XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.zen   
   From: wudao@wuji.net   
      
   Tang wrote:   
   > {:-]))) wrote:   
   >   
   >> A question arises, how are Daoism and Buddhism different?   
   >>   
   >> Eclectic synchronistic thought mixes, matches and blends to sum   
   >> as some people sum their sums to have things all add up.   
   >>   
   >> What I've found to be the most interesting, personally,   
   >> are the differences beyond the similarities to speak of.   
   >>   
   >> What makes Taoism unique, in other words.   
   >>   
   >> Thus, in what ways do the similarities not count?   
   >>   
   >> And, can I quote you and count on your response?   
   >>   
   >> - thanks!   
   >   
   >JayLo my sweet and loving son, As I keep saying,   
   >if somebody discovers something somewhere,   
   >somebody else is going to rediscover the same   
   >thing somewhere else, often in total independence   
   >from the original discoverer.   
      
   Gold is gold. Silver is silver.   
   Yet gold is not silver at various levels.   
      
   > Buddhism and Daoism   
   >arise about the same time, and are remarkably   
   >similar,   
      
   A question was how do those similarities not count?   
      
   Gold is similar to silver.   
      
   Gold is similar to water at some sub-atomic level.   
      
   A physicist or a chemist might say, minor differences   
   exist between all elements on the Table.   
      
   > in that both are founded on not-doing   
   >(an-abhisamskara, wu-wei), dropping and not   
   >accumulating. Stoicism is quite close to them,   
   >though its meditative technique is simpler. In late   
   >seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, two   
   >French people, Madame Guyon and her student   
   >Fénelon rediscover much Daoism and Buddhism,   
   >at a time and in a place where both are almost   
   >unknown, and they even rediscover ancient   
   >Stoicism, which has been in disuse even in Europe   
   >for some centuries.   
      
   Refining gold and silver, melting may occur.   
   And yet, the processes while being similar, may differ.   
      
   A question was, what are the differences?   
      
   >Stoicism and Buddhism are expressed originally   
   >in Indo-European languages, and Daoism in   
   >Chinese, but such differences are minor.   
      
   And what, in your view, are those differences?   
      
   Being a miner of the minor, an adult might grow   
   and be a fully grown child and all children   
   are similar except they all differ.   
      
   > The   
   >Chinese know how to rethink Buddhism in   
   >Chinese. The three are formed and informed by   
   >their respective environment, yet such local   
   >differences are also minor.   
      
   And what might those minor differences be?   
      
   All children might begin as single cells.   
   And all gold atoms are similar to silver ones.   
      
   One child might be as good as gold   
   while another not worth its weight in slivers.   
      
   >Their uniqueness is   
   >minor, in relation to their sameness.   
      
   What are their uniquenesses?   
   That was the question. What makes them differ?   
      
   >If I may say   
   >so, the Buddha, the Daoist sages, and the Stoic   
   >sages intuit the same truth, which they   
   >reluctantly teach but promptly deny, often in the   
   >same breath. The Stoic God withdraws into   
   >himself at the end of each world-cycle, which is   
   >a way of saying that all Stoic teachings are   
   >ephemeral, for he no longer bothers about them   
   >during his retreat.   
   >   
   >You may quote me on the above, though nothing   
   >is guaranteed. All three religions cannot be   
   >pinned down to anything.   
      
   If they are three, are they not different?   
   No matter if their sages intuit the same truth,   
   what are the differences between the three?   
      
   >Tang Huyen   
      
   Suppose someone were shopping for a religion   
   and you were asked about the differences   
   between the three you mentioned.   
      
   You might say to the shopper, it doesn't matter.   
      
   They're all saying the same thing. And so does   
   Christianity, Islam, Judaism and no matter what   
   denominations of them all, they're all the same.   
      
   The shopper might say, well, which one do you   
   recommend, for me, since I am, a young man   
   or a young woman, or a child, or an elder, or   
   from this or that geographical region, etc.?   
      
   Is there no circumstance under which or in which   
   you would recommend or not recommend any   
   over any other, since the differences are so minor?   
      
   Is there no accounting for taste?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)