5 ms·

What would you recommend as an introduction to Daoism, even if academic? I am not an expert on the subject but IMO Taoism has a very similar phenomenon to Budd

What would you recommend as an introduction to Daoism, even if academic? I am not an expert on the subject but IMO Taoism has a very similar phenomenon to Buddhism (and indeed all religions or popular philosophies really) in that the “classical”, original, core teachings are pretty different from the organized later movements under the same name. So the context - philosophical, historical, sociological, spiritual - in which you approach the subject and whether you’re doing so on the basis of the original thing or its more organized movements might make it so people interested in it under different contexts both think the other is ignorant or incorrect. I haven’t read the Tao of Pooh myself but I want to point this out because I think it’s possible to understand Taoism (the classical philosophy) and concepts like Wu-wei without necessarily knowing anything about Neidan and or “Taoist Magic”

spandrew 3y ago
This is fine though. All of these things, including the original sources, are philosophies as product of the time they were written. Ie. It makes sense for them to change as the society around them changes. If one guy reads the Tao of Pooh and it helps him 'be' — that is the point. Laozi would likely agree: don't overthink it.
- coldtea 3y ago
  >If one guy reads the Tao of Pooh and it helps him 'be' — that is the point. Laozi would likely agree: don't overthink it. That's still a Western way to see it. For Laozi that wouldn't "be the point". The point of his teaching was not to help people "be" in any which way, but to be in a particular way, within a certain philosophy of the world and our duties in it.
  - p3rls 3y ago
    Laozi would see it as fulfillment of his final mission to the western gates. Let us remember, the old master wasn't even going to leave any writings for you at all until he was kidnapped during his final attempt to emigrate from the orient.
Tao3300 3y ago
Hoh hoh! Have you not heard that that dao which has a recommended introduction is not the true dao?
- lannisterstark 3y ago
  The 'no true libertarian' problem all over again lol
dorchadas 3y ago
Personally, if you're interested in the early 'philosophical' side (which I don't think can - or should - be disentangled from the 'religious' side; the separation of religion and philosophy is inherently a post-Enlightenment, Western phenomenon, and doesn't really apply outside that cultural situation), van Norden's chapters on the DDJ and the ZZ in his book I quoted from above are a good start. But there was a 'religious' tint to a lot of this, even very early on. If you're more open to how the three strands ('religious', 'philosophical' and 'literary') of Daoism have merged and mingled throughout history, I really like Ronnie Littlejohn's Daoism: An Introduction published by I.B. Taurus. It's essentially an introductory textbook, but does a good job at showing how these things have always been interacting (indeed, there's quite possibly Nedian references in the DDJ/ZZ/LZ!) and that trying to separate them really isn't possible (indeed, as said, it's an inherently modern, Western distinction between 'philosophy' and 'religion'), while looking at how they've changed over time.
- dorchadas 3y ago
  Oh I forgot to mention Coutinho's An Introduction to Daoist Philosophies, which looks at the three early Daoist texts -- the Laozi, the Zhuangzi, and the Liezi. I haven't read it yet, but have heard decent things. He specifically works from a comparative perspective as well, which makes it more interesting.
duopixel 3y ago
The Tao Te Ching itself is the best introduction to philosophical Taoism (the religion is something else). Perhaps certain passages can be obscure, but they reveal their meaning in time. Take a look for yourself https://terebess.hu/english/tao/gia.html https://terebess.hu/english/tao/gia.html
- dorchadas 3y ago
  The dichotomy between 'philosophical' and 'religious' Daoism is ahistorical, and stems from the influence, especially, of the Jesuits. They were tied together and mixed together from the beginning, especially neidan traditions. Yes, there's two words - but they were often used interchangeably.

spandrew 3y ago

This is fine though. All of these things, including the original sources, are philosophies as product of the time they were written. Ie. It makes sense for them to change as the society around them changes. If one guy reads the Tao of Pooh and it helps him 'be' — that is the point. Laozi would likely agree: don't overthink it.

coldtea 3y ago
>If one guy reads the Tao of Pooh and it helps him 'be' — that is the point. Laozi would likely agree: don't overthink it. That's still a Western way to see it. For Laozi that wouldn't "be the point". The point of his teaching was not to help people "be" in any which way, but to be in a particular way, within a certain philosophy of the world and our duties in it.
- p3rls 3y ago
  Laozi would see it as fulfillment of his final mission to the western gates. Let us remember, the old master wasn't even going to leave any writings for you at all until he was kidnapped during his final attempt to emigrate from the orient.

Tao3300 3y ago

Hoh hoh! Have you not heard that that dao which has a recommended introduction is not the true dao?

lannisterstark 3y ago
The 'no true libertarian' problem all over again lol

dorchadas 3y ago

Personally, if you're interested in the early 'philosophical' side (which I don't think can - or should - be disentangled from the 'religious' side; the separation of religion and philosophy is inherently a post-Enlightenment, Western phenomenon, and doesn't really apply outside that cultural situation), van Norden's chapters on the DDJ and the ZZ in his book I quoted from above are a good start. But there was a 'religious' tint to a lot of this, even very early on. If you're more open to how the three strands ('religious', 'philosophical' and 'literary') of Daoism have merged and mingled throughout history, I really like Ronnie Littlejohn's Daoism: An Introduction published by I.B. Taurus. It's essentially an introductory textbook, but does a good job at showing how these things have always been interacting (indeed, there's quite possibly Nedian references in the DDJ/ZZ/LZ!) and that trying to separate them really isn't possible (indeed, as said, it's an inherently modern, Western distinction between 'philosophy' and 'religion'), while looking at how they've changed over time.

dorchadas 3y ago
Oh I forgot to mention Coutinho's An Introduction to Daoist Philosophies, which looks at the three early Daoist texts -- the Laozi, the Zhuangzi, and the Liezi. I haven't read it yet, but have heard decent things. He specifically works from a comparative perspective as well, which makes it more interesting.

duopixel 3y ago

The Tao Te Ching itself is the best introduction to philosophical Taoism (the religion is something else). Perhaps certain passages can be obscure, but they reveal their meaning in time. Take a look for yourself https://terebess.hu/english/tao/gia.html https://terebess.hu/english/tao/gia.html

dorchadas 3y ago
The dichotomy between 'philosophical' and 'religious' Daoism is ahistorical, and stems from the influence, especially, of the Jesuits. They were tied together and mixed together from the beginning, especially neidan traditions. Yes, there's two words - but they were often used interchangeably.