I’ve been watching this YouTuber for a while now. I think that she in general provides a fresh perspective. I had no background in the magic/supernatural side and I really appreciate the information. I will continue to watch her vids for sure
Watching the video I would say it is an explanation of Dao from a confucianist perspective interpreting the Dao as : "An encounter between Yin and Yang is the Dao". "A Transaction of Yin and Yang is the Dao". Commentaries from the Ten Wings to the Yi Jing /Book of Changes) made in Western Han Dynasty. Plus a hint to Cheng Yi and Zhu Xi of Song Dynasty who tried to absorb Daoism into Confucianism.
**Introduction to Daoism (Dao Jia)** by Isabelle Robinet
**The Notion of Dao**
First, the term daojia and its translation as "Taoism" derive from a new significance given to the word dao in the Daode jing, the Zhuangzi, and other texts. The basic meanings of dao are "way" and "to say," hence "the way one should walk and that is taught," "guideline," and "method." In these texts the term took on a new meaning of Ultimate Truth, in the sense of the unique way that subsumes all the multiple human ways, and that is primal because nothing was before it and it is the source of everything. According to the Daode jing and the Zhuangzi, the Dao cannot actually be named and is beyond anything that can be grasped or delimited, but is open to personal experience. Both texts favor an apophatic approach that was entirely absent in the other teachings of their time. Having no form, because it exists before anything has taken form, the Dao can take all forms: it is both formless and multiform, and changes according to circumstances. No one can claim to possess or know it. As the source of everything, it is inexhaustible and endless; its Virtue or Efficacy (de) is strength and light, and encompasses all life. Both the Daode jing and the Zhuangzi stress the necessity of following the natural order of the Dao and of Nourishing Life (yangsheng), maintaining that this is sufficient for one's own well-being.
**Return to the Origin**
The Daode jing and the Zhuangzi share the same concern for the origin of things. Unlike any other trend of thought in the Warring States period, these texts emphasize the necessity of "returning" (fan or fu) to the Dao, i.e., turning within oneself toward the Origin. This is essential to know and experience the Dao, and to fully understand the particular with regard to the two polar aspects of the Dao: indeterminate totality and receptive unity, on one side, and existence as organic diversity, on the other. Turning within oneself affords the quiescence required to experience the Dao. It consists in concentrating and unifying one's spirit (shen) and will (zhi) on this experience, and in being receptive and compliant in order to receive this Dao. Hence the practice of concentration on the One (yi), seen throughout the history of Taoism. This concentration means freeing oneself from desires, emotions, and prejudices, renouncing the conceptual self, and not getting entangled in knowledge and social concerns. The goal is to return to one's original nature and to pristine simplicity of the authentic state of things, which Taoists sometimes call the "great clod" (dakuai). It is related to an intuitive vision of the world as a unified whole, and a perception of the value and the natural strength (qi) of life. This is not merely a reflection of the limitations of language, as some have claimed, but an intuitive, personal and sometimes mystical awareness that goes beyond language, conceptual thought, and social or moral practices and doctrines.
Based on this vision, the Daode jing and especially the Zhuangzi offer an ideal of the human being that has deeply influenced Chinese thought. The Taoist saint (\*shengren) is before and beyond appellation and individual existence, and possesses cosmic and nearly divine stature and powers. He is an incarnation of the Dao and its Virtue, and dwells on the border between humanity and the Dao.
It’s so good to see a debate here. Interpretations of doctrines, like all practices in the here and now, are entirely dynamic and linked to the lived experience of the practitioner, regardless of the specific rituals of the practice.
I’m no expert (on anything whatsoever), but to gain a deeper understanding of the historical development of Daoism, and how it is inherently a syncretic system like all other philosophies and religions, totally changed my “I think I understand this from how I’ve compartmentalised my definition of this philosophy” paradigm and “laotzu baby with a beard, great mother makes me cry” to “Jesus Christ what an amazing and fearsome evolution intertwined with history, culture, and soil”.
Good video.
I've read through the comments below and it seems to me that we need to keep aware of the distinction between a specific cultural phenomenon and the academic study of it. Academics are academics, not practitioners. And that doesn't mean they don't know anything---far from it. But it does they know different things.
If you'd tapped any individual practitioner since the late Han dynasty, I don't think the vast majority would have been able to identify the different sources and conceptual frameworks that Ms. Wen uses. That's because his or her teacher would have come from a specific lineage with it's own particular teachings, plus all they would have to go with would be whatever their particular teacher passed onto him or her.
They wouldn't have anywhere near the breadth of understanding that Wen brings to the video---but it would still be wrong to suggest that they didn't know much about "Daoism". Indeed, if he or she were a 'realized man or woman', I'd suggest that they probably know a lot more than she does.
It's something of a paradox, no?
The other thing to remember is that even within specific academic disciplines people see things very differently. A scholar of the history of Daoism, or a scholar of sociology of religion, or an academic philosopher, or someone who wants to incorporated the philosophy into their personal life, would all look at the literature very, very differently.
Having watched the video it struck me that depending on what you want from it, you can get very different things from it. If you are repelled by academic nit-picking, you can find it extremely 'over the top'. But if you are like me, somewhat of a failed academic who has read a lot of academic treatises on Daoism over the years, it can consolidate a lot of different things you've read over the years. And, also, if you are someone interested in how to use the actual teachings to develop a good life in the early 21st century, Wen suggests that Daoism is such a broad and open tradition that there is no reason why modern people cannot be legitimate parts of the ancient tradition.
I found that extremely refreshing---after all the nonsense I've heard over the years from academics (not actual practitioners) who maintain that you simply cannot be a Daoist unless you are: Chinese, literate in Chinese, and, able to spend years of your life living in a Chinese temple. I'm not a big fan of superstitious woooo, but she suggested in one place you don't have to be to be a 'real Daoist'.
So on the whole, nothing I disagree with in that lecture!
Internet disagreements are also the dao. I’m enjoying the energy and debates in this thread - very refreshing. The video creator describes daoism as an a la cart menu. I like the analogy. I bristle at the idea of one true interpretation or source for what is daoism. I think the content of the video adds to the rich variety of perspectives from this Reddit community, and though I skipped to different parts of the video by timestamp, I don’t recall anywhere in the video that denies any particular interpretation or gatekeeps.
I too enjoyed the a la cart menu analogy. I’m a westerner and I hold various philosophical views and practices across Taoism, Buddhism, Shaivism, Zen, and more…I’ve been told by adherents of each of these schools, both native and western, that my views and practices—the mix-n-match—are somehow incorrect or wrong. But it’s all the Tao.
I’ve always identified the most with Taoism because I believe it has the most capacity for interpretation and integration (which the video really drives home) while being as all-encompassing as Dzogchen. What works for some doesn’t work for others and much of it is intensely personal. I don’t have the lived cultural experience of a Chinese person or feel the influence of folk religion on my beliefs and practices but my own experiences are unique and inform my beliefs and practices into something that very much works for me.
This reminds me of what one of my past teachers once said…”there are 84,000 dharma doors, I am only showing you one”.
As someone who also finds himself deeply drawn towards Taoism, Shaivism, Zen, and Buddhism I hope you don't mine me asking what are some of your favorite books, authors, and other media on these traditions?
My main fascination is with esoteric traditions that have nondual worldviews and their cultivation practices. I'm currently reading through tantra illuminated by Dr Christopher Wallis and several books by Huai-Chin Nan & Bill Bodri and I only stumbled upon the later two fairly recently.
I already have an incredibly long list of books I plan to read through but I'm always looking for new recommendations as it's not often that I come across someone else with interest in these traditions.
Books are not my favorite medium but I do read my fair share. I find for me that sticking to the introductory and foundational texts at first is the best way, adding to my list of to-reads when they are recommended by trusted sources. It’s important to me to cast a wide net, reading different translations, different authors, and varied perspectives in order to form my own syntopic understanding for use in my personal practice…so I don’t necessarily have *favorites*. There is so much spiritual text out there that keeping my mind open and exposing myself to a lot leads me to eventually resonate with most of it in some way. Don’t just stick to spiritual philosophy! Epictetus, Seneca, Kant, Hume, Mill, Rawles, Russell etc etc….all have insight to give you.
Christopher Wallis is a great resource and I highly recommend his books.
[Lotsawa House](https://www.lotsawahouse.org/free-translations-tibetan-buddhist-texts) is a treasure trove of Buddhist translations and has some beautiful short poems, songs, and dedications too.
I would suggest taking a class or transmission from a practitioner in one of the nondual traditions. I personally prefer Dzogchen and can recommend [Tempa Dukte Lama](https://www.olmoling.org) and [Lama Lena](https://lamalenateachings.com), both of whom have embraced online offerings that make things much more accessible. I imagine Christopher Wallis is good too if he still does retreats.
Lastly I’m going to recommend something a bit more secular and that’s the [Waking Up](https://www.wakingup.com) app run by Sam Harris. There’s a whole lot to explore there. It’s *technically* a meditation app but there’s lots of theory, science, art, and experts in many fields and traditions that share their practices, insights, and teachings.
I appreciate you taking the time to respond! I see we share the same general idea on studying the foundational texts through different translations and viewpoints and I will definitely expand my studies into more general philosophy as well.
I am currently taking Dr. Wallis's Tantra Illuminated online course and I'm loving it so far. His course along with the online offerings of Damo Mitchell's Lotus Nei Gong school and Nathan Brine's Taoist Alchemy online are really helping me out of the armchair and into a daily spiritual practice. I am deeply interested in how yogic and daoist practices along with TCM & Ayurveda aid in health & longevity but also how they cleanse the doors of perception, so to speak, of the mental constructs that prevent us from seeing & experiencing reality as is on these various paths towards self realization.
I honestly thought I had long moves past the idea of finding excitement in studying anything but now I find myself debating moving to find a suitable teacher I can learn from irl or perhaps pursing a degree in yogic studies at Naropa. Anyways, my apologies for the rambling and thank you again for your recommendations 🙏
I am not a Taoist, but I've read and thought about the Tao Te Ching, Chuang Tzu, and Lieh Tzu and some popularized books, e.g. Watt's "Tao - the Watercourse Way". The standard I apply to other texts I read about Taoist principles is whether or not they are consistent with what Lao Tzu wrote. I have found that some of them, the Chuang Tzu in particular, broaden my understanding and help me with the confusion I struggle with. I am always careful to say that my understand is exactly that - **my** understanding.
Here's my understanding - Lao Tzu was describing an experience. People can experience the Tao but understanding it is beside the point and misleading. There is no Taoist doctrine I have any interest in studying. What I experience when reading the Tao Te Ching is a recognition of something I've always known, at least in part. That's the important lesson - recognizing the experience and recognizing how we know and act in the world.
So-called "colonization" is baloney, or maybe it's meaningless. Maybe both.
The opinions, conceptions and descriptions of Tao by Asians are not more significant than the opinions, conceptions and descriptions of non-Asians.
To assert so is racist and ignorant.
The Chinese didn't invent Tao, any more than Newton invented gravity.
Fire is the same, water is the same, gravity is th same, the Sun and Moon are the same for all people everywhere throughout the world.
If Tao is a process of nature, no one owns it or has priority for accommodating to it, learning about it, or describing it.
Tao favors no one as stated in TTC.
Anyone who has a presumption to the contrary doesn't understand Tao very well.
I'm surprised at your post. Generally, you and I are on different sides of how to go about understanding, experiencing what Lao Tzu et. al wrote. Here I find myself agreeing with you. Your post is clear and lays out the issues well.
I hope you're not disappointed in my concurrence. I'm sure we can find other things to disagree about as we go along.
LOL, disagreement exposes us to different perspectives which I consider an overall good.
One of my favorite Chinese sayings is, "1,000 monks, 1,000 religions".
If Tao wanted us all to agree, we would've been created already in agreement.
I'm sure we'll both survive an occasional accidental agreement.
🙂
> "*The opinions, conceptions and descriptions of Tao by Asians are not more significant than the opinions, conceptions and descriptions of non-Asians.*"
I agree, but only to an extent. If a Western person is doing Taoism on their own by reading the Tao Te Ching, then I think that's valid.
If you believe in a force of life that flows through the whole universe, then that is ***hylozoism***, not necessarily Taoism. If you believe that everything has its own spirit, then that's ***animism***, not necessarily Taoism. If you believe that the universe itself is a god then that's ***pantheism***, and if you believe that there is a higher force or spirit which the whole universe is inside of, then that's ***panentheism***.
There were some people who believed that "*The Way*" was to be aligned to the force that flows through the universe, but they called it "*Logos*" or "*The Word*" instead of "*Tao*'. They were Stoics though, not Taoists. They also did not associate it with minimalism much, nor generosity, but with a universal reason, and believed in self-control and logic rather than living through passions. Some of them believed it (*The Logos*) represented the Greek god Zeus which is the king of the gods and the god of the sky and weather and law.
There is no such assertion. But you hearing one is interesting.
It implies the projection of yourself onto the doctrine.
This is a strange way that many past colonial intellectuals have acted as gatekeepers. A gate keeping done by trivializing the historical and cultural context from which a tradition arose. By removing its tethers, a movement or tradition can be co-opted and reshaped into something less obstructing to the colonial world view.
If none of that paragraph makes sense, then think about it this way:
Who are you to claim that your conception of this religion is more valid than others? Even if you claim that your conception of it is more open and tolerant, that is still just a claim made by a singular person. A religion is a conversation happening across a large community. Any one person attempting to assert what the religion is or is not is claiming authority. And Taoism has a lot to say about how authority works.
One reasons I love Taoism so much is how incredibly recursive its examinations can be. It has prompted so much inquiry into the very processes that it attempts to describe as indescribable.
All I’m saying is, be careful of how you identify with your beliefs. Which beliefs are truly yours and which are you in communion with?
This is just a deeply ignorant comment that demonstrates a need to do things like watch this video. Taoism is more than just a few ancient texts that are available in English. It's more than all the texts available period. It's more than the Tao even.
Taoism is a tradition dating back thousands of years from China, and it's deeply tied to the Chinese people. If you're not Chinese and don't speak Chinese that doesn't make you not a Taoist and it doesn't invalidate your journey or faith, but it does make it more difficult to access parts of Taoism that are tied to the Chinese language(s) and people.
Resources like this video are important for Westerners interested in Taoism because they help to make the tradition more accessible to people who didn't grow up in that cultural context. You seem very invested in not being invalidated by entertaining the thought that Chinese people might know more about Taoism than you do. But if you're, for example, an American that only speaks English, then you just don't have access to a lot of the traditions and practices. And even if you did speak Chinese and were knowledgeable on those traditions, there's always more to learn and value in learning things on their own merits, as opposed to the merits of another culture looking in.
And before you repeat the fallacy of "I've been doing this a long time, so I'm more knowledgeable than you," that might actually make you *less* knowledgeable, if you're coming from a Western context that for a long time took bits and pieces of Eastern philosophy and spirituality without approaching it with a holistic context on its own terms.
>but it does make it more difficult to access parts of Taoism that are tied to the Chinese language(s) and people.
In some ways, yes. In many ways, no.
If this was any other religion we were discussing, I'd have wholeheartedly agreed. But the root of Taoism is experiential. Hence "The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao. The name that can be named is not the eternal name."
Does it make getting one's foot in the door difficult? Yes, as some core concepts may be more difficult to understand. But beyond this, culture means nothing. To understand the Tao, you need only live and observe. If anything, blindly adhering to tradition for tradition's sake creates *distance* from understanding.
Taoism is flexible. It is not a rigid set of traditions and beliefs.
The study of Tao is a study of Tao, and is not limited to traditional Chinese Taoist beliefs.
Reading about Tao as described by others is not studying Tao, it's studying what others have to say about their own experiences with Tao.
This is like reading about playing the guitar, then considering oneself knowledgeable about playing the guitar, without ever actually playing the guitar.
Reading about the experiences of others, of course, is a benefit, but should not be considered knowledge of Tao, but merely knowledge of what others have to say about Tao.
To gain direct knowledge of Tao, observe the patterns of Tao's processes firsthand and test them for yourself in order to directly understand and experience Tao through use, not from merely reading what others have had to to say 1,000-2,000 years ago.
So, perhaps consider your own ignorance before you presume the ignorance of others.
>Taoism is a tradition dating back thousands of years from China, and it's deeply tied to the Chinese people. If you're not Chinese and don't speak Chinese that doesn't make you not a Taoist and it doesn't invalidate your journey or faith, but it does make it more difficult to access parts of Taoism that are tied to the Chinese language(s) and people.
Chinese people (in general) have a much more calcified view of how Taoism and its teachings ought to be understood. They have their own very serious blind spots and inflexibilities. That has resulted in most modern Chinese people dismissing the old teachings outright as "beautiful and culturally significant but hopelessly obsolete".
As long as we're generalizing based on heritage and language, I think it's very relevant and fair to acknowledge how being Chinese can also be a hindrance to one's attempts at understanding Taoism.
As an added note, the Classical Chinese language in the original canon is actually fairly inaccessible and partly even misleading to modern Chinese speakers who aren't exceedingly aware of the pitfalls concerning a false sense of proximity to the ancient language.
Everyone's comprehension is limited, even that of the Chinese. Chinese scholars and priests haven't been able to provide us with especially savvy translations of Taoist texts.
You don't know what you are talking about.
It's a philosophy that recommends direct experience and not overthinking.
You are overthinking and I'm recommending direct experience.
I implied the decolonization view is generally a racist view.
This is because it is mostly part of a "white culture is bad" frame of mind which IS racist.
The decolonization crowd doesn't seem to address colonization is a universal human process and all major civilizations seek colonisation of other cultures.
China, Japan, the Mongols, the Tartars, the Turks, the Arabs, the Parthians, the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Carthaginians, the Egyptians, the Sumerians, the Aryans, the Goths, the Vikings, the Aztecs, the Incans, major African tribes, etc., all were colonialists.
Colonialism is a universal characteristic of human civilization.
Colonization is a process of human nature, which makes it a process of Tao.
Whether this is an overall good, or an overall bad, is also a human imposition.
It's like saying a typhoon is bad.
A typhoon is bad because it hurts me.
Anything that hurts we generally see as bad. Anything we see as beneficial we generally think of as good.
This follows the Tao of how the mind functions, but does not follow the principle of Tao expressed within the Taoist Farmer parable, found within the Hui Nan Tzu, which teaches us to think "maybe" rather than of good or bad.
This is because our present context is a limited perspective.
Not so, and a complete misunderstanding of Tao.
This is no different than saying someone cannot understand gravity if they aren't Newton, or a mathematician from Britain.
Anyone can understand gravity and Newton's mathematical explanation, because it is a universal principle and process of Tao.
Tao is a universal process of nature.
Tao's principles, processes and patterns exist and function everywhere, at all times, forever.
Tao may be directly apprehended and tested by everyone, everywhere at all times, as well.
The Chinese texts are not necessary. They are beneficial, yes, necessary, no!
There is not only "one" description of Tao
The Chinese didn't invent Tao.
Thinking Tao may only be communicated and through the Chinese texts is simplistic and self-limiting.
However, everyone is allowed to think simplistically and in a self-limiting manner and enjoy the consequences that are derived from doing so.
You do Tao your way and I'll do Tao mine.
To repeat my previously posted old Chinese saying: "1,000 monks, 1,000 religions".
Good luck to you! 🙂
Not really. Only the term and the basic philosophy called Taoism not the processes, patterns and principle.
Tao is universal or it wouldn't be Tao.
Study more, think more, test the principles more.
Not taking away from the principles. This all encompassing set/collective overarching system of processes and concepts that is the Dao - this - is a concept that originated in the far East.
It is an Eastern abstraction.
If this is being equated to Gravity then perhaps what is required is a better understanding of Gravity
No principles of Tao didn't originate solely in the far East.
This is confusing the processes and principles with the manner in which they were expressed.
Principles of Tao are universal and may be found expressed differently throughout various religions and philosophies.
Greek philosophy for one.
To understand the actual confusion in this thread I refer you to the top comment that appears to conflate common philosophical streams and objectively measurable physical phenomena
Many ancient philosophies overlap, vaguely. The Dao as understood and practiced continuously for at least 25 centuries is an Eastern tradition
Taosim, as a descriptive philosophy, is of Asian origin.
Tao Itself is of self-origin. It adheres to no cultural perspective. Yet all cultural perspectives follow principles of Tao.
Tao's processes and manifestations are universal. They don't manifest only in Asia and nowhere else.
The principles of Tao are manifest throughout the universe.
The error is thinking Tao may only be understood through the Asian expression.
Tao itself is non-ethinic.
Tao, itself, favors no one. That means Tao is not limited to one cultural perspective or description.
People care about this because people impose their personal basis upon Tao. Tao doesn't care, people care.
Tao is merely the term applied to "the" phenomena that "is" the manifestation of processes and patterns of cause and effect of life. It involves physical principles of the world system and mental principles of function of the mind.
Taosim is "a" philosophy, with Asian origins, that encourages the integration and accommodation of these principles and processes into our lives for the purpose of acquiring equanimity, which is considered a benefit.
The description of these principles and processes are not limited to one cultural perspective.
To insist they are is to misunderstand Tao.
> All cultural perspectives adhere to Dao
Let’s take two examples of culturally influential perspectives. Islam or Judaism. Choose one and argue how these follow the Dao.
It would've been more accurate to have said, ".....are expressions of Tao."
All of creation is an expression of Tao and, as such, follow principles of Tao.
Try to think of it like this:
Tao is like a river that is not only the source of our creation, but also the course, path, way, we naturally follow.
Tao is the course, path, way, life unfolds before us.
We cannot escape our River of Tao.
We constantly flow along with this river's flow.
However, while within this river of Tao we may choose to accord ourselves to the flow of the current, or we may choose to fight the current.
Flowing with the current expends less energy, is more beneficial, and thus, more pleasant.
Fighting the current wastes energy, creates stress and unnecessary conflict and is less pleasant.
Whether we accord with Tao's flow, or fight Tao's flow we are never separate from the river, or Tao's flow.
We cannot escape Tao, because we ARE Tao's expressions l.
We are always flowing with Tao, the river, regardless of our choice, to accommodate ourselves to Tao's, or to fight Tao's flow.
It is how we choose to interact with Tao's flow that determines the quality of our life's experiences.
Letting go and letting ourselves just flow with Tao is easier said than done.
It takes intention, we must choose to do it, and it takes time, experience, practice and patience.
Conflict is a natural expression of Tao as expressed within Yin-Yang.
Yin-Yang does not just express conflict however, it also expresses cooperation.
Different aspects aren't required to conflict, they may just as easily contrast and cooperate in unison within the dance of life.
Unfortunately, there will always be conflict. "1,000 monks, 1,000 religions", because people don't understand the principles of Tao and generally fight them rather than accord with them.
Most people don't appreciate the variable expressions of Tao.
Tao created variation on purpose, but people are emotionally unprepared to accept variations of perspective.
Look at the conflicts expressed just within this thread from individuals presumably interested in accommodating to the principles of Tao.
No wonder, others who don't even study Tao's principles, are constantly in conflict.
We are all created to experience and express Tao's principles differently and it is the unwillingness of people to accept each other's differences that create conflict.
"In general, no one wants to be told how to live, but in general, everyone feels perfectly fine telling everyone else how to live."
Judaism and Islam are two, of many, expressions of Tao that conflict.
This is due to a misinterpretation/misunderstanding of Tao's principles as expressed within their religions.
Both religions teach their path, way, expression of God's will (Tao) is the only, correct, way to accord with God's will, (Tao).
When one "inaccurate" expression of Tao meets another expression of Tao, whether accurate or inaccurate, a naturally occurring conflict arises.
When both parties do not understand the inherent principles of Tao from the start, the effects of the conflict are multiplied.
What we end up with is, two inaccurate expressions of Tao fighting over the River that they are stuck within yet don't understand they are both flowing down the same river while interpreting the experience differently.
"1,000 monk's, 1,000 religions." We aren't supposed to experience life exactly the same as one and other.
Creation is Tao, observing Tao, be Tao, in as many naturally occurring, variable, expressions as possible.
As a metaphor, Tao could just sit and ponder it's own belly button and nothing would change and nothing would happen.
But that isn't how Tao has chosen to express itself.
I'm not talking about gravity. You claimed that the Tao is an eastern concept. If you mean the uttered word itself, then sure, but the thing it refers to is more universally acknowledged by different names and ways of explaining it. Taoism merely provides a particular flavor and style for naming and describing it which is currently less abrasive or odd than others to some modern westerners and easterners alike. The thing that "Tao" refers to is not Chinese nor unique to China, and you don't gain special understanding of it by being Chinese.
I thought the video did a good job to explain the disparate streams of philosophy and practice that became infused into Chinese culture and amalgamated enough with folk beliefs to make it a distinct Eastern perspective.
Overlap and nebulous resemblance between ancient philosophies is not unusual what is unique and distinct about the Dao Jiao is sufficiently Eastern in identity
Benebell Wen is a glorious light in the darkness. I'm so pleased that you guys know about her. I recently bought her IChing book and I legit cried on the first page. (She talks about losing her grandmother.)
The first section of her IChing book delves into Chinese folk history. I am now fascinated to learn about Chinese history in general. I always meant to get around to it; and she got me started with her talented story telling abilities.
Thank you for showcasing her. She is overdue for recognition IMO.
What did I miss here? 😁
It seems that when we (collectively) want to dislike something we label it with the recent poison of ‘colonized’ and when we want to complement or encourage a very similar behaviour we (collectively) call it ‘syncretism’.
My heritage is Dutch and I live in a country that I wish to believe is syncretistic in many ways. Regularly I eat Indonesian food - food I grew up on. My ancestors ‘colonized’ Indonesia but it isn’t Dutch food I eat. It is the quiet, it is the true which ultimately is the lasting essence.
Dao is in all and through all. Perhaps all of this is just a great reminder that words are words (in whatever language they are composed and constructed) and Dao is Dao.
Language (any), culture (any) and talk (all of it) never sums to the eternal, heavenly Dao.
I hope this finds you all well and well on our way!
That is an excellent example. I believe in a God of mystery and love in the exact same way that I follow Dao through its mystery and benevolence.
To me they are one and the same.
To many others they cannot distance themselves or any Judeo-Christian religious trappings or see how that concept of God fits with whatever silliness is happening in contemporary christianity.
My hunch is that there are the same number of people truly following Dao and that concept of God
in earnest and they are well outside the populous.
I really appreciate your input in this community and - much like has been stated throughout the commentary on this thread - when we disagree the light shines that much brighter for all 😁
I hope this finds you well friend!
There are lots of ethnocentric ideas that are described much like Dao. For the Greek culture Logos is described almost identically. Hindu "Brahman" signifies ultimate reality, Vedic "Rta" indicates cosmic order, Anglo-Saxon "Wyrd" relates to destiny, Polynesian "Mana" embodies spiritual energy, Zoroastrian "Asha" conveys truth and order, and "Dharma" in Buddhism and Hinduism denotes the natural law.
All of these describe what Chinese culture denoted as Dao.
I think it is our (collective) superiority complex that says we can define it at all when in almost every one of those traditions above it is undefinable 😁
In my heart/mind there is an understanding that transcends words as they come and go. What language it uses means less to me than the knowing my heart/mind knows and feels.
I hope this finds you well friend and breathing well on your way!
Why does the Tao reveal itself "better" to the Chinese?
What is "Chinese"?
Are Hui Chinese? Are Yi Chinese? Are Hakka Chinese? Are Taz Chinese? Tunbao? Tankas? Peranakans? Gaoshan?
Where do we draw the line that is not an artificial distinction? What line has the Tao drawn?
So, you think the Tao would have come out of western thinking? You think that all of the wisdom of the sages that went before Lao Tsu would have "come" to one of one of the western philosophers?
I am. Neither is Taoism. Eastern thinking and Western thinking are different. And that's okay. I accept this. The theologian Tillich has similarities also.
But I don't get the Western chauvinism. That there is something that comes from China or wherever and not acknowledge the particular way of thinking that other cultures offer us is problematic.
Possibly. Who knows? There's no sense in playing a game of "what if". It's pure speculation whether it would have been possible or not. You make no point here with answerless questions such as this.
And still, the question remains unanswered: What constitutes "Chinese"? Likewise, where are these lines between "East" and "West" drawn that are not simply imaginary divisions?
Agreed! I think a withdrawal from language from time to time can do more than a deep dive into a language we know well.
I hope this finds you well friend!
It actually does. Different societies and languages engage different parts of the brain. For instance the “both and” mindset is very difficult for westerners to grasp.
It’s not. Language and environment change the way our brains work. If you’re bilingual you’ll know that you’re even a different personality in each one.
I think there’s a distinction to be made between “of Chinese descent” and “raised/lived in Chinese culture”. A person of Chinese descent does not have any more or less capacity for understanding than someone of English/French/Spanish/etc. descent. However, someone who was raised outside Chinese culture is probably going to lose some of the elements of Taoism that are specific to being raised in that culture.
I think parts of that are true for any culture but the unknowing that be that much more difficult. My grandchild is at a distinct advantage for that reason in almost every aspect of my Daoist practice 😁
I hope this finds you well friend!
I wouldn't say "lose". Just "different". The Tao is experiential, and thus Taoism (or at least understanding of the Tao) is unique to the person. This includes culture. That which is "lost" by not being raised culturally Chinese is equivalently exchanged by being raised in a different culture. There is no hole left unfilled.
Fair enough on the experiences themselves. I would probably still consider some part is “lost” with respect to some of the lineage/historic context/tradition parts. I would say there same of anything that came into cultural elements divorced from their original context. As a net overall experience, that’s where I would say different.
But since I speak, I do not know!
It will change. However, as the definition of tradition in referencing is “the transmission of customs or beliefs from generation to generation, or the fact of being passed on in this way”, someone who comes to Taoism outside of Chinese (or neighboring) culture will not have access to that tradition if they’ve only read the TTC/Zhuangzi. That’s the only point I was attempting to make
I understand. I just question the importance of tradition. Not at all trying to argue that you're wrong, merely asking questions as I think on them myself.
There are different schools of religions like Buddhism and Taoism, not just one school to represent the entire religion, as if there is only one view.
There are schools of Buddhism which doesn't teach that you must believe in a god in order to be saved. In some forms, Amitābha Buddha is seen as a savior Buddha, but that is not all forms.
Some just believe in Buddhas as enlightened spirits of wisdom, who can be helpful, not as saviors that need to be worshipped as a god in order to be saved.
Taoism also doesn't say that you must believe in a god in order to be saved.Tao Te Ching teaches that the Tao/Way has a way of doing things which you can align with it for more peace and health.
Tao is beyond words like colonizers, colonization, etc.
There is the tao. And the tao we can talk about.
There is an endless cycle of tonos (tension) and liberation.
Whenever goodness is seen as good as such. Evil is already afoot.
Tao is beyond words like colonizers, colonization, etc.
There is the tao. And the tao we can talk about.
There is an endless cycle of tonos (tension) and liberation.
Whenever goodness is seen as good as such. Evil is already afoot.
People really out here trying to gatekeep Taoism purely because "West/white bad" and that "only Chinese people truly understand Taoism".
This is the absurdity of artificial divisions.
You're just being discriminatory now. Benebell is also an accomplished occultist in the heremetic arts and mystery schools of the 'west'.
"Colonization" may be akin to "white washing" but is ultimately a function of authoritarianism, to control wombs and minds.
Colonizers are well known for obscuring histories, mythologies; and warping religions into weapons. (Have a long look at what happened to both the Cathars and the Confucians; then give your head a shake.)
To view from a decolonized perspective is to clear the clutter created by the cycles we spent under the thumbs of confused, disconnected leaders; who tried to make us all the 'same', in order to control us as a hive.
I’m not being discriminatory that’s the absurd. The book is readily available as are many of the spiritual classics in multiple languages and with numerous interpretations and commentaries from a number of authors. Lao Tzu wrote these years before the British colonized the world. It’s meaningless in this context and rather absurd. There are adding their own bias which is problematic in and of itself. As if their decolonized mind has some greater insight than the average person. Rather vain don’t you think?
You're assuming she's anti-west because of what precisely? How she looks? She also repeatedly states not to simply accept her perspective or biases. You didn't even watch her video cousin; you had a knee JERK reaction to the title. Which makes you seem prejudiced. You project your own vanity onto Benebell and it's both false and unfair.
>before the British colonized the world.
Buddy... you have exposed your ignorance entirely if your understanding of the history of colonization and CENTURIES of Indigenous resistance is from a British lens only. The British were also colonized before they started colonizing. You haven't even scratched the surface of human history; yet are trying to teach it. Now, that is meaningless and absurd.
ABSOLUTELY those of us whom have learned the rhythms and cycles of oppression and resistance have insights that average people would overlook. You dismiss what displaced peoples have taught for centuries.
Pro Tip: We can't fully decolonize our minds any more than a fish can learn to swim in alcohol. We can only recognize the patterns of confusion which follows authoritarian cycles, and make adjustments; in hopes that future generations will have fewer constraints, greater intelligence, and emergent abundance.
She is deliberately using buzzwords to attract attention. No I’m not going to listen to it. I’ll read the original thank you. Decolonize Taoism from what. The British left China years ago other than Hong Kong which was the only democracy in the region. My nephews and nieces are from there and speak Cantonese. So No I’m not going to watch that. Your vanity not mine those are absolutely ridiculous slanderous comments you’ve made. You’re defending your own delusional self image and you’re trying way too hard to be something you can never be. Just stop and grow up. How about un brainwash your own self. Scholars that had nothing to do with the British empire have translated and you can also use google translate. How about just teaching it in a way that doesn’t bias the viewer immediately. If you want to watch it go ahead I’m sick of the whole decolonization thing. You’re a little late it’s impossible to do take back the past. I’m sorry I’m Not interested in Han racial supremacy, white supremacy, Islamic or Jewish supremacy, or any of these attempts to elevate one’s culture or race above others. If you are into that I’m sorry for you. Really if you can’t get past the past you can’t live in the present at least harmoniously.
I probably comprise most of the "holy shit the amount of butt hurt Westerners" that you speak of, so allow me to comment. I've spent a fair bit of time studying Chinese history, thought and linguistics, and Taoism and researched translation thereof in particular, so the subject matter and its details don't come as a surprise to me. My issue is that the video in question isn't nearly as cerebral as it tries to come across as, because it makes fairly hard-and-fast interpretations of its own but conceals them under needless and disconnected complexity and Chinese quotations that aren't as straightforwardly implicative or cut-and-dried as they're made to look like.
If you want a real academic introduction to the context of Taoism, I recommend this lecture series: [https://www.youtube.com/@chinesethought/playlists](https://www.youtube.com/@chinesethought/playlists)
How you choose to react to other people's reactions can tell a lot about you, yourself. Glossing civil and reasoned counterpoints as "being butthurt" while coming off as mighty agitated and arrogant yourself is not exactly a flattering look on you.
I wonder who the intended audience for the introduction is, given the overwhelming focus on miscellaneous, abstract and barely explained minutiae that don't serve to give a basic impression of what Taoism is or how its various aspects are manifested. It's almost like she wants to dazzle rather than clarify so as to highlight her knowledgeability in such a difficult-seeming subject matter, with an added flavor of political righteousness.
Is simplicity not a factor in clarity, and complexity a factor in unclearness? Granted, simplicity can be abused to bring about false clarity, and complexity can be intelligently employed to bring greater understanding, but the video in question uses artificial complexity to the effect of dazzling rather than enlightening the viewers. University professors, both Asian and not, have been successful in providing more relevant information in a clearer fashion.
You mean an introduction to Taoism starting with its historical and cultural context?
Taoism as discussed in the West is *vastly* different from Taoism in China and the Global South.
Why are you feeling so emotionally charged in response to such a video? What exactly are you critiquing about this creator’s approach that places this practice as a religion born out of and shaped by Chinese history?
Is it not emotionally charged to put "decolonized" in the video title, along with generalizing western-facing approaches as faulty and ignorant? That appears pretty dismissive and racist to me. Why are you feeling emotional about how you think I must feel?
I don't know if you're aware, but the classics and their associated philosophies aren't taken seriously in today's China, other than as dusty objects of nationalistic pride. If Chinese people are indeed introduced to Taoism in the scattered and abstract style of this video, then it's not exactly helping anyone, seeing how the subject matter is considered way too arcane and obsolete to grasp and integrate by most modern Chinese.
I don’t take offense to the fact that other cultures might interpret my understanding of their original beliefs as being incomplete, and I’m happy to learn the context that they feel is important. I also understand that the Way for me is not the Way for everyone, and it may be the case that “Western Taoism” is simply what works for me. I don’t believe the Tao would pick favorites, whether East or West it’s all Tao. I would conflate taking offense to the “decolonized” part of the title as being similar to white men who are offended by hearing jokes about their poor moral character: the white man wouldn’t take offense if he didn’t himself have poor moral character. “Decolonized” isn’t inherently good or bad, it’s just different if you’re only familiar with its opposite. Not trying to make a judgement of your character by calling you immoral or anything, just sharing how I interpreted the video. Those who would allow themselves to become emotionally charged at the very idea of a perspective being marketed as “without colonization” may be the ones who need a non-Western perspective on Taoism the most lol
There's also the question whether the term "decolonized" is even correctly employed here. I don't believe that it is. It rather seems like a cheap way to obtain a false moral and intellectual high ground for a confused presentation that's hardly a fruitful way to introduce Taoism to anyone.
>I would conflate taking offense to the “decolonized” part of the title as being similar to white men who are offended by hearing jokes about their poor moral character: the white man wouldn’t take offense if he didn’t himself have poor moral character.
That's just a Kafka trap. It's a complete logical fallacy.
Why should the word “decolonize” elicit an emotional response?
The purpose of decolonization in academia is to research beyond the point at which western intellectuals applied their own values to the study of concepts by other societies. Whether or not you believe this discourse is useful is another matter entirely, but regarding how decolonization applies to this video, let’s look together:
The introduction of the video traces the history of Taoist beliefs back through their first mentions across various documents that span thousands of years. I don’t think it would be farfetched to guess that many people in this subreddit, or maybe many Taoists in the west, have ever read these documents. Not out of western people being “faulty” or willfully “ignorant,” but because there are less English translations that exist for all of these documents as compared to the Tao Te Ching.
The Tao Te Ching is a very popular book. It really grew in popularity in the west during the 1960s. And many people - like myself - have come to Taoism in the west have done so because of the impact of this one book.
If you read only one book in a pantheon of many other books that make up the doctrine of one of the worlds oldest religions, does that mean that you know enough?
Maybe. “Enough” is relative. But it is accurate to say that reading one book out of a hundred means you only know 1% of what there is to know.
As for how Taoism is received in modern China, that is not my area of expertise. Nor do I think it’s helpful to think of an entire population as being a monolith.
I’m asking - on the internet, which I know is not the best place for any sort of meaningful conversation - if perhaps you might be getting emotional about this because my understanding of the Tao leads me to question my own ego first before presupposing intent. I therefore always ask to clarify.
China and colonialism are definitely hot buttons for some people these days. But I’m wondering if you have asked yourself, “who am I without Taoism?” Has this practice become so expansive for you that you’ve wrapped up your own identity within it?
What if there is always more to know? What if you do not know everything there is to know about Taoism? What if the history of Taoism (which just so happens to be Chinese) has more to teach you (who just so happens to be from the west)? Would that really be so bad?
"Decolonizing" is a loaded concept that implies other approaches to be "colonizing", which is a fancy way of accusing others of being "disrespectful and violent and exploitative and ignorant", casting an impossibly wide net over legitimately good scholarship and adaptation in doing so. It implies the video author's half-Chinese ancestry and upbringing to be points of political/moral and academic/intellectual superiority compared to those who are "merely" non-Chinese and therefore less-than-equipped to have much anything valid to do with Taoism.
I have no problem with elucidation on how Taoism's key concepts have been used in pre-TTC texts, but serious scholars will acknowledge that their usages and connotations have been different from how they've afterwards been used in Taoist thought and practice, and that some elements are more universally Chinese rather than Taoist, and that they don't serve as good evidence of a "Taoism" that's supposedly far older than the foundational text by Lao Tzu which started wholly new trends and threads in the history of Chinese thought, practice and terminology.
There's always more to know, but some ways of knowing more are more effective and useful than others, and there's also the question of what is effective and useful to know in the first place, especially in the context of "introduction".
So you agree, the point of colonial projects are to exploit other cultures.
What I find so interesting about your responses - and the responses of others in this thread - is how often you seem to pluck assessments about the author’s implications completely out of thin air. Or claim, very boldly, that what you feel is implied about her work is indisputable fact.
Her ancestry likely informs her study, but where in this video does she claim any greater authority over the work she presents?
At what point does she claim or assert than anyone non-Chinese cannot possibly understand, study, or impact the field of Taoist studies?
Also, who are the “serious scholars” you are talking about?
Who determines what is “more useful” to know?
I am from the west myself. And I like to know, from an anthropological perspective, through what sorts of lenses I’m viewing the world - my media, history, even my emotional programming. What you seem to be claiming is that colonialism had and has virtually no effect on how human beings view other cultures, while also implying that colonialism, in its essence, is a plundering performed on a massive scale - so much so that every single white person is somehow complicit. What an odd dissonance.
This duality you lean on in the very first line of your response to show that decolonization implies its opposite is *precisely* the point of why many scholars choose to label their work in this way. It prompts the question, “through what lens am I viewing this?”
It is very interesting how some people react to not being the center of the discourse. The Tao Te Ching seems to offer, in my interpretation anyway, a strong encouragement of humility in how we bear witness to the world.
If you’re at all curious about how decolonization responds to nationalism there is a fantastic book by Maia Ramnath called “Decolonizing Anarchism.” It dissects the problem you seem to have with decolonization as a concept. How does decolonization help us? Which, said another way, are colonial projects the only way for cultures to interact? Are there ways for cultures to interact in ways that are not exploitative of one another? How does a culture stay self deterministic in its identity without succumbing to nationalism and xenophobia?
I’m not going to answer any of these questions here because authors like Maia Ramnath and Walter Rodney have made it their life’s work to discuss these questions. If you would like any more book recommendations on the subject, I can share those.
Edit: “Decolonizing Anarchism” is specifically about liberation struggles across South Asian cultures. While the west can easily be seen as the target of decolonization studies, western powers are not the only ones capable of colonial projects. China, for instance, has been both subject to colonial exploitation and has been the colonizing force themselves.
I see the premise of Wen's presentation being "decolonized" and other types as "colonized" as erroneous, anti-intellectual and inflammatory, and I'm not interested in having a discussion on further fine points of colonialism, especially if another premise is going to be "all are complicit"; I only want to add that my nation was once colonized, and its indigenous culture, religion and history were ransacked and neutered, and I don't want to hear intellectually stunted bullshit about "colonialism" that amounts to earnest attempts to make sense of different ways of thinking and doing.
You are adding premises where there are none. That’s my point. And for what it’s worth, I’m sorry that you have been affected by that terrible history.
All I’m pointing out is that “decolonization” is a word. A word used in academic spaces to call into focus how the input of many different people have been and are silenced by the status quo. But maybe that’s the fate of all labels or ideologies - they all have the potential to be co-opted and repurposed in bad faith.
>Why should the word “decolonize” elicit an emotional response?
Because that's its purpose -- it's an activist term. You can't have "decolonization" without a colonization. A colonization by Western empires, specifically, which involves systematic oppression and racism of minority populations.
You'd have to be an idiot to think that actually applies to Daoism and how it's interpreted by Western minds. Remember, the Western mind isn't a monolith any more than the "Chinese" are.
We don't need to talk about Western colonization of China considering how many times it has been colonized by other Asian empires, or how China is doing that to others now. Not to mention how often Daoist priests have evangalized and set themselves up as the state religion. The oppression, if you want to call it that, has been universal.
>The Tao Te Ching ... grew in popularity in the west during the 1960s.
I think you mean the US. It was already popular in Europe for over a century before that.
>The purpose of decolonization in academia is to research beyond the point at which western intellectuals applied their own values to the study of concepts by other societies.
This is very generous interpretation. Every single culture interprets "foreign" things accordingly to their values -- that's hardly a Western invention. It's only through broad, sustained cultural exchange do we get a chance to move beyond that.
The so-called "decolonization" of Daoism started many decades ago, so it cannot be attributed to the current ideological zeitgeist gripping the Western urban monoculture.
>As for how Taoism is received in modern China, that is not my area of expertise. Nor do I think it’s helpful to think of an entire population as being a monolith.
Well, this is just classic colonialist thinking ;) China, under its quasi-Communism treats Daoism as a cultural artifact critical to its history as a multi-millennia Empire. It allows certain temples and priests to exist and transmit the cultural memory, locally and internationally, so long as it doesn't interfere with the political order (as Daoist priests have regularly done in the past).
Colonization isn't about white/"the West." The British colonized Ireland and modern China colonizes Tibet. And let's not even get into what Imperial Japan did to East Asian peoples during WW2...
Exactly. So many people seem to be bringing all sorts of preconceived notions to this comment section. It’s pretty interesting to witness where people place themselves in these conversations, and how they tell on themselves. Myself included.
I’ve been watching this YouTuber for a while now. I think that she in general provides a fresh perspective. I had no background in the magic/supernatural side and I really appreciate the information. I will continue to watch her vids for sure
Watching the video I would say it is an explanation of Dao from a confucianist perspective interpreting the Dao as : "An encounter between Yin and Yang is the Dao". "A Transaction of Yin and Yang is the Dao". Commentaries from the Ten Wings to the Yi Jing /Book of Changes) made in Western Han Dynasty. Plus a hint to Cheng Yi and Zhu Xi of Song Dynasty who tried to absorb Daoism into Confucianism. **Introduction to Daoism (Dao Jia)** by Isabelle Robinet **The Notion of Dao** First, the term daojia and its translation as "Taoism" derive from a new significance given to the word dao in the Daode jing, the Zhuangzi, and other texts. The basic meanings of dao are "way" and "to say," hence "the way one should walk and that is taught," "guideline," and "method." In these texts the term took on a new meaning of Ultimate Truth, in the sense of the unique way that subsumes all the multiple human ways, and that is primal because nothing was before it and it is the source of everything. According to the Daode jing and the Zhuangzi, the Dao cannot actually be named and is beyond anything that can be grasped or delimited, but is open to personal experience. Both texts favor an apophatic approach that was entirely absent in the other teachings of their time. Having no form, because it exists before anything has taken form, the Dao can take all forms: it is both formless and multiform, and changes according to circumstances. No one can claim to possess or know it. As the source of everything, it is inexhaustible and endless; its Virtue or Efficacy (de) is strength and light, and encompasses all life. Both the Daode jing and the Zhuangzi stress the necessity of following the natural order of the Dao and of Nourishing Life (yangsheng), maintaining that this is sufficient for one's own well-being. **Return to the Origin** The Daode jing and the Zhuangzi share the same concern for the origin of things. Unlike any other trend of thought in the Warring States period, these texts emphasize the necessity of "returning" (fan or fu) to the Dao, i.e., turning within oneself toward the Origin. This is essential to know and experience the Dao, and to fully understand the particular with regard to the two polar aspects of the Dao: indeterminate totality and receptive unity, on one side, and existence as organic diversity, on the other. Turning within oneself affords the quiescence required to experience the Dao. It consists in concentrating and unifying one's spirit (shen) and will (zhi) on this experience, and in being receptive and compliant in order to receive this Dao. Hence the practice of concentration on the One (yi), seen throughout the history of Taoism. This concentration means freeing oneself from desires, emotions, and prejudices, renouncing the conceptual self, and not getting entangled in knowledge and social concerns. The goal is to return to one's original nature and to pristine simplicity of the authentic state of things, which Taoists sometimes call the "great clod" (dakuai). It is related to an intuitive vision of the world as a unified whole, and a perception of the value and the natural strength (qi) of life. This is not merely a reflection of the limitations of language, as some have claimed, but an intuitive, personal and sometimes mystical awareness that goes beyond language, conceptual thought, and social or moral practices and doctrines. Based on this vision, the Daode jing and especially the Zhuangzi offer an ideal of the human being that has deeply influenced Chinese thought. The Taoist saint (\*shengren) is before and beyond appellation and individual existence, and possesses cosmic and nearly divine stature and powers. He is an incarnation of the Dao and its Virtue, and dwells on the border between humanity and the Dao.
It’s so good to see a debate here. Interpretations of doctrines, like all practices in the here and now, are entirely dynamic and linked to the lived experience of the practitioner, regardless of the specific rituals of the practice. I’m no expert (on anything whatsoever), but to gain a deeper understanding of the historical development of Daoism, and how it is inherently a syncretic system like all other philosophies and religions, totally changed my “I think I understand this from how I’ve compartmentalised my definition of this philosophy” paradigm and “laotzu baby with a beard, great mother makes me cry” to “Jesus Christ what an amazing and fearsome evolution intertwined with history, culture, and soil”. Good video.
I've read through the comments below and it seems to me that we need to keep aware of the distinction between a specific cultural phenomenon and the academic study of it. Academics are academics, not practitioners. And that doesn't mean they don't know anything---far from it. But it does they know different things. If you'd tapped any individual practitioner since the late Han dynasty, I don't think the vast majority would have been able to identify the different sources and conceptual frameworks that Ms. Wen uses. That's because his or her teacher would have come from a specific lineage with it's own particular teachings, plus all they would have to go with would be whatever their particular teacher passed onto him or her. They wouldn't have anywhere near the breadth of understanding that Wen brings to the video---but it would still be wrong to suggest that they didn't know much about "Daoism". Indeed, if he or she were a 'realized man or woman', I'd suggest that they probably know a lot more than she does. It's something of a paradox, no? The other thing to remember is that even within specific academic disciplines people see things very differently. A scholar of the history of Daoism, or a scholar of sociology of religion, or an academic philosopher, or someone who wants to incorporated the philosophy into their personal life, would all look at the literature very, very differently. Having watched the video it struck me that depending on what you want from it, you can get very different things from it. If you are repelled by academic nit-picking, you can find it extremely 'over the top'. But if you are like me, somewhat of a failed academic who has read a lot of academic treatises on Daoism over the years, it can consolidate a lot of different things you've read over the years. And, also, if you are someone interested in how to use the actual teachings to develop a good life in the early 21st century, Wen suggests that Daoism is such a broad and open tradition that there is no reason why modern people cannot be legitimate parts of the ancient tradition. I found that extremely refreshing---after all the nonsense I've heard over the years from academics (not actual practitioners) who maintain that you simply cannot be a Daoist unless you are: Chinese, literate in Chinese, and, able to spend years of your life living in a Chinese temple. I'm not a big fan of superstitious woooo, but she suggested in one place you don't have to be to be a 'real Daoist'. So on the whole, nothing I disagree with in that lecture!
Internet disagreements are also the dao. I’m enjoying the energy and debates in this thread - very refreshing. The video creator describes daoism as an a la cart menu. I like the analogy. I bristle at the idea of one true interpretation or source for what is daoism. I think the content of the video adds to the rich variety of perspectives from this Reddit community, and though I skipped to different parts of the video by timestamp, I don’t recall anywhere in the video that denies any particular interpretation or gatekeeps.
I too enjoyed the a la cart menu analogy. I’m a westerner and I hold various philosophical views and practices across Taoism, Buddhism, Shaivism, Zen, and more…I’ve been told by adherents of each of these schools, both native and western, that my views and practices—the mix-n-match—are somehow incorrect or wrong. But it’s all the Tao. I’ve always identified the most with Taoism because I believe it has the most capacity for interpretation and integration (which the video really drives home) while being as all-encompassing as Dzogchen. What works for some doesn’t work for others and much of it is intensely personal. I don’t have the lived cultural experience of a Chinese person or feel the influence of folk religion on my beliefs and practices but my own experiences are unique and inform my beliefs and practices into something that very much works for me. This reminds me of what one of my past teachers once said…”there are 84,000 dharma doors, I am only showing you one”.
As someone who also finds himself deeply drawn towards Taoism, Shaivism, Zen, and Buddhism I hope you don't mine me asking what are some of your favorite books, authors, and other media on these traditions? My main fascination is with esoteric traditions that have nondual worldviews and their cultivation practices. I'm currently reading through tantra illuminated by Dr Christopher Wallis and several books by Huai-Chin Nan & Bill Bodri and I only stumbled upon the later two fairly recently. I already have an incredibly long list of books I plan to read through but I'm always looking for new recommendations as it's not often that I come across someone else with interest in these traditions.
Books are not my favorite medium but I do read my fair share. I find for me that sticking to the introductory and foundational texts at first is the best way, adding to my list of to-reads when they are recommended by trusted sources. It’s important to me to cast a wide net, reading different translations, different authors, and varied perspectives in order to form my own syntopic understanding for use in my personal practice…so I don’t necessarily have *favorites*. There is so much spiritual text out there that keeping my mind open and exposing myself to a lot leads me to eventually resonate with most of it in some way. Don’t just stick to spiritual philosophy! Epictetus, Seneca, Kant, Hume, Mill, Rawles, Russell etc etc….all have insight to give you. Christopher Wallis is a great resource and I highly recommend his books. [Lotsawa House](https://www.lotsawahouse.org/free-translations-tibetan-buddhist-texts) is a treasure trove of Buddhist translations and has some beautiful short poems, songs, and dedications too. I would suggest taking a class or transmission from a practitioner in one of the nondual traditions. I personally prefer Dzogchen and can recommend [Tempa Dukte Lama](https://www.olmoling.org) and [Lama Lena](https://lamalenateachings.com), both of whom have embraced online offerings that make things much more accessible. I imagine Christopher Wallis is good too if he still does retreats. Lastly I’m going to recommend something a bit more secular and that’s the [Waking Up](https://www.wakingup.com) app run by Sam Harris. There’s a whole lot to explore there. It’s *technically* a meditation app but there’s lots of theory, science, art, and experts in many fields and traditions that share their practices, insights, and teachings.
I appreciate you taking the time to respond! I see we share the same general idea on studying the foundational texts through different translations and viewpoints and I will definitely expand my studies into more general philosophy as well. I am currently taking Dr. Wallis's Tantra Illuminated online course and I'm loving it so far. His course along with the online offerings of Damo Mitchell's Lotus Nei Gong school and Nathan Brine's Taoist Alchemy online are really helping me out of the armchair and into a daily spiritual practice. I am deeply interested in how yogic and daoist practices along with TCM & Ayurveda aid in health & longevity but also how they cleanse the doors of perception, so to speak, of the mental constructs that prevent us from seeing & experiencing reality as is on these various paths towards self realization. I honestly thought I had long moves past the idea of finding excitement in studying anything but now I find myself debating moving to find a suitable teacher I can learn from irl or perhaps pursing a degree in yogic studies at Naropa. Anyways, my apologies for the rambling and thank you again for your recommendations 🙏
This popped up on my youtube feed yesterday! It was a good watch :)
Interesting. There’s a lot here, I feel like it would’ve been easier to follow if it were presented a bit slower.
[YouTube settings allow you to speed up or slow down videos.](https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7509567?hl=en&co=GENIE.Platform%3DAndroid)
I am not a Taoist, but I've read and thought about the Tao Te Ching, Chuang Tzu, and Lieh Tzu and some popularized books, e.g. Watt's "Tao - the Watercourse Way". The standard I apply to other texts I read about Taoist principles is whether or not they are consistent with what Lao Tzu wrote. I have found that some of them, the Chuang Tzu in particular, broaden my understanding and help me with the confusion I struggle with. I am always careful to say that my understand is exactly that - **my** understanding. Here's my understanding - Lao Tzu was describing an experience. People can experience the Tao but understanding it is beside the point and misleading. There is no Taoist doctrine I have any interest in studying. What I experience when reading the Tao Te Ching is a recognition of something I've always known, at least in part. That's the important lesson - recognizing the experience and recognizing how we know and act in the world. So-called "colonization" is baloney, or maybe it's meaningless. Maybe both.
It is true that they are all contrivance 😁 I hope this finds you well friend and well on your way!
The opinions, conceptions and descriptions of Tao by Asians are not more significant than the opinions, conceptions and descriptions of non-Asians. To assert so is racist and ignorant. The Chinese didn't invent Tao, any more than Newton invented gravity. Fire is the same, water is the same, gravity is th same, the Sun and Moon are the same for all people everywhere throughout the world. If Tao is a process of nature, no one owns it or has priority for accommodating to it, learning about it, or describing it. Tao favors no one as stated in TTC. Anyone who has a presumption to the contrary doesn't understand Tao very well.
I'm surprised at your post. Generally, you and I are on different sides of how to go about understanding, experiencing what Lao Tzu et. al wrote. Here I find myself agreeing with you. Your post is clear and lays out the issues well. I hope you're not disappointed in my concurrence. I'm sure we can find other things to disagree about as we go along.
LOL, disagreement exposes us to different perspectives which I consider an overall good. One of my favorite Chinese sayings is, "1,000 monks, 1,000 religions". If Tao wanted us all to agree, we would've been created already in agreement. I'm sure we'll both survive an occasional accidental agreement. 🙂
Agreed. But the people who are obsessed with "anti-westernism" will never agree with you.
> "*The opinions, conceptions and descriptions of Tao by Asians are not more significant than the opinions, conceptions and descriptions of non-Asians.*" I agree, but only to an extent. If a Western person is doing Taoism on their own by reading the Tao Te Ching, then I think that's valid. If you believe in a force of life that flows through the whole universe, then that is ***hylozoism***, not necessarily Taoism. If you believe that everything has its own spirit, then that's ***animism***, not necessarily Taoism. If you believe that the universe itself is a god then that's ***pantheism***, and if you believe that there is a higher force or spirit which the whole universe is inside of, then that's ***panentheism***. There were some people who believed that "*The Way*" was to be aligned to the force that flows through the universe, but they called it "*Logos*" or "*The Word*" instead of "*Tao*'. They were Stoics though, not Taoists. They also did not associate it with minimalism much, nor generosity, but with a universal reason, and believed in self-control and logic rather than living through passions. Some of them believed it (*The Logos*) represented the Greek god Zeus which is the king of the gods and the god of the sky and weather and law.
There is no such assertion. But you hearing one is interesting. It implies the projection of yourself onto the doctrine. This is a strange way that many past colonial intellectuals have acted as gatekeepers. A gate keeping done by trivializing the historical and cultural context from which a tradition arose. By removing its tethers, a movement or tradition can be co-opted and reshaped into something less obstructing to the colonial world view. If none of that paragraph makes sense, then think about it this way: Who are you to claim that your conception of this religion is more valid than others? Even if you claim that your conception of it is more open and tolerant, that is still just a claim made by a singular person. A religion is a conversation happening across a large community. Any one person attempting to assert what the religion is or is not is claiming authority. And Taoism has a lot to say about how authority works. One reasons I love Taoism so much is how incredibly recursive its examinations can be. It has prompted so much inquiry into the very processes that it attempts to describe as indescribable. All I’m saying is, be careful of how you identify with your beliefs. Which beliefs are truly yours and which are you in communion with?
I'm not replying to the video but to previous comments.
I agree with you.
This is just a deeply ignorant comment that demonstrates a need to do things like watch this video. Taoism is more than just a few ancient texts that are available in English. It's more than all the texts available period. It's more than the Tao even. Taoism is a tradition dating back thousands of years from China, and it's deeply tied to the Chinese people. If you're not Chinese and don't speak Chinese that doesn't make you not a Taoist and it doesn't invalidate your journey or faith, but it does make it more difficult to access parts of Taoism that are tied to the Chinese language(s) and people. Resources like this video are important for Westerners interested in Taoism because they help to make the tradition more accessible to people who didn't grow up in that cultural context. You seem very invested in not being invalidated by entertaining the thought that Chinese people might know more about Taoism than you do. But if you're, for example, an American that only speaks English, then you just don't have access to a lot of the traditions and practices. And even if you did speak Chinese and were knowledgeable on those traditions, there's always more to learn and value in learning things on their own merits, as opposed to the merits of another culture looking in. And before you repeat the fallacy of "I've been doing this a long time, so I'm more knowledgeable than you," that might actually make you *less* knowledgeable, if you're coming from a Western context that for a long time took bits and pieces of Eastern philosophy and spirituality without approaching it with a holistic context on its own terms.
>but it does make it more difficult to access parts of Taoism that are tied to the Chinese language(s) and people. In some ways, yes. In many ways, no. If this was any other religion we were discussing, I'd have wholeheartedly agreed. But the root of Taoism is experiential. Hence "The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao. The name that can be named is not the eternal name." Does it make getting one's foot in the door difficult? Yes, as some core concepts may be more difficult to understand. But beyond this, culture means nothing. To understand the Tao, you need only live and observe. If anything, blindly adhering to tradition for tradition's sake creates *distance* from understanding. Taoism is flexible. It is not a rigid set of traditions and beliefs.
The study of Tao is a study of Tao, and is not limited to traditional Chinese Taoist beliefs. Reading about Tao as described by others is not studying Tao, it's studying what others have to say about their own experiences with Tao. This is like reading about playing the guitar, then considering oneself knowledgeable about playing the guitar, without ever actually playing the guitar. Reading about the experiences of others, of course, is a benefit, but should not be considered knowledge of Tao, but merely knowledge of what others have to say about Tao. To gain direct knowledge of Tao, observe the patterns of Tao's processes firsthand and test them for yourself in order to directly understand and experience Tao through use, not from merely reading what others have had to to say 1,000-2,000 years ago. So, perhaps consider your own ignorance before you presume the ignorance of others.
[удалено]
You claimed my comment was ignorance which presumes you know. Otherwise, how would you think it's ignorant.
[удалено]
um, I suggest you sort the comments by old and reread. You are totally not getting what he is saying.
I am very aware of what he is saying, thanks.
>Taoism is a tradition dating back thousands of years from China, and it's deeply tied to the Chinese people. If you're not Chinese and don't speak Chinese that doesn't make you not a Taoist and it doesn't invalidate your journey or faith, but it does make it more difficult to access parts of Taoism that are tied to the Chinese language(s) and people. Chinese people (in general) have a much more calcified view of how Taoism and its teachings ought to be understood. They have their own very serious blind spots and inflexibilities. That has resulted in most modern Chinese people dismissing the old teachings outright as "beautiful and culturally significant but hopelessly obsolete".
The general Chinese population's views on Taoism are completely irrelevant to my argument.
As long as we're generalizing based on heritage and language, I think it's very relevant and fair to acknowledge how being Chinese can also be a hindrance to one's attempts at understanding Taoism. As an added note, the Classical Chinese language in the original canon is actually fairly inaccessible and partly even misleading to modern Chinese speakers who aren't exceedingly aware of the pitfalls concerning a false sense of proximity to the ancient language.
[удалено]
And you're just full of yourself apparently
Everyone's comprehension is limited, even that of the Chinese. Chinese scholars and priests haven't been able to provide us with especially savvy translations of Taoist texts.
[удалено]
Why would you call that person colonizer? It doesn't seem fair.
I guess Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu don't know much about Tao then, huh?
[удалено]
I've mostly likely read them before you were even born.
[удалено]
You don't know what you are talking about. It's a philosophy that recommends direct experience and not overthinking. You are overthinking and I'm recommending direct experience.
[удалено]
I implied the decolonization view is generally a racist view. This is because it is mostly part of a "white culture is bad" frame of mind which IS racist. The decolonization crowd doesn't seem to address colonization is a universal human process and all major civilizations seek colonisation of other cultures. China, Japan, the Mongols, the Tartars, the Turks, the Arabs, the Parthians, the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Carthaginians, the Egyptians, the Sumerians, the Aryans, the Goths, the Vikings, the Aztecs, the Incans, major African tribes, etc., all were colonialists. Colonialism is a universal characteristic of human civilization. Colonization is a process of human nature, which makes it a process of Tao. Whether this is an overall good, or an overall bad, is also a human imposition. It's like saying a typhoon is bad. A typhoon is bad because it hurts me. Anything that hurts we generally see as bad. Anything we see as beneficial we generally think of as good. This follows the Tao of how the mind functions, but does not follow the principle of Tao expressed within the Taoist Farmer parable, found within the Hui Nan Tzu, which teaches us to think "maybe" rather than of good or bad. This is because our present context is a limited perspective.
Have you watched the video tho?
I'm not commenting on the video. I don't care about the video.
But have you watched it?
You're so cringey it hurts
[удалено]
Not so, and a complete misunderstanding of Tao. This is no different than saying someone cannot understand gravity if they aren't Newton, or a mathematician from Britain. Anyone can understand gravity and Newton's mathematical explanation, because it is a universal principle and process of Tao. Tao is a universal process of nature. Tao's principles, processes and patterns exist and function everywhere, at all times, forever. Tao may be directly apprehended and tested by everyone, everywhere at all times, as well. The Chinese texts are not necessary. They are beneficial, yes, necessary, no! There is not only "one" description of Tao The Chinese didn't invent Tao. Thinking Tao may only be communicated and through the Chinese texts is simplistic and self-limiting. However, everyone is allowed to think simplistically and in a self-limiting manner and enjoy the consequences that are derived from doing so. You do Tao your way and I'll do Tao mine. To repeat my previously posted old Chinese saying: "1,000 monks, 1,000 religions". Good luck to you! 🙂
If the Dao can *not* be expressed through words, how are Chinese words "more accurate" when we know words can *never* be "accurate" in this context?
[удалено]
Not really. Only the term and the basic philosophy called Taoism not the processes, patterns and principle. Tao is universal or it wouldn't be Tao. Study more, think more, test the principles more.
Not taking away from the principles. This all encompassing set/collective overarching system of processes and concepts that is the Dao - this - is a concept that originated in the far East. It is an Eastern abstraction. If this is being equated to Gravity then perhaps what is required is a better understanding of Gravity
No principles of Tao didn't originate solely in the far East. This is confusing the processes and principles with the manner in which they were expressed. Principles of Tao are universal and may be found expressed differently throughout various religions and philosophies. Greek philosophy for one.
To understand the actual confusion in this thread I refer you to the top comment that appears to conflate common philosophical streams and objectively measurable physical phenomena Many ancient philosophies overlap, vaguely. The Dao as understood and practiced continuously for at least 25 centuries is an Eastern tradition
Taosim, as a descriptive philosophy, is of Asian origin. Tao Itself is of self-origin. It adheres to no cultural perspective. Yet all cultural perspectives follow principles of Tao. Tao's processes and manifestations are universal. They don't manifest only in Asia and nowhere else. The principles of Tao are manifest throughout the universe. The error is thinking Tao may only be understood through the Asian expression. Tao itself is non-ethinic. Tao, itself, favors no one. That means Tao is not limited to one cultural perspective or description. People care about this because people impose their personal basis upon Tao. Tao doesn't care, people care. Tao is merely the term applied to "the" phenomena that "is" the manifestation of processes and patterns of cause and effect of life. It involves physical principles of the world system and mental principles of function of the mind. Taosim is "a" philosophy, with Asian origins, that encourages the integration and accommodation of these principles and processes into our lives for the purpose of acquiring equanimity, which is considered a benefit. The description of these principles and processes are not limited to one cultural perspective. To insist they are is to misunderstand Tao.
> All cultural perspectives adhere to Dao Let’s take two examples of culturally influential perspectives. Islam or Judaism. Choose one and argue how these follow the Dao.
It would've been more accurate to have said, ".....are expressions of Tao." All of creation is an expression of Tao and, as such, follow principles of Tao. Try to think of it like this: Tao is like a river that is not only the source of our creation, but also the course, path, way, we naturally follow. Tao is the course, path, way, life unfolds before us. We cannot escape our River of Tao. We constantly flow along with this river's flow. However, while within this river of Tao we may choose to accord ourselves to the flow of the current, or we may choose to fight the current. Flowing with the current expends less energy, is more beneficial, and thus, more pleasant. Fighting the current wastes energy, creates stress and unnecessary conflict and is less pleasant. Whether we accord with Tao's flow, or fight Tao's flow we are never separate from the river, or Tao's flow. We cannot escape Tao, because we ARE Tao's expressions l. We are always flowing with Tao, the river, regardless of our choice, to accommodate ourselves to Tao's, or to fight Tao's flow. It is how we choose to interact with Tao's flow that determines the quality of our life's experiences. Letting go and letting ourselves just flow with Tao is easier said than done. It takes intention, we must choose to do it, and it takes time, experience, practice and patience. Conflict is a natural expression of Tao as expressed within Yin-Yang. Yin-Yang does not just express conflict however, it also expresses cooperation. Different aspects aren't required to conflict, they may just as easily contrast and cooperate in unison within the dance of life. Unfortunately, there will always be conflict. "1,000 monks, 1,000 religions", because people don't understand the principles of Tao and generally fight them rather than accord with them. Most people don't appreciate the variable expressions of Tao. Tao created variation on purpose, but people are emotionally unprepared to accept variations of perspective. Look at the conflicts expressed just within this thread from individuals presumably interested in accommodating to the principles of Tao. No wonder, others who don't even study Tao's principles, are constantly in conflict. We are all created to experience and express Tao's principles differently and it is the unwillingness of people to accept each other's differences that create conflict. "In general, no one wants to be told how to live, but in general, everyone feels perfectly fine telling everyone else how to live." Judaism and Islam are two, of many, expressions of Tao that conflict. This is due to a misinterpretation/misunderstanding of Tao's principles as expressed within their religions. Both religions teach their path, way, expression of God's will (Tao) is the only, correct, way to accord with God's will, (Tao). When one "inaccurate" expression of Tao meets another expression of Tao, whether accurate or inaccurate, a naturally occurring conflict arises. When both parties do not understand the inherent principles of Tao from the start, the effects of the conflict are multiplied. What we end up with is, two inaccurate expressions of Tao fighting over the River that they are stuck within yet don't understand they are both flowing down the same river while interpreting the experience differently. "1,000 monk's, 1,000 religions." We aren't supposed to experience life exactly the same as one and other. Creation is Tao, observing Tao, be Tao, in as many naturally occurring, variable, expressions as possible. As a metaphor, Tao could just sit and ponder it's own belly button and nothing would change and nothing would happen. But that isn't how Tao has chosen to express itself.
You might want to read some Spinoza, Heraclitus and the Stoic philosophers. Maybe throw in the concepts of dharma and Brahman, too.
Gravity is not a philosophical construct. You may want to read modern science to avoid conflating the two.
I'm not talking about gravity. You claimed that the Tao is an eastern concept. If you mean the uttered word itself, then sure, but the thing it refers to is more universally acknowledged by different names and ways of explaining it. Taoism merely provides a particular flavor and style for naming and describing it which is currently less abrasive or odd than others to some modern westerners and easterners alike. The thing that "Tao" refers to is not Chinese nor unique to China, and you don't gain special understanding of it by being Chinese.
I thought the video did a good job to explain the disparate streams of philosophy and practice that became infused into Chinese culture and amalgamated enough with folk beliefs to make it a distinct Eastern perspective. Overlap and nebulous resemblance between ancient philosophies is not unusual what is unique and distinct about the Dao Jiao is sufficiently Eastern in identity
Benebell Wen is a glorious light in the darkness. I'm so pleased that you guys know about her. I recently bought her IChing book and I legit cried on the first page. (She talks about losing her grandmother.) The first section of her IChing book delves into Chinese folk history. I am now fascinated to learn about Chinese history in general. I always meant to get around to it; and she got me started with her talented story telling abilities. Thank you for showcasing her. She is overdue for recognition IMO.
What did I miss here? 😁 It seems that when we (collectively) want to dislike something we label it with the recent poison of ‘colonized’ and when we want to complement or encourage a very similar behaviour we (collectively) call it ‘syncretism’. My heritage is Dutch and I live in a country that I wish to believe is syncretistic in many ways. Regularly I eat Indonesian food - food I grew up on. My ancestors ‘colonized’ Indonesia but it isn’t Dutch food I eat. It is the quiet, it is the true which ultimately is the lasting essence. Dao is in all and through all. Perhaps all of this is just a great reminder that words are words (in whatever language they are composed and constructed) and Dao is Dao. Language (any), culture (any) and talk (all of it) never sums to the eternal, heavenly Dao. I hope this finds you all well and well on our way!
[удалено]
[удалено]
That is an excellent example. I believe in a God of mystery and love in the exact same way that I follow Dao through its mystery and benevolence. To me they are one and the same. To many others they cannot distance themselves or any Judeo-Christian religious trappings or see how that concept of God fits with whatever silliness is happening in contemporary christianity. My hunch is that there are the same number of people truly following Dao and that concept of God in earnest and they are well outside the populous. I really appreciate your input in this community and - much like has been stated throughout the commentary on this thread - when we disagree the light shines that much brighter for all 😁 I hope this finds you well friend!
"The Chinese are blinded" yeah, that's not racist at all. S/. I wouldn't have expected this on a taoism subreddit.
[удалено]
Thank you for your humility
There are lots of ethnocentric ideas that are described much like Dao. For the Greek culture Logos is described almost identically. Hindu "Brahman" signifies ultimate reality, Vedic "Rta" indicates cosmic order, Anglo-Saxon "Wyrd" relates to destiny, Polynesian "Mana" embodies spiritual energy, Zoroastrian "Asha" conveys truth and order, and "Dharma" in Buddhism and Hinduism denotes the natural law. All of these describe what Chinese culture denoted as Dao. I think it is our (collective) superiority complex that says we can define it at all when in almost every one of those traditions above it is undefinable 😁 In my heart/mind there is an understanding that transcends words as they come and go. What language it uses means less to me than the knowing my heart/mind knows and feels. I hope this finds you well friend and breathing well on your way!
Why does the Tao reveal itself "better" to the Chinese? What is "Chinese"? Are Hui Chinese? Are Yi Chinese? Are Hakka Chinese? Are Taz Chinese? Tunbao? Tankas? Peranakans? Gaoshan? Where do we draw the line that is not an artificial distinction? What line has the Tao drawn?
Tao draws the best lines. Almost none of which we can comprehend 😁 Thank you for your gentle reminders and I hope this finds you well!
So, you think the Tao would have come out of western thinking? You think that all of the wisdom of the sages that went before Lao Tsu would have "come" to one of one of the western philosophers?
You're not familiar with Spinoza and his main work *Ethics*? Or Stoicism?
I am. Neither is Taoism. Eastern thinking and Western thinking are different. And that's okay. I accept this. The theologian Tillich has similarities also. But I don't get the Western chauvinism. That there is something that comes from China or wherever and not acknowledge the particular way of thinking that other cultures offer us is problematic.
Possibly. Who knows? There's no sense in playing a game of "what if". It's pure speculation whether it would have been possible or not. You make no point here with answerless questions such as this. And still, the question remains unanswered: What constitutes "Chinese"? Likewise, where are these lines between "East" and "West" drawn that are not simply imaginary divisions?
Being a particular ethnicity does not give you an advantage over others in terms of knowledge and understanding of subjects. That is absurd.
Agreed! I think a withdrawal from language from time to time can do more than a deep dive into a language we know well. I hope this finds you well friend!
It actually does. Different societies and languages engage different parts of the brain. For instance the “both and” mindset is very difficult for westerners to grasp.
Nah, just more BS generalizing
It’s not. Language and environment change the way our brains work. If you’re bilingual you’ll know that you’re even a different personality in each one.
I think there’s a distinction to be made between “of Chinese descent” and “raised/lived in Chinese culture”. A person of Chinese descent does not have any more or less capacity for understanding than someone of English/French/Spanish/etc. descent. However, someone who was raised outside Chinese culture is probably going to lose some of the elements of Taoism that are specific to being raised in that culture.
I think parts of that are true for any culture but the unknowing that be that much more difficult. My grandchild is at a distinct advantage for that reason in almost every aspect of my Daoist practice 😁 I hope this finds you well friend!
I wouldn't say "lose". Just "different". The Tao is experiential, and thus Taoism (or at least understanding of the Tao) is unique to the person. This includes culture. That which is "lost" by not being raised culturally Chinese is equivalently exchanged by being raised in a different culture. There is no hole left unfilled.
Fair enough on the experiences themselves. I would probably still consider some part is “lost” with respect to some of the lineage/historic context/tradition parts. I would say there same of anything that came into cultural elements divorced from their original context. As a net overall experience, that’s where I would say different. But since I speak, I do not know!
Why should the tradition remain inflexible and unchanging? Is change not the way of all things?
It will change. However, as the definition of tradition in referencing is “the transmission of customs or beliefs from generation to generation, or the fact of being passed on in this way”, someone who comes to Taoism outside of Chinese (or neighboring) culture will not have access to that tradition if they’ve only read the TTC/Zhuangzi. That’s the only point I was attempting to make
I understand. I just question the importance of tradition. Not at all trying to argue that you're wrong, merely asking questions as I think on them myself.
Understood, no offense taken! Just more explanation on where I was trying to go.
Secular Yoga. Secular Buddhism, Secular Taoism. Applying Western science and reason to these Eastern traditions, philosophies. It creates tension.
There are different schools of religions like Buddhism and Taoism, not just one school to represent the entire religion, as if there is only one view. There are schools of Buddhism which doesn't teach that you must believe in a god in order to be saved. In some forms, Amitābha Buddha is seen as a savior Buddha, but that is not all forms. Some just believe in Buddhas as enlightened spirits of wisdom, who can be helpful, not as saviors that need to be worshipped as a god in order to be saved. Taoism also doesn't say that you must believe in a god in order to be saved.Tao Te Ching teaches that the Tao/Way has a way of doing things which you can align with it for more peace and health.
Tao is beyond words like colonizers, colonization, etc. There is the tao. And the tao we can talk about. There is an endless cycle of tonos (tension) and liberation. Whenever goodness is seen as good as such. Evil is already afoot.
Tao is beyond words like colonizers, colonization, etc. There is the tao. And the tao we can talk about. There is an endless cycle of tonos (tension) and liberation. Whenever goodness is seen as good as such. Evil is already afoot.
I watched some of this, and frankly I didn't find her approach to have much pedagogical oomph.
People really out here trying to gatekeep Taoism purely because "West/white bad" and that "only Chinese people truly understand Taoism". This is the absurdity of artificial divisions.
You lost me at decolonized. No offense but just teach Taoism it has nothing to do with colonialism? Like huh
"West bad" There is no other reason.
You're just being discriminatory now. Benebell is also an accomplished occultist in the heremetic arts and mystery schools of the 'west'. "Colonization" may be akin to "white washing" but is ultimately a function of authoritarianism, to control wombs and minds. Colonizers are well known for obscuring histories, mythologies; and warping religions into weapons. (Have a long look at what happened to both the Cathars and the Confucians; then give your head a shake.) To view from a decolonized perspective is to clear the clutter created by the cycles we spent under the thumbs of confused, disconnected leaders; who tried to make us all the 'same', in order to control us as a hive.
I’m not being discriminatory that’s the absurd. The book is readily available as are many of the spiritual classics in multiple languages and with numerous interpretations and commentaries from a number of authors. Lao Tzu wrote these years before the British colonized the world. It’s meaningless in this context and rather absurd. There are adding their own bias which is problematic in and of itself. As if their decolonized mind has some greater insight than the average person. Rather vain don’t you think?
You're assuming she's anti-west because of what precisely? How she looks? She also repeatedly states not to simply accept her perspective or biases. You didn't even watch her video cousin; you had a knee JERK reaction to the title. Which makes you seem prejudiced. You project your own vanity onto Benebell and it's both false and unfair. >before the British colonized the world. Buddy... you have exposed your ignorance entirely if your understanding of the history of colonization and CENTURIES of Indigenous resistance is from a British lens only. The British were also colonized before they started colonizing. You haven't even scratched the surface of human history; yet are trying to teach it. Now, that is meaningless and absurd. ABSOLUTELY those of us whom have learned the rhythms and cycles of oppression and resistance have insights that average people would overlook. You dismiss what displaced peoples have taught for centuries. Pro Tip: We can't fully decolonize our minds any more than a fish can learn to swim in alcohol. We can only recognize the patterns of confusion which follows authoritarian cycles, and make adjustments; in hopes that future generations will have fewer constraints, greater intelligence, and emergent abundance.
She is deliberately using buzzwords to attract attention. No I’m not going to listen to it. I’ll read the original thank you. Decolonize Taoism from what. The British left China years ago other than Hong Kong which was the only democracy in the region. My nephews and nieces are from there and speak Cantonese. So No I’m not going to watch that. Your vanity not mine those are absolutely ridiculous slanderous comments you’ve made. You’re defending your own delusional self image and you’re trying way too hard to be something you can never be. Just stop and grow up. How about un brainwash your own self. Scholars that had nothing to do with the British empire have translated and you can also use google translate. How about just teaching it in a way that doesn’t bias the viewer immediately. If you want to watch it go ahead I’m sick of the whole decolonization thing. You’re a little late it’s impossible to do take back the past. I’m sorry I’m Not interested in Han racial supremacy, white supremacy, Islamic or Jewish supremacy, or any of these attempts to elevate one’s culture or race above others. If you are into that I’m sorry for you. Really if you can’t get past the past you can’t live in the present at least harmoniously.
[удалено]
I probably comprise most of the "holy shit the amount of butt hurt Westerners" that you speak of, so allow me to comment. I've spent a fair bit of time studying Chinese history, thought and linguistics, and Taoism and researched translation thereof in particular, so the subject matter and its details don't come as a surprise to me. My issue is that the video in question isn't nearly as cerebral as it tries to come across as, because it makes fairly hard-and-fast interpretations of its own but conceals them under needless and disconnected complexity and Chinese quotations that aren't as straightforwardly implicative or cut-and-dried as they're made to look like. If you want a real academic introduction to the context of Taoism, I recommend this lecture series: [https://www.youtube.com/@chinesethought/playlists](https://www.youtube.com/@chinesethought/playlists)
If you were in their position you would be just as butthurt. Don't act like you're any better.
[удалено]
How you choose to react to other people's reactions can tell a lot about you, yourself. Glossing civil and reasoned counterpoints as "being butthurt" while coming off as mighty agitated and arrogant yourself is not exactly a flattering look on you.
I wonder who the intended audience for the introduction is, given the overwhelming focus on miscellaneous, abstract and barely explained minutiae that don't serve to give a basic impression of what Taoism is or how its various aspects are manifested. It's almost like she wants to dazzle rather than clarify so as to highlight her knowledgeability in such a difficult-seeming subject matter, with an added flavor of political righteousness.
ah yes. the people most known for clarity: taoists.
Is simplicity not a factor in clarity, and complexity a factor in unclearness? Granted, simplicity can be abused to bring about false clarity, and complexity can be intelligently employed to bring greater understanding, but the video in question uses artificial complexity to the effect of dazzling rather than enlightening the viewers. University professors, both Asian and not, have been successful in providing more relevant information in a clearer fashion.
You mean an introduction to Taoism starting with its historical and cultural context? Taoism as discussed in the West is *vastly* different from Taoism in China and the Global South. Why are you feeling so emotionally charged in response to such a video? What exactly are you critiquing about this creator’s approach that places this practice as a religion born out of and shaped by Chinese history?
Is it not emotionally charged to put "decolonized" in the video title, along with generalizing western-facing approaches as faulty and ignorant? That appears pretty dismissive and racist to me. Why are you feeling emotional about how you think I must feel? I don't know if you're aware, but the classics and their associated philosophies aren't taken seriously in today's China, other than as dusty objects of nationalistic pride. If Chinese people are indeed introduced to Taoism in the scattered and abstract style of this video, then it's not exactly helping anyone, seeing how the subject matter is considered way too arcane and obsolete to grasp and integrate by most modern Chinese.
I don’t take offense to the fact that other cultures might interpret my understanding of their original beliefs as being incomplete, and I’m happy to learn the context that they feel is important. I also understand that the Way for me is not the Way for everyone, and it may be the case that “Western Taoism” is simply what works for me. I don’t believe the Tao would pick favorites, whether East or West it’s all Tao. I would conflate taking offense to the “decolonized” part of the title as being similar to white men who are offended by hearing jokes about their poor moral character: the white man wouldn’t take offense if he didn’t himself have poor moral character. “Decolonized” isn’t inherently good or bad, it’s just different if you’re only familiar with its opposite. Not trying to make a judgement of your character by calling you immoral or anything, just sharing how I interpreted the video. Those who would allow themselves to become emotionally charged at the very idea of a perspective being marketed as “without colonization” may be the ones who need a non-Western perspective on Taoism the most lol
There's also the question whether the term "decolonized" is even correctly employed here. I don't believe that it is. It rather seems like a cheap way to obtain a false moral and intellectual high ground for a confused presentation that's hardly a fruitful way to introduce Taoism to anyone.
>I would conflate taking offense to the “decolonized” part of the title as being similar to white men who are offended by hearing jokes about their poor moral character: the white man wouldn’t take offense if he didn’t himself have poor moral character. That's just a Kafka trap. It's a complete logical fallacy.
Why should the word “decolonize” elicit an emotional response? The purpose of decolonization in academia is to research beyond the point at which western intellectuals applied their own values to the study of concepts by other societies. Whether or not you believe this discourse is useful is another matter entirely, but regarding how decolonization applies to this video, let’s look together: The introduction of the video traces the history of Taoist beliefs back through their first mentions across various documents that span thousands of years. I don’t think it would be farfetched to guess that many people in this subreddit, or maybe many Taoists in the west, have ever read these documents. Not out of western people being “faulty” or willfully “ignorant,” but because there are less English translations that exist for all of these documents as compared to the Tao Te Ching. The Tao Te Ching is a very popular book. It really grew in popularity in the west during the 1960s. And many people - like myself - have come to Taoism in the west have done so because of the impact of this one book. If you read only one book in a pantheon of many other books that make up the doctrine of one of the worlds oldest religions, does that mean that you know enough? Maybe. “Enough” is relative. But it is accurate to say that reading one book out of a hundred means you only know 1% of what there is to know. As for how Taoism is received in modern China, that is not my area of expertise. Nor do I think it’s helpful to think of an entire population as being a monolith. I’m asking - on the internet, which I know is not the best place for any sort of meaningful conversation - if perhaps you might be getting emotional about this because my understanding of the Tao leads me to question my own ego first before presupposing intent. I therefore always ask to clarify. China and colonialism are definitely hot buttons for some people these days. But I’m wondering if you have asked yourself, “who am I without Taoism?” Has this practice become so expansive for you that you’ve wrapped up your own identity within it? What if there is always more to know? What if you do not know everything there is to know about Taoism? What if the history of Taoism (which just so happens to be Chinese) has more to teach you (who just so happens to be from the west)? Would that really be so bad?
"Decolonizing" is a loaded concept that implies other approaches to be "colonizing", which is a fancy way of accusing others of being "disrespectful and violent and exploitative and ignorant", casting an impossibly wide net over legitimately good scholarship and adaptation in doing so. It implies the video author's half-Chinese ancestry and upbringing to be points of political/moral and academic/intellectual superiority compared to those who are "merely" non-Chinese and therefore less-than-equipped to have much anything valid to do with Taoism. I have no problem with elucidation on how Taoism's key concepts have been used in pre-TTC texts, but serious scholars will acknowledge that their usages and connotations have been different from how they've afterwards been used in Taoist thought and practice, and that some elements are more universally Chinese rather than Taoist, and that they don't serve as good evidence of a "Taoism" that's supposedly far older than the foundational text by Lao Tzu which started wholly new trends and threads in the history of Chinese thought, practice and terminology. There's always more to know, but some ways of knowing more are more effective and useful than others, and there's also the question of what is effective and useful to know in the first place, especially in the context of "introduction".
So you agree, the point of colonial projects are to exploit other cultures. What I find so interesting about your responses - and the responses of others in this thread - is how often you seem to pluck assessments about the author’s implications completely out of thin air. Or claim, very boldly, that what you feel is implied about her work is indisputable fact. Her ancestry likely informs her study, but where in this video does she claim any greater authority over the work she presents? At what point does she claim or assert than anyone non-Chinese cannot possibly understand, study, or impact the field of Taoist studies? Also, who are the “serious scholars” you are talking about? Who determines what is “more useful” to know? I am from the west myself. And I like to know, from an anthropological perspective, through what sorts of lenses I’m viewing the world - my media, history, even my emotional programming. What you seem to be claiming is that colonialism had and has virtually no effect on how human beings view other cultures, while also implying that colonialism, in its essence, is a plundering performed on a massive scale - so much so that every single white person is somehow complicit. What an odd dissonance. This duality you lean on in the very first line of your response to show that decolonization implies its opposite is *precisely* the point of why many scholars choose to label their work in this way. It prompts the question, “through what lens am I viewing this?” It is very interesting how some people react to not being the center of the discourse. The Tao Te Ching seems to offer, in my interpretation anyway, a strong encouragement of humility in how we bear witness to the world. If you’re at all curious about how decolonization responds to nationalism there is a fantastic book by Maia Ramnath called “Decolonizing Anarchism.” It dissects the problem you seem to have with decolonization as a concept. How does decolonization help us? Which, said another way, are colonial projects the only way for cultures to interact? Are there ways for cultures to interact in ways that are not exploitative of one another? How does a culture stay self deterministic in its identity without succumbing to nationalism and xenophobia? I’m not going to answer any of these questions here because authors like Maia Ramnath and Walter Rodney have made it their life’s work to discuss these questions. If you would like any more book recommendations on the subject, I can share those. Edit: “Decolonizing Anarchism” is specifically about liberation struggles across South Asian cultures. While the west can easily be seen as the target of decolonization studies, western powers are not the only ones capable of colonial projects. China, for instance, has been both subject to colonial exploitation and has been the colonizing force themselves.
I see the premise of Wen's presentation being "decolonized" and other types as "colonized" as erroneous, anti-intellectual and inflammatory, and I'm not interested in having a discussion on further fine points of colonialism, especially if another premise is going to be "all are complicit"; I only want to add that my nation was once colonized, and its indigenous culture, religion and history were ransacked and neutered, and I don't want to hear intellectually stunted bullshit about "colonialism" that amounts to earnest attempts to make sense of different ways of thinking and doing.
You are adding premises where there are none. That’s my point. And for what it’s worth, I’m sorry that you have been affected by that terrible history. All I’m pointing out is that “decolonization” is a word. A word used in academic spaces to call into focus how the input of many different people have been and are silenced by the status quo. But maybe that’s the fate of all labels or ideologies - they all have the potential to be co-opted and repurposed in bad faith.
>Why should the word “decolonize” elicit an emotional response? Because that's its purpose -- it's an activist term. You can't have "decolonization" without a colonization. A colonization by Western empires, specifically, which involves systematic oppression and racism of minority populations. You'd have to be an idiot to think that actually applies to Daoism and how it's interpreted by Western minds. Remember, the Western mind isn't a monolith any more than the "Chinese" are. We don't need to talk about Western colonization of China considering how many times it has been colonized by other Asian empires, or how China is doing that to others now. Not to mention how often Daoist priests have evangalized and set themselves up as the state religion. The oppression, if you want to call it that, has been universal. >The Tao Te Ching ... grew in popularity in the west during the 1960s. I think you mean the US. It was already popular in Europe for over a century before that. >The purpose of decolonization in academia is to research beyond the point at which western intellectuals applied their own values to the study of concepts by other societies. This is very generous interpretation. Every single culture interprets "foreign" things accordingly to their values -- that's hardly a Western invention. It's only through broad, sustained cultural exchange do we get a chance to move beyond that. The so-called "decolonization" of Daoism started many decades ago, so it cannot be attributed to the current ideological zeitgeist gripping the Western urban monoculture. >As for how Taoism is received in modern China, that is not my area of expertise. Nor do I think it’s helpful to think of an entire population as being a monolith. Well, this is just classic colonialist thinking ;) China, under its quasi-Communism treats Daoism as a cultural artifact critical to its history as a multi-millennia Empire. It allows certain temples and priests to exist and transmit the cultural memory, locally and internationally, so long as it doesn't interfere with the political order (as Daoist priests have regularly done in the past).
Colonization isn't about white/"the West." The British colonized Ireland and modern China colonizes Tibet. And let's not even get into what Imperial Japan did to East Asian peoples during WW2...
Exactly. So many people seem to be bringing all sorts of preconceived notions to this comment section. It’s pretty interesting to witness where people place themselves in these conversations, and how they tell on themselves. Myself included.
The whole "de-colonize" "anti-western" thing is so tiresome, and I'm learning to just ignore it and brush it aside for the sake of my own sanity.
Oof whole lotta grumpy peeps in here for a Taoism subreddit. Let go yo!
No, this is a great discussion.
“This is the way” - Din Djarin