Taoism and death

[Anonymous No.17589344]

Which other philosophy can, without supernatural bullshit in any form, absolutely obliterate the fear of death and any existential crises as smootly and effectively as Philosophical Taoism does it?

[Anonymous No.17589355]

Wasn't it obsessed with finding immortality elixir?

[Anonymous No.17589396]

>>17589355
It's religious taoism, with divination, gods and afterlife. Just Chinese folk religion in fancy clothes.
The original strictly philosophical Taoism of Laozi and Zhuangzi is a whole different story

[Anonymous No.17589404]

>>17589344
Zen

[Anonymous No.17589419]

>>17589404
This. The Manifestation Only teaching of Buddhism as well, their ideas are about the same. Seeing everything as formation of the universal energy. Birth and death are just changes, waves we ride, but ultimately everything is everything. There is nothing to fear.

[Anonymous No.17589451]

>>17589419
Buddhism still believes in soul, immortal consciousness and supernatural things.
Without the idea of immortal consciousness it'd fall apart in a moment

[Anonymous No.17589464]

>>17589451
And taoism?

[Anonymous No.17589482]

>>17589464
Philosophical Taoism doesn't need any supernatural beliefs. No soul, soul individual consciousness at all

[Anonymous No.17589498]

>>17589451
lmao

[Anonymous No.17589519]

>*demolishes all forms of dogma in your path*

[Anonymous No.17589547]

>>17589519
>Western """philosophy"""
>Discarded

[Anonymous No.17589558]

>>17589451
You have to differentiate between the philosophy/technique and the religion. If you strip it of the layers that were added later what remains is a system to confront the absence of meaning. Pleasure/Pain is the same thing/it's all temporary/detach yourself from these illusions/ here's how you do it.

[Anonymous No.17589581]

>>17589547
cringe

[Anonymous No.17589620]

>>17589581
Subject-first, wide-branched time and motion system, strict word order languages of Europe aren't just suitable for any serious philosophy, with maybe a small exception for Ancient Greek. I'm sorry I don't make the rules

[Anonymous No.17589626]

>>17589355
Ignore dumbasses like >>17589396. The broad point of Taoist alchemy was to achieve a higher state of being. Everything from Feng Shui to Tai Chi is ultimately in service of this goal. The "elixir of immortality" is intended to cause fundamental change in one's being, resulting in that higher state. It's no different than the end-goal of Yoga in Hinduism being a state wherein one can subsist solely by breathing. "Immortality" in this case is completely incorrect, as you aren't really "alive", you're completely beyond life and death.

"Philosophical vs religious" Taoism is a Western understanding to try and make it easier to convert Chinks to Low-Church Protestantism. It has no meaning in Asia, where Taoism is a supremely practical religion.

[Anonymous No.17589649]

>>17589344
>as smootly and effectively as Philosophical Taoism does it?
How so?

[Anonymous No.17589666]

>>17589620
As opposed to Mandarin which is... even more strict in word order... and rigidly SVO... Hmm...

[Anonymous No.17589677]

>>17589666
>Equating Classical Chinese with Mandarin

[Anonymous No.17589727]

>>17589677
Oh, you mean the language that was... just as analytical as modern Mandarin... huh...

If you're just doing INFLECTION GOOD ISOLATION BAD then sure, we can say that Old Chinese is a good language for philosophy, but that logic you might as well just learn PIE if you REALLY want to do philosophy, or at least settle for Lithuanian if you want to remain a pleb.

[Anonymous No.17589756]

>>17589626
How is it a Western understanding? I know Mandarin, there are literally two terms, 道家 VS 道教,with 教 as jiào 'to teach'. Compare with the philosophy in Confucianism 儒家,and 基督教 'Christianity'
Jiā 家 is an entirely different meaning

[Anonymous No.17589789]

>>17589727
Remeber we still don't even know how the words were pronounced in Classical Chinese. Hell we don't even know if it was a long word or a single syllable.
You are equating one of the most enigmatic languages in the history of humanity to modern Chinese

[Anonymous No.17589855]

Bump

[Anonymous No.17589919]

>>17589344
How does it do that?
I seem to lack the cultural milieu to get much out of the Taoism and Zen material I've read, but I'm open-minded.

[Anonymous No.17589924]

>>17589626
You're wrong about literally everything. If you are too retarded to see the difference between Zhuang Zhi's philosophy and later daoist cults you belong in a mental facility.
>muh western meme
giga cringe
Whatever you do do not listen to this retard.

[Anonymous No.17589979]

>>17589519
Came here to post this. But if you still need soteriology there are the different schools of Buddhism
>>17589451
Not even Yogacarins believe in an immortal consciousness and they usually get labelled "mind only" Buddhists by the others. You should try reading some actual texts instead of Wikipedia.

[Anonymous No.17589983]

>>17589924
This

[Anonymous No.17589998]

>>17589558
>what remains is a system to confront the absence of meaning.
So what does one read to learn this system without having to plow through all the opaque poetry that tends to define Taoist/Zen literature?

[Anonymous No.17590035]

>>17589979
Buddhist soteriology is fucking depressing

[Anonymous No.17590052]

>>17589979
>Not even Yogacarins believe in an immortal consciousness
Does any non-abrahamic religion?

[Anonymous No.17590159]

>>17589998
This is just Chinese and Japanese. Their writing system (one of the most beautiful things ever created if you ask me) can carry numerous tiny subtle meanings. That's how high-context cultures work, and if you try to translate it it unavoidably turns into "opaque poetry"

[Anonymous No.17590172]

People who deny the philosophy/religion distinction in taoism or think it os a western concept know nothing about China. The TTJ was a classic that countless nobles read and had taught to them as a strategic guide, without joining a taoist sect. Fucking Wang Bi wasn't a member of any of the taoist cults. The real reason we see such a sharp divide is that people who read the Zhuang Zhi and apply it to their life don't build large ecclesiastic structures that sirvive the centuries. Only cults that promise divine intercession in return for money can build such structures. The oldest sect we know of are the celestial masters who claimed to be in contact with heaven and thus had the right to overthrow the emperor. Tell me where you find that in Lao Zi or Zhuang Zhi.

[Anonymous No.17590291]

>>17590035
>tfw you can go to heaven but also DIE in heaven because what is born dies

[Anonymous No.17590321]

>>17590052
Some of the other Indian systems do, and I suppose there is the platonic and hermetic Nous but even in these cases usually it's not as if your consciousness is the immortal one. I can never remember all the particulars without looking it up, and in any case, given all the antinomies, take the Pyrrho pill and be done with it.

[Anonymous No.17590346]

>>17590321
>take the Pyrrho pill and be done with it.
I wanna larp and meditate and see cool weird shit though

[Anonymous No.17590367]

>>17590321
Thanks for yet another confirmation that Western """pholosophy""" is just sophistry and wordplay

[Anonymous No.17590368]

>>17590291
This only makes sense in the dharmist framework where rebirth exists anyway

[Anonymous No.17590380]

>>17589924
>i have never read anything on this subject
It shows. Start with Zhuangzi or Art of War (either works). Really ruminate on each part.

>>17590172
But literally everything in your post just supports this foreign imposition of philosophy vs religion (which is really just a Christian distinction to allow for Christians to read Greek Philosophy) as being just that: foreign. The Chinese do this shit precisely because they don't make this distinction (or rather, historically did not).

[Anonymous No.17590399]

>>17589344
Op where did you get the picture?

[Anonymous No.17590417]

>>17589626
doesn't understand that there is religious/mystical Taoism and Philosophical Taoism.

[Anonymous No.17590427]

>>17590346
Mix it with William James and some deity yoga

[Anonymous No.17590432]

>taoism thread
>inevitably descends into LARPing protties regurgitating Christ the Eternal Tao and neoplatonic schizo
Taoism is too based for /lit/.

[Anonymous No.17590438]

>>17590368
Most systems don't try to explain themselves in terms of other systems. Although given the history of Buddhism as a missionary religion there are historical examples of efforts to do, especially in China, Japan, etc.

[Anonymous No.17590442]

>>17589919
After contemplating Tao, you begin to understand the most basic principle of the universe, which cannot be described with words, as the very concept of 'word' is too complex for it. You naturally see how futile was your ego and anll 'existential' individualist worries cease.
Zhuangzi teaches you, along many other revelations, that the fact that we die and lose our consciousness isn't intrinsically bad, and our society just assigns this neutral fact a 'bad' label. You can easily view it as something postive if you want.
>>17589998
Learn to appreciate this style, develop your imagination. You will increase your literary taste for sure

[Anonymous No.17590444]

>>17590427
Did William James write any practical stuff or just theoretical reports on religious experiences?
>deity yoga
Isn't there a western equivalent?

[Anonymous No.17590467]

>>17589756
Let me see if I get it
>道家
Taoism home or Chinese Taoism, as in its native religion
>道教
Taoism teach or Philosophical Taoism

also
>基督教 as Christianity
it means the overseeing faith? Or if the over seer is God then it means the God faith, or One God faith?

[Anonymous No.17590505]

>>17590467
Home isn't the sole meaning of 家。 How do you say 'writer, book creator' in Mandarin? 作家。 Would you say it means 'To do home'?

[Anonymous No.17590543]

>>17590432
Neoplatonism and protestantism do not mix you absolute nonce. Chuffed to bits seeing you say that.

[Anonymous No.17590565]

>>17590432
Straightforward American mind can only operate with neoplatonism and play with its empty shells of words and concepts

[Anonymous No.17590619]

>>17590380
>>i have never read anything on this subject
>It shows
lol
>>17590380
>this foreign imposition of philosophy vs religion (which is really just a Christian distinction to allow for Christians to read Greek Philosophy)
Oh no you're actually retarded. Yes chinese do the same.
The Shangqing school didn't even recognize the ttj as canonical.
You're just plain wrong this isn't something that magically changes just because you want to egotrip about those ignorant western christians.
The Art of War isn't a taoist text and features non of the religious framework that appears in later taoist sect. For your own dignity's sake stop just desperately throwing words into the bowl to look educated.

[Anonymous No.17590623]

>>17590505
>家
of this place?

[Anonymous No.17590655]

>>17590444
>Did William James write any practical stuff
His philosophy is literally Pragmatism. Like that's what he calls it.
or just theoretical reports on religious experiences?
He has an inductive view of religious experience as something which seems to be possible across a variety of examples, but is skeptical of the organized religions themselves since they often have a hostile relationship with those who have mystic experiences. In other words the organized religions oppose themselves to people who have religious experiences and there is a disconnect between the competing belief systems and what people describe
>Isn't there a western equivalent?
Neoplatonic theurgy but we are more removed from that than from tantra

[Anonymous No.17590664]

>>17589789
I just want Linear A deciphered desu. Though, having ancient proto-chinese be reconstructed would be cool too. Stleast there are rhyme tables for some of it.

[Anonymous No.17590675]

>>17590380
>The Chinese do this shit precisely because they don't make this distinction (or rather, historically did not).
Does your schizophrenic mind just ignore everything that refutes your pretensions retardation?
Tell me which Taoist cult Wang Bi followed. Google Wang Bi for what it's worth. Tell me why the Lao Zi was a classoc among the Imperial Elite who never stepped outside the orthodoxy of the Imperial Cult. Tell me where the Zhuang Zhi which doesn't play a role in the religious practices of any of the taoist cults recommends to burn spells in order to communicate with the gods or advocates paying a religious tax to your local temple. Taoism is older in China than Buddhism which none of the sects are. You are entirely wrong about the entire history and timeline of China. I don't know what axe you have to grind with christians but it's wrong.

[Anonymous No.17590684]

>>17590655
>the organized religions oppose themselves to people who have religious experiences
Not all of them.

[Anonymous No.17590718]

>>17590655
Peirce > James

[Anonymous No.17590720]

>>17589756
>>17590467
lol at the orientalist etymology. buddhism is called both 佛家 and 佛教

家 here means sect or school or better yet lineage... the idea being like a family bloodline it is passed down from one to another
教 as well as teaching, can also mean lineage, as in something passed on or bestowed

[Anonymous No.17590722]

>>17590427
where do i start with yoga

[Anonymous No.17590752]

>>17590172
if the dao de jing was used for actual strategy, doesn't that just reinforce his point about pragmatism? i dont see how all of this stuff leads to this airy fairy fart huffing intellectualism when if we actually look at the chinky dudes writing all of this stuff they're neck deep in mysticism and divination and war and trying to find patterns in reality to advance their (or their patron's) political causes.

[Anonymous No.17590759]

>>17590675
Did you quote the wrong person? I don't see what this post has to do with mine.

[Anonymous No.17590777]

>>17590367
Western philosophy is based in dialogue and argumentation. It would be ridiculous to say all of it is sophistry though. Any sincere treatment of metaphysics isn’t sophistry.

[Anonymous No.17590791]

>>17590777
Furthermore, contemporary mainstream English philosophy is based in logic, so simply calling it “wordplay” is a stretch.

[Anonymous No.17590801]

>>17590752
Who's point about what? The ttj wasn't a divination guide or religious text. We have Wang Bi (the guy responsible for the preservation of the ttj)'s commentary and he doesn't lay out a theology or mystical vision of it. The primary texts don't develop such concepts. There's far more than a thousand years between the Lao Zi and any taoist religious cult and the cults didn't draw on the ttj or Zhuang Zhi for their religious rituals. We have their ritual texts and their claims of divine revelation preserved. This isn't a theory or something vague. The guy who denies the distinction between religious and philosophical daoism simply does not know either nor the scope of chinese history.

[Anonymous No.17590857]

>>17590777
Your Aristotlean logic IS sophistry

[Anonymous No.17590867]

>>17590801
Wang Bi writing commentaries on a fucking divination manual just supports my point, though. The fact that there is no dense theology or mystical visions is precisely the fact that I'm getting at. Trying to create some distinction between stinky Asian Catholicism with Gods and sacrifices and immortality elixirs and Feng Shui, and some kind of pure airy-fairy pure intellectualism that only exists for scholars to masturbate over just seems silly to me, because I can't find it anywhere in anything I've ever read on or about China. Are there texts like the Zhuangzi that that get at deep, abstract things? Of course. And those abstract things can then be ruminated on, and applied. But nowhere have I ever seen anything that exists solely to ferment in your gut and then be huffed after farting it out so you can wax poetic about how much of an intellectual you are for assenting this this series of propositions.

You can say "oh, well, this practice or this practice is just an import from Chinese Folk Religion or peepeepoopooism", and perhaps that's the case, but the very fact that it's cribbing practices from other schools of thought to help in better arranging your furniture to cultivate Qi or whatever is just yet another demonstration of the latent pragmatism at every level.

[Anonymous No.17590879]

>>17589344
Where we are, death is not.
Where death is, we are not.
Therefore death does not concern us.

[Anonymous No.17590908]

>>17590623
This white boy Mandarin is getting out of hand

[Anonymous No.17590922]

>>17590718
I haven't read Peirce. Is there much of a difference?
>>17590722
Start with the Indians

[Anonymous No.17590932]

>>17590867
>Trying to create some distinction between stinky Asian Catholicism with Gods and sacrifices and immortality elixirs and Feng Shui, and some kind of pure airy-fairy pure intellectualism that only exists for scholars to masturbate over just seems silly to me, because I can't find it anywhere in anything I've ever read on or about China.
Look I have no idea what kind of battle your fighting with christianity. I'm sorry that that priest touched you inapproriately or whatever but neither the TTJ nor the Zhuang Zhi espouse Feng Shui since you brought up that example.
Nobody said philosophical taoism is incompatible with religious taoism I pointed out that the much earlier philosophical underpimnings do neither espout nor depend on later incorporated religious cults and that chinese courtiers and sages have used only the philosophical taoism for over a millenia before western scholars arrived. The distinction between philosophical and religious taoism is everywhere. In the timeline, in the history, in the texts, in the claims of canonicity of texts for crying out loud.
I don't understand why this makes you so mad.

[Anonymous No.17590941]

What level of chinese do I need to learn to make a buck out of translating classical texts?
I'm a NEET anyway might put my time to good use.

[Anonymous No.17590949]

>>17590857
No, it isn’t. The Sophists didn’t like Aristotle.
The computer you’re using right now is based on logic. It isn’t sophistry.

[Anonymous No.17590958]

>>17590932
Are you ESL, or just so angry that you're making typos? If this is that upsetting, let me just end it with this: Give me some literature that will convince me that there is a firm distinction between some kind of early pure intellectualism abstracted from pragmatic utility and some kind of later corrupted stinky-Chinky-Catholicism that's all about worshiping Gods and demons (which was not done when the pure intellectualism was written). Do not give me divination manuals or ancient texts, give me something by some kind of academic or scholar, Western or Chinese.

[Anonymous No.17590966]

>>17590941
go for it, anon. it's very time consuming but fun if you're sufficiently autistic

[Anonymous No.17590979]

>>17589998
Not something you can read, but I recommend dhamma talks by Ajahn Brahm on YouTube. He gave one today, check it out

[Anonymous No.17591031]

>>17590958
>abstracted from pragmatic utility and some kind of later corrupted stinky-Chinky-Catholicism
I'm not insulting you I genuinely think you should speak with a professional about this issue you have woth christianity. All the best my friend.
>that's all about worshiping Gods and demons (which was not done when the pure intellectualism was written)
I didn't give you a divination ritual I said Wang Bi's commentary DID NOT interpret the TTJ as a divination manual or derived theological cult practices from it. Wang Bi was THE chinese scholar on the Lao Zi. As far as academia goes Rudolf Wagner has a three part series on Wang Bi which includes his Textus Receptus and his commentary.

[Anonymous No.17591054]

>>17591031
So, you don't have any literature to support this view of yours?

[Anonymous No.17591073]

>>17591031
>>17590932
is this bait? no one is stupid enough to do this, right? i feel like im having a stroke looking at this shit.

[Anonymous No.17591096]

>>17591031
Are you trolling? I told you, I don't want commentaries on a divination manual, I want you to cite your source on this bizarre divide in Taoism. Have you, or have you not read anything on this subject?

[Anonymous No.17591106]

>>17590922
>Start with the Indians
Come on give me an actual book

[Anonymous No.17591130]

>>17591073
>>17591096
>the dao de jing isnt a divination manual
yes, he's trolling, or just a really butthurt tradlarper.

[Anonymous No.17591141]

>>17591096
>I don't want commentaries on a divination manual
>I said Wang Bi's commentary DID NOT interpret the TTJ as a divination manual
I have told you my source. If you want a source on something other than Wang Bi I recommend Viktor Kalinke's three part series on the TTJ which gives you a broad overview over the different interpretations of the text in china. Kalinke also published a commentary on the Zhuang Zhi where he goes into detail about the reception of thid text.
Now let's put the shoe on the other foot and you provide me with scholarship on how any taoist religious cult is as old as philosophical taoism.

[Anonymous No.17591155]

>>17591096
Who even started this autistic trend of denying the divide in Taoism?

[Anonymous No.17591170]

The "stinky Asian catholicism" bit is from an argument against palifags in Buddhist threads, since some of them use hyperprotestant argumentation against Mahayana, complaining about its devotional and ornamental features which postdate the historical Buddha. In other words, their case against Mahayana amounts to calling it extra-scriptural and therefore false, since someone apparently made them masters of exegesis. It's worth noting as well that real Theravadins are not sola scriptura; Theravada is literally "way of the elders." So when they effectively complain that Mahayana is catholic without saying so, they are being referential to protestantized conditioning without saying so. I am not sure this really carries over to Taoism but you definitely see it in the Indian philosophy and religion threads where people assume the oldest material is the most correct even though they themselves are interpreting it just as much as anyone else has throughout history.

[Anonymous No.17591244]

the irony of effortposting in a taoism thread

[Eris Omniquery No.17591314]

>>17589344
Calculus-based process metaphysics: >>>/x/27683419
Rather than contradicting Taoism, you'll find that it clarifies its fundamental principles.

[Anonymous No.17591721]

I don't understand the purpose of the artificial distinction between philosophical Asian thing and Religious Asian thing. Do the people who have lived out this way of life for centuries make this distinction?

[Nemo !!GgBWHLRiayD No.17591812]

>>17589344
Taoism regards the elucidation of the pleromatic pattern of eternity, therefore, the answer to your question is: Christian philosophy.

[Anonymous No.17591864]

>>17590432
You and all other westerners will never be real Taoists.

[Anonymous No.17591948]

>>17591864
How sad is it to be you?

[Anonymous No.17591979]

>>17591721
>Do Mormons say their religion developed in the 19th century?
No. What a silly question. The distinction is quite easy. The Book of Mormon was written in the 19th century and the bible (which was written much earlier) doesn't mention the specific doctrines that make up Mormonism. It's still very much a christian sect but you don't have to be a Mormon if you agree with the bible. In fact many christians before and after the development of Mormonism were not Mormons.

[Anonymous No.17592477]

>>17591812
fuck off schizo

[Anonymous No.17593582]

>>17589344
Dying for a good cause makes death powerless.

[Anonymous No.17594164]

What are some books, though?