Daoism Q&A! Yay!

[Rusticus]

I wonder if you could tell us how you became a Daoist?

I do mean how and not why. Is there some study one must do? some initiation? some signing of papers? Or do you just reach a point where you feel that your personal belief is sufficiently aligned with general Daoist beliefs - and so you ARE a Daoist?

 

[meebs]

Daoism is like The Force in that the Dao exists everywhere, in all things, and is sort of a wellspring of energy and existence; being from nonbeing. Unlike The Force, Daoism exists and mitigates all things, not only things that are alive. It also doesn't grant supernatural powers. But the feel of the religion is similar to The Force because both are defined loosely and apophatically in most cases, and because both pervade all things and essentially run the Universe.

Trickster

The Tao is everything. Thats all you need to say.

Nice post by the way. I love the whole philosphical Taoism but i dont really class it as a religion nor the Tao a Diety, it just is.

I guess i have my own personal Taoism. Im still learning. I dont even entirely agree with the Tao Te Ching, oh man it has many good points but...

Heres one thing that gets me:

It seems to say that we have seperated ourselves from the Tao (This is implied by the fact that we have to find our way back to the ways of the Tao), however, if the Tao is all - how have we seperated? Even if our actions do not seem natural and unbalanced, it still is as we are a part of the whole system.

Thats the best wording i can use - maybe you can help?

Thanks!

 

[Eudaimonist]

But to answer the spelling of Magic/K thing.
It was actually Aleister Crowley

Yes, it was. But I heard that he added the "k" to make the word fit his numerology better. Using the different spelling to differentiate from stage magic was an after-the-fact rationalization.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[TricksterWolf]

I wonder if you could tell us how you became a Daoist?

I do mean how and not why. Is there some study one must do? some initiation? some signing of papers? Or do you just reach a point where you feel that your personal belief is sufficiently aligned with general Daoist beliefs - and so you ARE a Daoist?

I just read the Dao De Jing, and it made sense to me. Daoist is just a label, though. It doesn't carry any special weight, and many people I would call Daoists might not call themselves by that name.

Trickster

 

[TricksterWolf]

It seems to say that we have seperated ourselves from the Tao (This is implied by the fact that we have to find our way back to the ways of the Tao), however, if the Tao is all - how have we seperated? Even if our actions do not seem natural and unbalanced, it still is as we are a part of the whole system.

Hmm. Here's my take on this...

All actions are, in essence, in accordance with the Dao. So there is a sort of schizophenia between the "all is Dao" and "these particular things are against the Dao" statements.

Think of it this way...the Dao is like a tool with infinite potential, like a bellows that stokes a fire. It's always there, but not everyone uses it properly. Some people sit on the bellows, or merely play with it, instead of using it to its full potential. The Dao--when Dao is a verb--is something that is actively lived. It is lived by paying attention to the way things work, and using the natural way in which things work in our universe, in conjuction with our actions. A Daoist doesn't try to control nature, or politics, or war, with a head-on attack. She rather employs a gentle manipulation of forces that already exist, in order to help those people who are not wise enough to do this for themselves. And she draws comfort from knowing that the way things work in this world is greater than her own ambitions, and more likely to produce just things.

Trickster

 

[very_irreverand_Bill]

Yes, it was. But I heard that he added the "k" to make the word fit his numerology better. Using the different spelling to differentiate from stage magic was an after-the-fact rationalization.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Ah yes, that would make sense, andI think I heard that too.
That Crowley, interesting fella.

In Reason:
Irrev.Bill

 

[Rusticus]

Another question:

What form, if any, does your religious practice take.

(I am aware that your answer my hold true only for yourself, seeing that your form of Daoism is a very personal one.)

Are there for instance meditations or prayer or rituals or chanting or whatever. Or do you keep to a particular time schedule with daily activities as part of Daoism.


And, a second one, if I may: How would you say that your Daoist beliefs affect your daily living? (Also, has there been any change in your life since you became a Daoist?)


Thanks. Hope I'm not too demanding...

 

[Eudaimonist]

It is lived by paying attention to the way things work, and using the natural way in which things work in our universe, in conjuction with our actions.

I've come upon a very similar insight, independently of Taoism.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[TricksterWolf]

Another question:

What form, if any, does your religious practice take.

(I am aware that your answer my hold true only for yourself, seeing that your form of Daoism is a very personal one.)

Are there for instance meditations or prayer or rituals or chanting or whatever. Or do you keep to a particular time schedule with daily activities as part of Daoism.


And, a second one, if I may: How would you say that your Daoist beliefs affect your daily living? (Also, has there been any change in your life since you became a Daoist?)


Thanks. Hope I'm not too demanding...

The answer to both questions is the same, because the Dao is "worshipped" (in a sense) by living it. While the folk and organized religion versions of Daoism involve rituals, philosophical Daoism does not.

When I'm feeling down or in need of advice, or in a quiet moment in which to reflect on life, I read the Dao De Jing. Apart from that, I try to remember to use the Dao in my daily life.

Often I realize I'm running headlong into a problem that should be tackled instead in a Daoist manner, and I correct myself. Often I find myself making judgments based on things I don't really know, and I stop myself short. For me, I'm an impetuous sort, so there's more "damage control" than "proper living".

Trickster

 

[TricksterWolf]

I've come upon a very similar insight, independently of Taoism.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Daoism's principles are simple and universal, but surprisingly hard to teach. It's like the Chinese metaphor of pointing at the moon, while the students are busy staring at your hand. People want to be handed answers on "What is Dao?" when the answer is not something that can be described, only lived.

Trickster

 

[Rusticus]

The answer to both questions is the same, because the Dao is "worshipped" (in a sense) by living it. While the folk and organized religion versions of Daoism involve rituals, philosophical Daoism does not.

When I'm feeling down or in need of advice, or in a quiet moment in which to reflect on life, I read the Dao De Jing. Apart from that, I try to remember to use the Dao in my daily life.

Often I realize I'm running headlong into a problem that should be tackled instead in a Daoist manner, and I correct myself. Often I find myself making judgments based on things I don't really know, and I stop myself short. For me, I'm an impetuous sort, so there's more "damage control" than "proper living".
Trickster

Would it be fair to say, then, that your particular form of Daoism is a philosophy rather than a religion?

And, would it be possible to adhere to Daoist philosophy while at the same time having a religion as well (obviously one one that teaches things that are fundamentally opposed to daoist philosophy)?

 

[TricksterWolf]

Would it be fair to say, then, that your particular form of Daoism is a philosophy rather than a religion?

And, would it be possible to adhere to Daoist philosophy while at the same time having a religion as well (obviously one one that teaches things that are fundamentally opposed to daoist philosophy)?

Only if "religion" is the same as "ritual", which I doubt anyone would agree to. I still believe in God, so I consider it my religion.

Some people who are Philisophical Daoists do not consider it a religion for them.

Yes, you can simultaneously be a Daoist and some other faith. It's highly compatible. At least from my perspective.

Trickster

 

[meebs]

Daoism's principles are simple and universal, but surprisingly hard to teach. It's like the Chinese metaphor of pointing at the moon, while the students are busy staring at your hand. People want to be handed answers on "What is Dao?" when the answer is not something that can be described, only lived.

Trickster

In which case im confused, im guessing that our own views of the Tao (sorry i cant help it calling it the Tao ) are very different. Since i view the Tao as all anyway and the thing that just is, that means i already see all as a part of the Tao already - The Tao so far has been the best "word" that can describe all that is.

You get what i mean - lol sorry ive been trying to work out for a week my reply to you. Sorry its late!

 

[meebs]

Some people who are Philisophical Daoists do not consider it a religion for them.

Trickster

Like me who dont beleive in a Diety or spiritual force! I have the icon because it represents my philosophies more closely than an atheist icon.

Since you say you beleive in God do you see it as a more Pantheist god or a Deistic God?

 

[TricksterWolf]

In which case im confused, im guessing that our own views of the Tao (sorry i cant help it calling it the Tao ) are very different. Since i view the Tao as all anyway and the thing that just is, that means i already see all as a part of the Tao already - The Tao so far has been the best "word" that can describe all that is.

You get what i mean - lol sorry ive been trying to work out for a week my reply to you. Sorry its late!

You should spell it Tao and I can spell it Dao...it's like two bilingual people, each of a different native language. The best way to communicate is to speak your own, because comprehension is easier than formation.

Anyway. The "Tao" may be a word, but the problem is that a word is all it can be. Look at the very beginning of Lao Tsu's writing:

"The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao.
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.
The unnamable is the eternally real."

Also, Dao does not describe all that is. It is the great source that begets all things, but the things which are begotten are not Dao. They are manifestations. They are not in the same category of "real". Just as our name for dao is not in the same category as the true Dao.

Like me who dont beleive in a Diety or spiritual force! I have the icon because it represents my philosophies more closely than an atheist icon.

Since you say you beleive in God do you see it as a more Pantheist god or a Deistic God?

I don't think either view captures it correctly. The Dao is neither pantheistic, nor deistic. It's most compatible with deism or monotheism, but in both cases it is defined too loosely to say. Basically it's an apophatically defined deity that exists in all things and actions, but it isn't literally all things and actions.

Trickster

 

[meebs]

Anyway. The "Tao" may be a word, but the problem is that a word is all it can be. Look at the very beginning of Lao Tsu's writing:

"The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao.
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.
The unnamable is the eternally real."

Also, Dao does not describe all that is. It is the great source that begets all things, but the things which are begotten are not Dao. They are manifestations. They are not in the same category of "real". Just as our name for dao is not in the same category as the true Dao.
Trickster

Yeah i remember reading that. I must be getting a totally different impression from you and other Taoist/Daoists.

Well remember (i state the obvious here) that a word describes something but is not something. For example the word Tree describes a tree but isnt the tree. So i think i get you. But the impression i get (im being led to the erm Taoism because it seems that stuff i already thought was being described in these texts) is that Tao describes everything. I see it as the undercurrent thing behind everything that is, but because of that, everything that is is a part of it. Either im looking at it deeper or just differently?

 

[TricksterWolf]

Yeah i remember reading that. I must be getting a totally different impression from you and other Taoist/Daoists.

Well remember (i state the obvious here) that a word describes something but is not something. For example the word Tree describes a tree but isnt the tree. So i think i get you. But the impression i get (im being led to the erm Taoism because it seems that stuff i already thought was being described in these texts) is that Tao describes everything. I see it as the undercurrent thing behind everything that is, but because of that, everything that is is a part of it. Either im looking at it deeper or just differently?

It's hard to talk about the Dao because you can't talk about it accurately. No linguistic description suffices; any attempt to define its characteristics in positive measure is going to be inaccurate. You can only point people in the right direction and hope they look until they see it.

Granted, the word "tree" is not a tree. But we can describe the properties of trees, while we cannot accurately do that for the Dao. The Dao is--in a rough sense--too big to fit into conceptual categories. This is similar to large cardinal theory in mathematics, which deals with classes of infinity. The larger the infinity gets, the more rules of mathematics it becomes inconsistent with (breaks). And the cardinality of all infinities is larger than any infinity, which is itself a contradiction. In mathematics there's always a paradox when you try to classify "everything" because some things are inherently unclassifiable. The Dao is inherently unclassifiable in every respect. If I said "it is good" that would be an error, because the "goodness" of the Dao certainly extends beyond what I can imagine "goodness" is. This is why we only define the Dao apophatically (with negative language, saying what it isn't rather than what it is), or else say "it is beyond the concepts of (for one true example) is and is not".

So we can't say that Dao describes everything, but we can say a few things about it: there isn't anywhere that it isn't at, there isn't anything that it doesn't do, it is timeless, and it is the source (and destination!) of all manifestations such as trees, you, me, ideas, etc. So everything arises from and follows Dao, at least. It can be thought of (somewhat incorrectly) as a force of sorts. Because its auspices know no bounds, it can be seen as containing "the manner in which all things work", though it is more than this.

It's actually much simpler than anything I've described, too. There's nothing simpler than Dao, but it's a devil to explain it.

Trickster

 

[samsonknight]

so trickster part of your belief is the buddihst belief?

interesting stuff.

 

[TricksterWolf]

so trickster part of your belief is the buddihst belief?

interesting stuff.

Not precisely. I don't believe in karma, that all life is suffering, or in the eightfold path--and these are all the primary beliefs of Buddhism as I understand it. But most Eastern religions have a similar flavor, a focus on the spiritual denial of self and material things, and an emphasis on humility and compassion. These I try to emulate, and admire in Buddhists.

Trickster

 

[Snowbunny]

Hola Trickster!

You said that there have been philosophers in Daoism that are also in other religions... i am curious about this... does it mean that Daosim recognizes other ways to the Dao? or can Daoism be a supplemental on top of other religious beliefs?

And is the Dao something that you become a part of, something that you simply become, or something that is above you? im having difficulty trying to understand how Dao is similar to the idea of God... if it is...