What Are Some Subtle Ways That Taoism Differs From The Indian Philosophies Of Buddhism And Advaita Vedanta

[Joseph Maynor]

This is not a beginner's question where you can get the answer from Wikipedia.  This is a serious question.  I'm looking for some key differences that you can think of.  And then we'll discuss.  I find that Taoism is incredibly profound and should be more fully investigated in the West.

And I'll contribute too because I have a pretty intermediate grasp of Taoism.  I understand the Tao Te Ching very well.  Or at least I think I do.  When that book becomes clear to you, it is hard to mistake it.  With Buddhism, I'm at the intermediate stage, but I am stronger in Taoism than Buddhism, although I am learning very quickly.

And you can add some Advaita Vedanta theory in here too.  Or any other relevant theory.  Maybe you coined the theory yourself?  If so, add that.   Let's not get locked in the paradigm of looking back.  Tradition is what it is, but let's also innovate and see connections in a modern way so that we can make the connections current to us.  In the now.

Ok.  So, to recap, what we're doing here is trying to find parallels and comparisons between Taoism and the Indian Philosophies of Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta.

Consider:

Tao = the Absolute (Brahman)

Tao = Atman

Wu We = Flow

Te = indistinguishable from Tao

Te gives rise to Tao

Edited July 8, 2017 by Joseph Maynor

[Prabhaker]

@Joseph Maynor

Zen is a very rare flowering – it is one of the strangest things that has happened in the history of consciousness – it is the meeting of Buddha’s experience and Lao Tzu’s experience. Buddha, after all, was part of the Indian heritage: he spoke the language of philosophy; he is perfectly clear, you can understand him. In fact, he avoided all metaphysical questions; he was very simple, clear, logical. But his experience was not of the mind. He was trying to destroy your philosophy by providing you with a negative philosophy. Just as you can take out a thorn from your foot with another thorn, Buddha’s effort was to take out the philosophy from your mind with another philosophy. Once the first thorn has been taken out, both thorns can be thrown away and you will be beyond mind.

But when Buddha’s teachings reached China a tremendously beautiful thing happened: a crossbreeding happened. In China, Lao Tzu has given his experience of Tao in a totally non-philosophical way, in a very absurd way, in a very illogical way. But when the Buddhist meditators, Buddhist mystics, met the Taoist mystics they immediately could understand each other heart to heart, not mind to mind. They could feel the same vibe, they could see that the same inner world had opened, they could smell the same fragrance. And they came closer, and by their coming closer, by their meetings and merging with each other, something new started growing up; that is Zen. It has both the beauty of Buddha and the beauty of Lao Tzu; it is the child of both. Such a meeting has never happened before or since.

Zen is neither Taoist nor Buddhist. It is both and neither. Hence the traditional Buddhists reject Zen and the traditional Taoists also reject Zen. For the traditional Buddhist it is absurd, for the traditional Taoist it is too philosophical, but to those who are really interested in meditation, Zen is an experience. It is neither absurd nor philosophical because both are terms of the mind. It is something transcendental.

Osho, Walking in Zen, Sitting in Zen, Talk #16

[Prabhaker]

3 hours ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I have a pretty intermediate grasp of Taoism

Index of /download/osho-books/Tao

http://www.oshorajneesh.com/download/osho-books/Tao/

[Joseph Maynor]

Consider this:

Tao is the merging of yin and yang.  It is the harmony that emerges from this union and is deeply creative.  It is the absolute expression of love.  Tao guides thr wise moment by moment.  The foolish are lost and can't see clearly.  (Exerpted from the Tao Box by Priya Hemenway)

How do these ideas compare with Zen or Advaitan concepts?

Edited July 9, 2017 by Joseph Maynor

[poimandres]

To my knowledge, Buddhism doesn't mention much of a Yin/Yang principle. It's heavy non-dual philosophy, focus inward, the "now", etc. End suffering.

Taoism (it seems) seems dualism philosophy approach that seeks the unity of the poles. I haven't reach much other than the Tao Te Ching and the Dhammapada.

A subtle difference, I would think, that Taoism would attempt to define a "God" if you will, while Buddhism (specifically Zen) could care less. Of course the religion's approaches to other doctrines is probably going to be different and have their own framework. 

I'd be willing to bet if you asked a Zen master about defining God, he'd probably respond with a Koan.

Edited July 22, 2017 by poimandres