that Daoism encourages us to avoid distinctions and judgements. I've yet to be convinced that this is encouraged by Daoist doctrine, or even a good idea. I do seem to be almost in a minority of one on this one though.

[Mark Saltveit]

Thinker: How then do you interpret chapter two of the Daodejing?

 

kaaazuo: One of the most essential elements of (modern) Daoism is rejecting rigid ideology and traditions. The opposite is true of traditional Daoism.

 

You often speak of your superior knowledge of Dao, especially as against Westerners. Will you tell us which "traditional Daoism" you follow? The one that was created 1,000 years after the Daodejing and Zhuangzi were compiled (Zhengyi), the one created 1,600 years after (Quanzhen), or a different one?

[thinker]

One of the most essential elements of (modern) Daoism is rejecting rigid ideology and traditions. The opposite is true of traditional Daoism.

 

When there is a lack of discipline, even sitting up straight at the dinner table is rigid ideology. Good posture and etiquette, hard work and honesty, are rejected when such traditions are too hard to uphold.

 

Thus (modern) Daoism goes one way and traditional Daoism the other.

 

I'd go in the opposite direction. My understanding is that Daoism formed as a reaction against Confucian ideology and traditions, and in the millennia since has evolved to contain much ritual and ceremony of its own. Thus I would say that early Daoism was more centered around the rejection of ideology and traditions, while contemporary Daoism has become more approving of it.

 

I'm not sure how to read the rest of the post. I see no problem in having hard work and honesty without good posture and etiquette, particularly given that notions of good posture and etiquette seem culturally bound.

[kaaazuo]

Which traditional Daoism do I follow? Christ almighty!

 

I think I will get on my buffalo and head west.

[thinker]

Traditional Daoism begins and ends with courtesy. It speaks to the perfect man who never gets caught in an unsavoury situation, the lot of the uncultivated and the damned.

 

I copied this quote from another thread, because responding to it there would have driven that thread way off topic.

 

kaaazuo: Are you sure that you're not speaking of Confucianism? I'm far from an authority on either Confucianism or Daoism, but the extreme emphasis on courtesy, etiquette that incorporates information about social relationships, and so forth seems a lot more like the former than the latter. Certainly there was a lot of this about in the early days of Daoism, but if my understanding is correct it was not a part of Daoism, it was a part of the prevailing culture that Daoism was rejecting.

[thinker]

Thinker: How then do you interpret chapter two of the Daodejing?

 

Give me a couple of days to think about this one.

[shanlung]

My understanding is that Daoism formed as a reaction against Confucian ideology and traditions, and in the millennia since has evolved to contain much ritual and ceremony of its own.

 

How can that be?

Taoism was already very old before Confucious even existed as the lust in his father's heart

and the gleam in the eye of his mother.

 

 

Idiotic Taoist

[kaaazuo]

I copied this quote from another thread, because responding to it there would have driven that thread way off topic.

 

kaaazuo: Are you sure that you're not speaking of Confucianism? I'm far from an authority on either Confucianism or Daoism, but the extreme emphasis on courtesy, etiquette that incorporates information about social relationships, and so forth seems a lot more like the former than the latter. Certainly there was a lot of this about in the early days of Daoism, but if my understanding is correct it was not a part of Daoism, it was a part of the prevailing culture that Daoism was rejecting.

 

You sound earnest. Ok, One more reply before I ride.

 

No, I wasn't speaking of Confucianism. Daoism is just another aspect of Chinese thought that is meant to teach us how not to live like an uncivilized beast. If we internalize Lao Tzu's Way, we would live the teaching of Confucius.

[thinker]

How can that be?

Taoism was already very old before Confucious even existed as the lust in his father's heart

and the gleam in the eye of his mother.

 

Good point. Perhaps I should have said that it was an oral tradition that was first recorded in writing roughly at, or shortly after, the time of Confucius, apparently (to me, YMMV) in reaction to the Confucian authoritarianism and rigid social codes of the day, the philosophical foundations of which may also have existed long before Confucius was born.