Talk:Taoism/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions about Taoism. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Taoism on superstition

Hello, can anyone here who has a "high Tao" enlighten me on something? Is there any connection between Taoism and superstition? For instance, although most Taoists followers (the commoners) practise many superstition that are similar to Chinese folk religions such as burning Hell Banknotes for afterlife and so on, do Taoism really actually "endorse" or specifically encourage/instruct this kind of superstitious practises?? I am a Taoists (junior) with the Siu sect (called SiuTao), and I was under the impression that Taoists must use one's common sense to his/her fullest extent. It is important to improve one's own logic and therefore his/her "Tao". So, for us, something like burning hell banknotes are useless because our common sense indicates that dead people or deities would have no use for money even if we send them one. We made our own website is www.siutao.com. We are in Indonesia. I am an Indonesian ethnic Chinese btw.

ALso, if there are also other sects of Tao that have slight deviation of practises/understanding, it would be interesting to note some of them. How about Taoists on Taiwan?? Heilme 09:52, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

There are probably as many different sects of Taoism as there are Taoists. Everyone sees Truth with different eyes, so what one person would call superstition makes perfect practical sense to another. Who can say? For me, Taoism as taught by Laozi and Zhuangzi is an eminently practical, concise, direct way to solve problems. Other people will prefer other systems. You have to investigate it for yourself, understand it for yourself if you want to get anywhere with it. A teacher is good, but a good teacher will only set you on the path, not walk it for you. Good luck! --Fire Star 21:09, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. You're right, different people will have different path that will suit them. It's just that sometimes we want and need to discuss each individual perception so we can help one another improve each other's "tao". Individual development is good, but since one tends to deviate if not guided properly, I think it's only right for those more experienced to set the less experienced back to the "right" path again. Therefore, I just would to question what other Taoists would think on these kinds of folk practices. Heilme 00:29, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Different practises, folk or not, can serve as disciplines to see through artifice. So, burning money can be seen as superstition or a way to feel closer to the ancestors who gave you your life, reinforcing your heart in the process. I've been lucky to have some powerful and caring teachers (all passed away now) and it helps my heart to pay them respect. Some people would see my placing incense in front their portraits as superstitious, I see it as a way to show my thanks to them for their gift to me, reciprocity. I agree that someone without an art, of whatever form, can go astray following their fancy (and most do), but that is their fate, and I can't let that stop me from getting to where I belong. Cheers, --Fire Star 05:11, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Taoism -Superstition & Reincarnation

Taosim has been taken as superstition for reason that one of the principle schools who did possess certain gifts-powers in the past, have been abused by fake practitioners who were con-artists. Two subjects I hope to incorporate as an improvement to the Taosim page are, that priests who did possess these special powers did exist in the past, secondly the perception of Taosim in connection with these Shannanigans ought to be separated, i.e. what they did and what the Critics think they did and thus concluded it was also Taoism.

A second subject I hope to introduce would be the Reincarnation teaching of Laozi, an integral and intrinsic part of Taoism, and would include the 11~13 reincarnation of Laozi himself. This is no theory and not a thesis. Any genuine tutorials with real Daoist Practitioners would reveal this aspect of the Founding Father. Again this subject has been shredded by scholars in the past to cast a doubt on the existence of Laozi himself, who was the last incarnate of the 13 lives.

I welcome any suggestion that could make the above even more acceptable to the readers of the page.

It will never be acceptable, I'm afraid, as it involves a point of view that goes against scholarship, and relies upon a set of religious beliefs. Wikipedia doesn't allow this sort of editing (see Wikipedia:neutral point of view and Wikipedia:No original research). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:57, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Mel Etitis is correct, we have to rely on academic research rather than the opinion of any given sect or teacher for content, unless it is an academic historical or contextual study of the sect in question. Many don't see an explicit belief in reincarnation until after the influence of Buddhism, and there is very little indisputed textual evidence for such before that time. --Fire Star 17:16, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Points noted regarding Laozi's incarnates and acceptability. But central to practitioners of Daoism to the folks 1000 or 2000 years ago was a hereafter, a very structured herafter, instrinsic to Daoism that was not in Laozi, Daodejing or Zhuangzi. Any descriptions here would be historical, rather than a empirical scientific check. In the same light what Firestar mentioned about scholastic research on Daoism is not conducive to putting what we now regard as superstition today, on historical records that can no longer be verified. Fivestar's assertion that Reincarnation cam after the intro of Buddhism into China is also tainted, without knowing what Daoists have to say on the same. Alex 23Feb06 GMT+8hr

I'm afraid that I don't completely follow everything that you say, but if you're saying that the new material would report on later religio-Taoist beliefs neutrally, and that it would be well-sourced and cited, then of course there'd be no problem adding it. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:33, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Could I have your consideration on the revised intro as follow:

Taoism also written as “Daoism” generally stands for:

(1) The philosophy and wisdom in the Dao De Jing and other teachings by Laozi 老子 , the founding father of Daoism 道祖.

(2) Practitioners in the past with special gifts and powers derived from the understanding of Taoism;

(3) The ancestral and deity worship as in the Chinese folk religion, and general adherence to the De attributed to the Dao de Jing consisting of eight core qualities namely filial piety 孝, sibling-kinship 悌, loyalty 忠, honesty 信, courtesy 禮, honour-integrity 義, modesty 廉 and humility 恥.

Taosim also collectively embodies two Chinese terms Daojiao (道教) and Daojia (道家). The character Tao 道 (or Dao, depending on the transliteration scheme one prefers) literally means "path" or "way", but in Chinese religion and philosophy refers to the Absolute, the First Cause or the First Mover. The compound Daojiao refers to "Daoism" as a "religion" and Daojia refers to the activity of scholars in their studies. It must be noted that this distinction is itself controversial and fraught with hermeneutic difficulty by scholars, the taxonomy commonly used preclude one from the other. An example would be the Cave Man metaphor used in Plato's Republic would deem this to be metaphysical analogy rather than religious in nature. In Taoism it would be both.

Taosim has spawned many offshoots over the 2500 years history, which include the Shinto faith in Japan. And some uncertainty exists today over the origin of Taosim, Laozi and the Daodejing, especially in view of some of the new scrolls unearthed in Mawangdui Changsha in 1973 which gave different date and text to Daodejing. These materials ought to be taken as what the Dead Sea Scrolls and the gnostic Nag Hammadi gospels are to Catholicism, is to Taoism.

Essential to the teachings of Taosim is a structured heaven and hell structure much more descriptive than that in Catholicism adjudicates in both realms for the deceased and living, and a set of guidelines on Causality and cyclical Reincarnation. Scholars who discredited similar concepts in other religions find the same equally unconvincing in Taoism however under the same definition, Taoism would be the most liberal of all religions. In brevity it preaches a way of life and a way for all humanity to better themselves, their families, their country and their dominion 修身齊家治國平天下, in that order, rather than an exclusion of all other beliefs. Teachings of the Taoism thus have interwoven with those of Confucius and with Buddhism.

I Ching 易經, Chinese alchemy 煉金術, Special Gifts and Powers 五行奇門遁甲術, Chinese astrology 星象學, , several branches of Chinese martial arts, Chinese traditional medicine or TCM, fengshui 風水學 and many schools of qigong 氣功 are some derivatives in Daoist's teachings in (a) and (b) above. Like some aspects of Christianity these Taoist derivative-wisdom have been discounted heavily in the last century as being unscientific. This would be an area best left as faith in a Religion and as Esoterism of Taoist teachings.

to start off Taoism is"...the name for..." when Daodejing specifically refers to naming and categorization of Tao is ironical. All comments welcomed. Alex 24Feb06

I think that this, generally, would be a much improved lead for the article. It needs some copyediting and I would suggest omitting the comparisons to Catholicism and the comment about it being discounted in the last century as being unscientific. Sunray 09:55, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

This is so fraught with factual errors that creating a point by point counter respose would be ridiculous. It's as if you've heard of the pieces, but forgot how they fit together.--Dustin Asby 07:17, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

A few observations on the subject of Chinese medicine. It is a state-licensed medical practice in the US. Some of its implements are FDA-regulated. It is widely practiced in China, Taiwan, Chinese diaspora countries, the EU, and former Soviet nations. There is a vast international body of scientific and clinical research that validates many of its claims and practices. The World Health Organization recognizes its clinical practicality and makes specific endorsements for real world applications. It might be premature to dismiss a field with so much science behind it as "unscientific."

Furthermore, the historical context and textual tradition of Chinese medicine, Taoist alchemical practices notwithstanding, has been predominantly a scholastic (Confucian) one. The lead for the article correctly states that Chinese medicine and Taoism are related, but the language could be construed as implying that Chinese medicine is a principally Taoist phenomenon, which is simply not the case. The earliest literature of Chinese medicine predates both Taoism and Confucianism, in any event.Jinggui (talk) 06:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Aside from considerable copy-editing, including bringing usage and transliterations into line with current usage in the article, I have some specific worries, including:

"wisdom" is both vague and PoV;
what ground is there for the claim that "Taoism" is used to refer to "practitioners in the past"?
the explanation of what "tao" means is much too simple, and shouldn't be presented as uncontroversial;
the claim about Shinto having its origins in Taoism is false; Shinto borrowed from Taoism, as it borrowed from other traditions;
what are the other "many offshoots"?
claims like "Taoism would be the most liberal of all religions" (even aside from the puzzling use of the conditional) should be avoided, as both PoV and impossible to justify;
the last paragraph is obscurely worded, but (as per Sunray) comparisons with Christianity are best avoided, especially in the summary.
to question the fact that "Taoism" is a name for various things is peculiar; whatever Lozi does or doesn't say about naming, the fact remains that "Taoism" is a name. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 12:21, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, to your queries:

(1)Wisdom: This is to be followed-up in subsequent texts;

I don't understand this, I'm afraid. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:33, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

The proposed texts are in the intro-lead, wisdom will be explained later in additional paragraphs.

(2)As mentioned earlier, these Practioners have been documented in the annals albeit they were not recognized by ivy-league scholars;

First, you miss the point; the word "Taoism" can't be used to refer to a group of peopl. Secondly, I'm not sure what the "Ivy league" reference has to do with it, but if scholars don't recognise them, then neither does Wikipedia (see Wikipedia:No original research).--Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:33, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Point noted.

(3)Every belief systems in Japan, including the UN-recognized Nicherin Shosu, originated from China, willing to discuss this separately if you have further doubts;

No, it's not a matter for discussion; your claim is controversial, to say the least, and we don't include that sort of claim. You might, if you can provide a reputable citation, say something like "so-and-so writes that..." --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:33, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

What belies this "controversy" may be a case of lack of scholarship on the Japanese Religious origins. Point(3) is as you may say an assertion, but Shinto was based in Taoism, I will find the appropriate citation.

(4)Taoism being liberal- this goes back to the definition of Religions and what some of the prominant schools preaches, including exclusivity;

Again, you miss the point; it's a claim that's both vague and impossible to justify. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:33, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Intended as an intro, I hope to get further when given a chance, in the subsequent texts.

While Alex's statement is very likely false, it still can be measured. Liberal has a meaning, albeit a political one, and one could systematically compare the values and practices of every religion to that meaning.--Dustin Asby 07:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

(5)Noted- Catholicism & Christianity thrown in to balance the general-superstitious-feel this page originally had, ie to show that similarly in other beliefs certain unexplanable and or parallel counter-arguments are prevalent.

People understand that religious beliefs are often faith base without a comparison, especially a vague one. Also, superstitious is a term with a very precise meaning in academics. A superstition is "a belief that is kept despite the self realised irrationality of it." Please be sure to use the term appropriately.--Dustin Asby 07:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

(6)Noted, the proposed change was meant to be subtle about Taosim being a anme or what it stands for.... Alex 25Feb06-0930

Well, it wasn't terribly subtle I'm afraid, and it was PoV.

It's very important, before making major changes to articles, to make sure that you've understood Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I've provided a number of good places to start at various places above. Wikipedia only includes material that can be cited as appearing in other reputable sources; it doesn't allow original research, however compelling the author thinks her arguments. This is a majot limitation on what can be added, and can be frustrating, but it's not negotiable. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:33, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I will see how I could rework some of the above. Alex 3Mar06

Recent major changes

I'm afraid that I've had to revert user:Alexchua's changes again. For some reason you're changing correct English grammar to incorrect, removing internal links (wikilinks), and adding material that's false to the best of my knowledge (e.g., "Taoism" isn't used to refer to Taoist practitioners in the past). You're also adding material that is not neutral. Please discuss these changes here if you want to defend them. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:55, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I noted the definitions of Taoism has worsened to include "b) ....the Zhengyi ("Orthodoxy") or Quanzhen ....." If Wikipedia is to strictly abide by its canons, it would be worthwhile to banish references to any particular schools claiming exclusivity to orthodoxy such as the two mentioned- whether they are prevalent in the USA or not. A salient fact relating to the general disunity wrt Taosim arises from various sectarian-infighting. Alex-12 July06

Rival schools?

"Originally belonging to rival philosophical schools, these motifs entered Taoism by way of Neo-Confucianism." Apparently I've gotten different information then the person who wrote this. As I understand when it both Taoism and Confucianism developed these pre-existing ideas were taken advantage of or included. The I-Ching for example far predates both of these schools and wasn't introduced into one from another.--Dustin Asby 07:02, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Reorder Content

I believe that this article could be improved by reordering so that the section "Beliefs" preceeds the sections on "History" and "Adherents".

Many people have worked hard on this article, and I am just a casual visitor. Hence, I will refrain from making the change myself. Just the same, sometimes an outsider (editor, proofreader) can make useful comments simply because he was not a part of the creation process. I hope that my suggestion merits consideration.

I turned to this article with only the most basic understanding of Taoism. (This, I think, is the level of readership we should be gearing to in our encyclapedia project). My initial interest was naturally to gain an operational definition of Taoism. Material on historical development and relationship with other systems are unquestionably worthwhile, but are of little use to a reader at a loss for context.

Thank you for your attention!

--Philopedia 21:34, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Geedanged Huge Picture

There is a geedanged huge picture in the middle of this page. EFF WHY EYE

three part yin/yang

There is also sometimes seen a three part yin/yang, in relation to Taoism as well as Buddhism, what does that signify? Chris 01:09, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

looks good

This article looks very good keep up the good work.--The Gnome King [ 00:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Quick question

This site http://ezinearticles com/?What-is-Human?---All-About-Heaven!&id=75572 claims that Taoism 'partitions Heaven into thirty-six sections because there are three-hundred and sixty degrees in a circle.' Not knowing much about Taoism in general I was wondering if this is an accurate and complete statement.Number36 01:35, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

User:CyberAnth/Religious views on masturbation#Taoism

For anyone who is interested, there is a draft of a new article, Religious views on masturbation, at User:CyberAnth/Religious views on masturbation. Please feel free to expand the draft, especially the section User:CyberAnth/Religious views on masturbation#Taoism! After it looks good on user space, it can be posted on to article space. CyberAnth 08:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

GA on hold

I think this is an excellent article in most regards, but there is one glaring issue: Lack of citations. I'm placing the nomination on hold for seven days to give time for citations to be added. See WP:CITE for instructions on how to do so. I'll be watching the page, so you can let me know either here or on my talk page when they're in place; if I don't hear from you, I'll check back in a week. Shimeru 02:33, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

GA-related discussion

Listed as "A-Class", wondering if the consensus is that it really belongs there. Badbilltucker 19:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I think you are right to question whether Taoism deserves its A-class status. I only looked at the article briefly, but noticed that there are no in-line references. Considering that A-class articles are higher on the scale than GAs, this is a red flag. Do you know how a case like this is normally dealt with? ike9898 22:51, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Generally, by changing the class, like this.Badbilltucker 14:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, they generally change the status to Failed good article above and take it off the list.

Added some footnotes, but I don't have access to many texts for a couple of weeks, and so me adding more is unlikely to happen in the near future.Zeus1234 23:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

The additions are a very good start. More are needed, but I commend you on the quick response. I realize that the holidays might interfere with efforts to cite the article, and I will extend the hold an additional week if necessary, since an effort is clearly being made. Thanks. Shimeru 02:09, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I've done pretty much all the footnoting I can by using the three books I currently have (Maspero, Schipper and Robinet). When I have access to a library again (the first week a January), I shall get the other books on the reference list and attempt to cross reference the rest of the information. There are two books that my library does not have (Chang and Ni), so I will likely not be able to reference any of the new age stuff. Hopefully someone else will be able to do that.Zeus1234 21:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

In light of the terrific work you've done over the past few days, I'm going to pass the article. I trust that you'll cite the other sources as soon as you can, further improving the article, and I think what you've already done makes it acceptable according to the GA criteria. Citations may still be a little sparse, but that will be remedied soon, and the article itself is well-written and comprehensive. I think it's well on the way to becoming a Featured Article. Once you have the extra citations in place, a Peer Review would make a good next step. The areas I would suggest looking into:

Some of the History subsections are a bit short, especially Three Kingdoms. Can more be said here?
Take a look at WP:MOS and try to ensure everything is in line with it. For example, try to avoid "scare quotes."
A copyedit aimed at removing redundant or unnecessary words might be helpful. The prose is good as is, but it might be possible to make it even better.

Congratulations again, and thanks to you and all of the page's editors for the hard work. Shimeru 23:36, 26 December 2006 (UTC)