This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

37
38

Taoism vs Buddhism (self.taoism)

tenshon が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]Truthier 13ポイント14ポイント  (29子コメント)

Buddhist philosophy focuses on the here and now, and the idea of "countless lives" is not central to its teachings.

Tao philosophy focuses on Nirvana, too, but the Dao de Jing doesn't use Indian language, so it doesn't use that word

[–]earlymorninghouse 3ポイント4ポイント  (17子コメント)

can you illustrate where the Tao focuses on Nirvana?

[–]johannthegoatman 3ポイント4ポイント  (11子コメント)

A canonical Taoist classic, The Book of Balance and Harmony, is a great example. The link explains a bunch, but of course it's not as good as reading the book! Since the wiki article doesn't mention Nirvana directly, here's a quote from the book:

A student asks, "... it seems to me there is a difference between Buddhist nirvana and Taoist 'release from the matrix.' Answer: Nirvana and release from the matrix are but one principle." Not a very descriptive answer in this small chunk, but he goes on in a super long quote that is hard to grasp in any redditable chunk. You'll have to read it yourself!

[–]Truthier 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

It's definitely not samsaric, right?

[–]earlymorninghouse 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

yeah i'm not being sarcastic at all, i'm interested in where you see this

[–]Truthier 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

What is Nirvana?What is Tao? Now we are obliged to ask ourselves these questions.

As I have understood, Nirvana is where there is no more dualism. Samsara is the existence of such dualistic views, which are ultimately deluded

Lord Gotama said, in the Nirvana Sutra:

"There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, nor fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there, I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor stasis; neither passing away nor arising: without stance, without foundation, without support [mental object]. This, just this, is the end of stress." - http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.8.01.than.html

Who here has read the Tao Teh Ching and doesn't see a similarity? If you like, I'll find the relevant citations. I know one from memory.

[–]maverin 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

The Tao is quite clearly described as having very specific properties. It seeks balance, it creates. It is "the mother of all". Buddhism would never allow for such a thing. What Taoism has you accept as the nature of things, Buddhism would see as an attachment. The Buddhist seeks to relativize everything into non-existence, and that is precisely what Nirvana is - extinction. I honestly don't think the two are related.

[–]earlymorninghouse 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

using that definition of nirvana, i can certainly see the similarities.

[–]deterrence 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

That is indeed truthier.

[–]deadwisdom -1ポイント0ポイント  (9子コメント)

Buddhism is a messed up mix in that there are different schools and different interpretations. But reincarnation and Nirvana are completely central to the ideas of Buddhism, whereas any sort of "Nirvana" you might claim in Taoism is completely tangential.

[–]DyceFreak 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

As a regular at /r/Buddhism and with all do respect, you are entirely incorrect to assume that either of those things are central ideas to Buddhism. The only central ideas to Buddhism are truth and personal integrity within one's own environment, that is all. There are many other ideas in the mix which would make it a "messed up mix", sure. But you must remember that Buddhism is not exactly a religion in any sense, you can practice Buddhism without believing in any of it's history, traditions, gods, teachings since it's all about bettering yourself and personal integrity with respect to the truths of reality. All of it's teachings are simply a series of guidepost which one can choose to follow or stray as their free will dictates.

[–]deadwisdom 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Haha. Alright well then Buddhism is just about being awesome. We can leave it at that.

[–]Truthier 0ポイント1ポイント  (6子コメント)

Then tell us, what is the fundamental discrepancy between Tao and Nirvana?

EDIT: Also, how is reincarnation central to Buddhism? It's certainly an idea which is "well-known" or perhaps even "prevalent", but my understanding is it's not quite "central", most of the core teachings don't involve it...

[–]maverin 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Even in your definition of Nirvana, "there is neither coming, nor going" - where in the Tao Te Ching does it refer to the Tao as the same? In fact it defines it as the opposite - "Infinite Tao flows everywhere, creating and destroying, Implementing all the World, attending to the tiniest details. It is the substance of all things; "

In particular see here, with original Chinese characters.

[–]deadwisdom -4ポイント-3ポイント  (4子コメント)

In that they aren't related in the slightest? Nirvana is an ultimate state of enlightened peace that some lucky souls will attain after many reincarnations. The Tao is the ultimate truth of all things. How is this news? What sort of Buddhism are you reading?

[–]Truthier 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

Nirvana is an ultimate state of enlightened peace that some lucky souls will attain after many reincarnations.

That is one interpretation. Do you have a source for it? Not trying to challenge you on its correctness, but rather trying to get an understanding of what kind of material has exposed you to the concept.

What about the description of Nirvana I posted?

[–]deadwisdom 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

I hate to be a jackass but there's the Wikipedia page on the subject. Man if anything the Tao and Nirvana could not be more different in that the Tao is all about duality and it's effect on the world, and Nirvana is all about singularity with something completely unearthly.

[–]maverin 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think it's very sad when people try to dismiss Taoism as being a Buddhism-wannabe. They're fundamentally different, and if you treat Taoism as Buddhism you're missing out on learning a very profound truth.

[–]nybsop 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Wikipedia is Tao.