When managing an emotional situation with someone you want to be there so bad and “not hoard” but you wonder if it impacts you too

Please read this before you reply --

This post is about Daoism as religion 道教. You can find more here https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/daoism-religion/

chapter3.4 in the article above talks about deity figures. I realized religious Daoism may be a novel term to many people here as most discussions seem to be philosophy oriented.

Religious daoism has a collection of canons, DDJ is just one of them (albeit one the most important ones)

---------Original post----------

I don't really understand why its tagged as polytheistic or atheistic.

Daoism believes in the supreme Dao and the manifestation as SanQing (三清, 3 pure forms). SanQing has the absolute rule over everything else, with YanShi TianZun being the highest

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Pure_Ones

Other demi gods, demi goddesses, demi deities and immortals are obviously of a much lower 'status' for the lack of a better word, similar to buddha vs. bodhisattva vs. asekha etc and they'll never become Dao and be comparable to Dao.

It seems to be the text book example of henotheism. SanQing is orthodox core concept in Daoism. Any school/lineage, reformed or historical, acknowledges it.

EDIT - here's core theology:

The concept of SanQing - the manifestation of Dao
YuanShi - the shapeless and immortal
LingBao - the tangible but immortal
DaoDe (Lao Zi) - the tangible and mortal, born to preach Dao to us.
This is very similar if not identical to trikaya in mahayana buddhism, and somewhat similar to trinity

In classic Daoism theology:

One genders two, two genders three, and three engenders everything (DaoDeJing)All three pure forms comes from Dao (一气化三清， Yi Qi Hua San Qing)

EDIT 2 - looks like I might have mistaken polytheism with hierarchy with henotheism? I'm digging rn

EDIT 3 - may have found a more fitting term: hierarchical monistic polytheism

In ch41 of the Mitchell translation of the TTC, there is a paradox that was shocking to me, yet the more I thought about it, the more it seemed to make sense. It says: "the greatest love seems indifferent."

In this subreddit, I have encountered apparently knowledgeable persons who were very critical of the Mitchell translation, so I decided to explore other translations, and I started with Gia-fu Feng and Jane English. I've just been skipping around for now, but I compared the list of paradoxes in ch41. Although many are similar, in their translation nothing is said about love at all. Theirs reads:

The bright path seems dim;
Going forward seems like retreat;
The easy way seems hard;
The highest Virtue seems empty;
Great purity seems sullied;
A wealth of Virtue seems inadequate;
The strength of Virtue seems frail;
Real Virtue seems unreal;
The perfect square has no corners;
Great talents ripen late;
The highest notes are hard to hear;
The greatest form has no shape;
The Tao is hidden and without name.
The Tao alone nourishes and brings everything to fulfillment.

I find it hard to believe that the translations could be so different on something like this, and I would be interested in comments.

,

I'm particularly interested in resources that focus on Daoism as a living religious tradition, its history, scriptures, deities, rituals, temples, lineages and contemporary practice, rather than only philosophical Daoism.

I'm already familiar with some academic resources, but I'd be interested in hearing what people in this community actually consider reliable and worthwhile.

What websites, organizations, teachers or online archives would you recommend?

I've started eating healthier because of the tao(avoiding processed food for the most part) I'm not an inherently religious person but I am a little igious. I've been reading more and more of some of the beliefs of the religious side of taoism and for the most part have discarded them. However some of them I've found make sense or are useful to me to "better myself" I grew up eating mostly hunted meat and moved into the city and met my now fiance and have been eating more beef over the last few years because of it. Taoism has the 4 forbidden foods (dog, eel, beef, wild goose) and my fiance has made a big deal out of my recent self conversion to taoism although I've been interested in it for years if not our entire relationship.

The argument on her side is that I'm "picking and choosing" what to follow and not recognizing how it affects her like how I've kind of decided not to eat beef anymore. She seems to think its all a cult and I'm going to get swindled somehow. I've explained that for the most part I'm following the mindfulness and philosophical side of the tao and trying to practice self cultivation as best I can, I dont expect I'll ever be burning joss paper or hell money or anything like that but I recognize the philosophical side as a way to better oneself both mentally physically and spiritually. She is wholly unconvinced, has anyone else had to deal with this? Is there any advice or insight that can be offered ? Am I just a culture vulture ? Alas.

As In unsolvable tao riddles

In my readings (English translations) I’ve come across the ideas of how it is necessary to let go of cravings. That cravings lead to emotions and emotions muddy the clarity that is the way.

But i keep getting myself into an intellectual loop. Obviously I see the truth to this idea of not craving and not falling victim to momentary high emotions. But if I WANT to not be affected by emotions, is this not also a craving of something?

I understand I need to let go. And stop trying so hard but if I let go am I not succumbing to a craving of the way? lol sheesh

So far I’ve been using the English translation of Lao tzu “don’t think about things you don’t understand” but idk if it applies here

Does any of this even make sense? Let me know!

Thanks everyone

Dr. Alexander Douglas has written a new book called Against Identity. In it, he explores the work of Zhuangzi and the Tao, suggesting that a fixed identity might not only be the source of our personal struggles but also of broader societal ills. Hope his work might be of interest to some of you. Thank you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZDS00eBdWw

Hi, all,

I hope this is ok. I've made an app- because i didn't know another way to present writings, images and video in one place- so I hope you'll forgive if this isn't the right place, despite that.

It's totally free and no sign up- it's genuinely just a place to present my material.

It's based entirely on the Yijing hexagrams as ideograms.

I started to explore...why? what on earth- apart from the obvious yin/yang properties of the lines, did those little six line squares or little rectangles presented as the 'shape' of the transformations being described in the commentaries...actually...mean...that. Why...those shapes, to represent vast movements of qi?

Starting there...I found myself somewhere very far away.

It's supposed to be fun, but there are some pretty useful things in there for the avid student of the Yi, or even just daoist ideas, generally.

I have a Masters degree in the study of Mysticism from Canterbury University and have been involved in daoism for over twenty years, so hopefully that might inform some of your views, before opening!

Here are a few images to wet the appetite. Jump straight to the films section of the site if you want to dive straight in. but please let me know what you think- i genuinely hope you enjoy it.

https://shapeofchange.base44.app

Hey guys! Ive been wanting to study taoism for some time, as its idea of "aligning" with Tao, rather than some "ultimate destination" really speaks to me.

I have never really believed in searching for a "right path" forward for some sort of ultimate destination i can reach from it. Abrahamic religions dont make sense to me, Hinduism and Buddhism are too focused on the "ultimate destination"/moksha/nirvana, which is really depressing to think of existence as some "eternal prison" i need to escape from.

I like how the "end goal" of Taoism is just to have balance with Tao, which manifests itself through nature and the physical world. Life is not inherently suffering, not a prison, it can be beautiful and fulfilling, and there is no "vicious cycle" to break

HOWEVER, I have trouble understanding the concept of wu wei. HOW do you decide what is "natural" action and what is not? Are we assuming that natural action is ALWAYS the one we should follow? Like if someone is s*icidal, the "natural" and "effortless action" for them is to k*ll themselves, right? Please help and correct if i am wrong. I am young and rather ignorant.

I hope its allowed here

寻声救苦 太乙天尊 放灯指引 救度亡魂

May TaiYi TianZun hear my prayer, light up the path, save the suffering and lost

Just some thoughts, I’ve seen a lot of anti ai sentiment on this sub whenever it’s brought up, which is understandable considering the creators of the technology and how it is distributed, however I think ai can be more interestingly interpreted by the taoist idea of the ten thousand things.

if the one and the two and their thesis,antithesis, synthesis dynamic translate to the ten thousand things (All things in existence). Artifial intelligence theoretically (no guard rails or alignment steering) is trained on those ten thousand things, which imo if perfectly trained would be the mechanics of the Tao (of which those mechanics could not be consciously and intimately understood by a human being or by human language). if you take the I Ching seriously, which I think you should at minimum as philosophy, the I Ching is possible bc of this idea of a structured universe (not speaking on the divinatory aspect, just that all situations can be encapsulated by one of the 64 hexagrams).

so if ai can learn that structure, what does that mean? Imo it means that if we go back to the ten thousand things, the ai essentially becomes a second new “one”, however this time, that one gets to circle back around to the ten thousand things that already exist and resynthesize with them in the context of this new ”one” which would be equivalent to context of the interconnected relationship of all things.

perhaps tho nothing would change, bc philosophically that interconnected relationship was already embedded innately in the synthesis/antithesis tree That created them initially. All just food for thought, curious what others think

no ai was used in this post if that wasn’t obvious

Hello! I wanted to keep practicing doing collective readings, so here’s this week’s reading for the week of August 31:

11 — Peace (泰)
→ changing to →
34 — Great Power (大壯)

The feeling I get from this reading is pretty simple: let things come together, and then be willing to act when the time comes.

Peace is about harmony, balance, and things beginning to move more easily. There can be a sense that circumstances are becoming more favorable, especially when we stop trying to force everything into place. This week, it might be worth noticing where things are already flowing instead of focusing so much on what isn't working.

The change to Great Power brings a shift in energy. Once an opportunity or opening presents itself, there may be a need to actually do something with it. Having power doesn't necessarily mean pushing as hard as possible, though. It can mean recognizing when you have enough momentum, confidence, or support to finally take that step you've been thinking about.

For me, the combination feels like a reminder that not every situation needs to be fought through. Sometimes we have to wait for things to become clearer or more favorable, but when that opening appears, we shouldn't be afraid to move.

My advice for this week would be:

• Pay attention to where things are becoming easier or more cooperative.
• Don't force something that isn't ready yet.
• When you do see an opening, don't be afraid to take action.
• Use your energy intentionally rather than trying to control everything around you.
• Remember that having strength doesn't mean you always need to prove it.

Peace says: allow things to come together.

Great Power says: when the moment comes, don't be afraid to move.

That's the reading for this week. What does this combination bring up for you?

i've been pondering this all day and would benefit from input from those more educated than myself:

How would a Palestinian Taoist respond?

What does "be like water" mean in extreme contexts?

thank you in advance.

I basically have to give a mini thesis defense for my undergrad philosophy class. My argument is that change is fundamental to existence and that the ideas of dao, wu wei and ziran help us cultivate virtue by embracing change instead of being stuck with rigid identities.

Any questions or criticisms for this argument? Feel free to point out any holes and contradictions, the more nit picky the better.

My classmates and professor get to question my argument as much as they want, so anything that helps me prepare for the defence would help me out!

I have always liked this quote by Ram Dass. Of course, in The Zhuangzi, even trees are dismissed. Carpenter Shi (匠石, Carpenter Stone) sees a huge oak and thinks it's "useless," just 散木, or worthless timber. The oak tree later appears in Shi's dream and rebukes him. He points out that fruit trees are "useful" to humans, and so they are mutilated by them.

且予求無所可用久矣，幾死，乃今得之，為予大用。
使予也而有用，且得有此大也邪？
且也，若與予也皆物也，奈何哉其相物也？

"Moreover, I have long sought to be of no use. I nearly died, but only now have I attained it, and it has become of great use to me. If I had been useful, would I ever have been able to grow this large? Besides, you and I are both things. Why, then, should one of us judge the other?"
(The last line could perhaps be more clearly translated as "how can you presume to appraise me as a thing?")

From Chapter 4 of the《莊子 》The Zhuangzi, 《人間世》 (Rénjiān shì, “In the Human World”)

Was it a person or an idea, or just curiosity
For me it was a guiding teacher who passed me the way.

I’d say I how I met your mother is filled with some taoist ideas, but still pretty western coded.
Movies there are a lot to choose from

The spirit of wu wei is more along the lines of 'without contrivance' (I didn't invent that). Contrivance meaning any reason other than for the sake of the game. Fame, money, achievement, status - basically any kind of gaining in order to gain.

But, importantly, gaining any of these things as a result of non-contrived action is not in and of itself undesirable (just look at Dolly Parton - she even invited fame and wealth - someone in her position, if they are successful, will become famous and rich, so why not run with it). In fact, trying to suppress gaining is itself a form of contrivance. Imagine Dolly Parton incorrectly studying wu wei every morning and trying to reject wealth and fame. That's delusional.

"Non-doing" and even "Without contrivance" are entirely yin phrasing. Wu wei deserves a more balanced definition, don't you think? Something like "Act, without contrivance", a blend of yin and yang.

The point is - don't default to not acting, default to acting (and from time to time, check to make sure you're not selling your soul, so that people will like you or give you money (or any other reason).

Over the course of my 63 years, I have heard people say that a meaningful life requires discovering our purpose.

Find your calling. Define your mission. Build your identity. Know where you’re going. Yada Yada Yada
But lately I’ve been wondering whether that entire framework is behind some of the anxiety we’re trying to escape.

Western existentialism often begins with the uncomfortable realization that life doesn’t arrive with an obvious meaning. The response is frequently some version of: Then we have to create one.
Taoism seems to ask a more unsettling question:

Why does existence need to justify itself at all?

Maybe an existential crisis isn’t always a crisis of meaning. Maybe it’s what happens when the identities, ambitions, careers, relationships, and stories we’ve used to explain ourselves peacefully come to an end.

And perhaps immediately rushing to create a new “purpose” simply replaces one script with another.
I recently explored this tension between existentialism, Taoism, wu wei, and the idea of living without a fixed life script HERE:

But I’m far more interested in the question than defending my answer:

Do human beings actually need a sense of purpose to live well?

Or have we confused having a direction with needing life itself to explain where it’s going?

Curious as to where you land.