Is Zen Just Taoism in Disguise? 

Dude, dude, love ya but Chuang Tzu is not Confucius! Confucius is K'ung Fu Tzu (in Wade Giles) or Kongfuzi (in Pinyin). Chuang Tzu is the second most important Daoist master after Lao Tzu. Between not knowing this and not having read Hinton's book, maybe just maybe you shouldn't have made this video? Because, as opposed to your usual M.O., you're working with very little knowledge of the facts here. (And also, you'd love Chuang Tzu if you read him.) In any case, I love Dogen, but on this matter he sounds like he was just being partisan and doctrinaire, so I don't know if you should be taking him at his word... Hinton's book, as it happens, is not particularly good or convincing. He builds his whole theory on the graphic etymologies of Chinese characters, and these etymologies seem... pretty creative. He certainly doesn't cite any sources supporting his readings. But this is not to say that a much stronger case can't be built proving the influence of Daoism and Confucisnism on Zen. The Confucian part is the easiest to show, and perhaps the least interesting because of that: it's what gave Zen its obsession with lineage and with masters, not to mention the discipline and organization of its monasteries. The Daoist case needs to be made at much greater length, but just a few indications: 1. When Buddhism first came to China, it was seen as a foreign version of Daoism. As a result, the early translations of sutras borrowed pretty much wholesale the language of Daoism to find Chinese equivalents to Buddhist concepts. This couldn't help but slightly tweak those concepts in the direction of Daoism. 2. The first mondos, encounter dialogues (from which later koans are selected), guess where they appear? In Chuang Tzu. As a matter of fact all the sources that we have before the mid 10th century indicate that the early Zen masters were actually pretty orthodox Zen teachers, none of that absurdist remark, sandals on the head stuff. Most of that first appears in the Jingde Chuadeng Lu, the first major Transmission of the Lamp history, written at the imperial court and published about 1004-1009. That's where we first learn about all the outrageous things that Linji & co. are supposed to have done and said -- and all of that is spurious embellishment, put there by the court literati in charge of writing the history. And guess what? Those literati were primarily Daoist, and they thought they'd spice up these pretty boring stories of Buddhist meditation masters with some Daoist flavor. That's what ended up making Zen seem so uncoventional. So, yes, koans? They're mostly Daoist deep down. 3. Taking a big leap to the 20th cantury: when the west falls for Zen, as the Beats did, it's mostly for the unconventional stuff. Basically, "Beat Zen" especially digs the Daoist undercurrents in Zen. Now, with new generations of teachers coming in, we all learned that Zen is actually a lot more boring than that. I myself just practice shikantaza, and have little interest in koan zen. But it's important to realize that once upon a time "Zen" could mean for the west this new form of liberation from convention, from stuffiness -- leading straight into the counterculture of the '60s. Now, as I said, modern Zen is not like that anymore -- but modern Zen would never have captured the imaginations of the Beats or even of the Hippies. Where they found liberation is precisely in that kind of Daoist Zen that we now poopoo. And that's what Hinton still clearly feels nostalgic for. (He's a beat born several decades too late.) But while that's not proper Buddhist Zen, it may be that in moving away from it we've moved away from some real liberating potential... Sorry about the long rant, typed all on my phone. I can give you scholarly references for all this, if you need them.

Theravadins in my country like to deride Chan/Zen by saying that Chan/Zen is NOT the real Buddhism. I was one of them. However, after some "research" , I changed my mind. When Buddhism came to China, there were already many native philosophical schools in China. Some argue that Chinese philosophical thoughts emerged roughly 5000 years ago. Way before Buddhism came to China. Those Buddhist monks in China had to face numerous "public" philosophical debates "against" so many schools of Chinese philosophy. Chinese philosophers were NOT friendly to foreign philosophies and would try to "defeat" foreign philosophers through debates. Chinese had lots and lots of native philosophers because of "imperial exam": in order to be a government employee, you had to master philosophy among other subjects. Everybody wanted to be government's employee. So many youths studied philosophy in ancient China because of that imperial exam. Buddhist monks faced that situation since the first time they arrived in China. So many philosophical schools tried to defeat Buddhist monks through philosophical debates. The current Chan/Zen Buddhism is the spiritual "descendants" of the Buddhist monks who managed to "survive" those debates. They were and are still philosophy geniuses. Do not underestimate them. Even the Chinese ended up putting Buddha statue side by side with Laozi's and Confucius's statues in Chinese temples! That is a huge achievement and recognition! The Chinese say Buddha is the religion of loving kindness. Meanwhile, they say Confucianism is the religion of real men. Chan/Zen Buddhism has received acceptance from the Chinese for thousands of year now. Chan/Zen has become a friend/family to the Chinese and it is normal that we adopt our friend's way of thinking. Chan/Zen took some from Daoism and Daoism also took some from Buddhism.

A buddhist and a taoist had a baby, it was zen.

David Hinton wrote a follow-on book called “The Way of Chan” that came out in 2023, which expands on “China Root.” Both are very thoughtful and well written. Dogen spent about a year and a half studying Caodong Chan Buddhism under Rujing in China before receiving transmission from him. (After which the Mongol Horde descended on China. -Which is why the transmission to Japan was so important.) I would not rely on Dogen’s understanding of the evolution of Chan in China over more modern historical studies based on the recent unearthing of ancient manuscripts. According to Hinton Chan derives from the interpretation of Indian Buddhist text based upon the assumption (by the Chinese) that they were ultimately expressing the same underlying framework as the Taoism that the Chinese were already familiar with. For example, here’s what Hinton says about KARMA (taken from the Glossary of Buddhist Terms from “The Way of Chan”): “In the Taoist/Ch’an framework, karma is very different than for Buddhism in general (though it is sometimes used in that conventional sense for literary effect). Rather than successive reincarnations of a “soul,” karma in Ch’an involves the selfless unfurling of Way’s Great Transformation according to inner-pattern. Another example of Buddhist concepts reconfigured in the Taoist/Ch’an framework.” Now one can either simply consider this reinterpretation to be a mistake. But I see it as a wonderful opportunity for merging two of the greatest spiritual traditions of the East. Let me put it this way: There are very few essential points in Buddhism that I cannot find expressed in the “Tao Te Ching.” But the problem with the “Tao Te Ching” is that it compresses everything down to so few words that it is hard to follow, and even when you think you understand it, how can you be sure? Compare for example the Three Noble Truths: 1st - life involves dukkha 2nd - desire (for this or that) leads to arising of dukkha 3rd - fading away desire (for this or that) leads to ending of dukkha. With Chapter 1 of the “Tao Te Ching” (translation by Gia Fu Feng & Jane English): Ever desireless, one can see the mystery. Ever desiring, one can see the manifestations. These two spring from the same source but differ in name; this appears as darkness. Darkness within darkness. The gate to all mystery. I consider the entire “Tao Te Ching” as instruction on the path of enlightenment. Chapter 16 describes how to do zazen: Empty yourself of everything. Let the mind rest at peace. The ten thousand things rise & fall while the Self watches their return. They grow and flourish and then return to the source. Returning to the source is stillness, which is the way of nature. The way of nature is unchanging. Knowing constancy is insight. …

This is great. I’ve been watching your channel since like 2009.

I remember getting the impression that they were the same from Raymond Smullyan's "The Tao is Silent," but looking at it again, he draws a pretty sharp distinction. It is a very cool book from a western-trained logician and mathematician who discovered eastern philosophy later in life. I do think the Zhuangzi has a lot of resonance with Zen when it talks about discrimination creating illusory opposites. Then there is the characteristic Chinese emphasis on praxis vs dogma which is *ahem* foreign to western philosophies. (Though that obviously didn't factor into the debate during Dogen's time.)

Great vid! I was actually watching the previous one when I had a random thought that it bothered me how many Westerners interpretation of Zen is just "Taoism flavored Buddhism." Imagine my excitement when the next one is at least partially about that.

The Tao of Zen by Ray Grigg makes a strong case that zen grew out of Taoism and Hinton seems to piggyback on that.

Curiously, Mahayana arrived in China earlier than Hinayana and (apparently) it's pretty clear from the earliest translations of Mahayana works from Sanskrit to Chinese (some of which survive in Tibetan translations that can be analyzed to get at the Chinese terms), that early Chinese Buddhist translators, who were translating Mahayana texts to be read by their fellow Chinese, _used Daoist terms to translate key Buddhist terms._ That's quite a remarkable thing. Some would argue that they were stupid and didn't really understand Buddhism, and basically floundered about trying to find familiar terms for nearest equivalents, but it's quite possible that rather jaundiced view comes from the later Hinayana translators, who didn't have any truck with Daoist terms at all - but were after all translating a somewhat different kind of Buddhism. You can actually see some of the famous dialogues from the early Ch'an masters involve novice Buddhists' puzzlement in reconciling laboriously-listed and detailed Hinayana stuff with Mahayana - in fact I'd say that the early Ch'an vibe was actually probably more a revolt against Hinayana in China than against other forms of Mahayana (like, say, other schools of Ch'an), and that even the overinflated supposed war between gradual and sudden schools may have been a distorted version of that. At any rate, when people think they perceive a Daoist influence in Ch'an, some of that may just be an artefact of the earliest translations of Mahayana texts being translated using Daoist terms, and the association sticking. But I would also suggest that maybe the earliest translators (IIRC some of whom had studied in India at Nalanda and all that, and were translating from the original Sanskrit) knew what they were about, and that such translation is in fact fairly accurate and there just is a lot of similarity between Daoism and Buddhism. Or rather, I _might_ say that, except, as someone else points out in the comments, what Daoism was in those days is probably different from the mixture of Daoism, Buddhism and Confucianism that later came to be called "Daoism." So one would have to be cautious. I'm also of the school of thought that Daoism was historically characterized neither by being a philosophy nor by being a religion, but by its being a practice of self-improvement and self-cultivation in various forms (i.e. the famous distinction between "philosophical" and "religious/magical" Daoism is the entirely bogus artifact of the accident that Legge's main Chinese interlocutor was a Confucian, and that's just a Confucian interpretation of Daoism). But that just speaks to my general hobbyhorse about all this: that all the "non-dual" systems are practically identical and differences only appear when you get second and third sons being packed off to monasteries who aren't all that interested in the practices, so tend to find bones of contention in philosophy to browbeat other second and third sons with and jockey for social position in the religion :) None of this is primarily philosophy, it's primarily practice which leads to certain results which practitioners then try to explain to others as best they can - often using terms that are already lying around in the culture. An interesting angle on this: if you look at something like Red Pine's book _Road to Heaven_ which has interviews with meditators in the cave systems of the Chungnan mountains China - to some of those old gents and ladies, Buddhism and Daoism are more or less just just flavours of exposition, the _practices_ are virtually identical between them. Both systems, so far as meditation goes, follow the general Mahayana pattern of a longish period of Calming meditation as a foundation for Insight.

How beautiful is the place there. The pond and all the lovely flowers. All the best to the dog with the limp paw!

Is American Buddhism more influenced by the cross or by the hammer and sickle?

Taoism is pretty cool man, its worth checking out. Once you see some stuff about it the similarities start piling up to an eerie degree. Taoists were the first to adopt Buddhism in Chinese, and after Buddhism got popular Taoists started important stuff from Buddhism. I have no doubt there was significant cross pollination.

very much enjoyed listening to this Zen/Tao debate controversy. made me think about my Taoism vs my Zen practice

Dogen is doggone difficult!

I implore anyone with an inkling towards zen read the Chuang Tzu if you haven't already. It's difficult, it's poetic, it's hilarious and its metaphors will likely stay with you for a long time. Also has parallels with zen, be they loose or a bit of a stretch. It's chief premise is that it's a counter to Confucianism so, putting it politely, to confuse Confucious with Chuang Tzu is doing a great disservice to the latter. Chuang Tzu is a proponent of wu-wei, variously defined as non-doing/non-action etc, in complete opposition to the rigidity of Confucianism. I like the Burton Watson version. The Brook Ziporyn translation is great too, but more academic with endless footnotes, better suited to a second read imo. The Jason Gregory channel on YT has lots of good Zhuangzi and Taoist related content. I support Jason via Patreon, along with Brad and Jack Haubner, all of whom I value greatly. This is a very rare video by Brad I won't be clicking like on but you can't please everyone all of the time, ha!

Zuowang is a classic daoist meditation mentioned in the classic zhuangzi and it is exactly the same as silent illumination/ Shikantaza

Brad, have you ever considered starting a ko-fi account? I have issues with paypal and patreon both in recent years.

Regarding the observation that we've inherited many Christian ideas in the West; have you read Dominion by Tom Holland? He makes an historical case that we're so swimming in a deep sea of Christian beliefs, that even western atheists for all intents and purposes may as well be Christian. Tom Holland himself unironically considers himself to be a Christian atheist.

The Cicada and the Bird is a new translation of Chuang Tzu that blew me away. Would love a commentary if you're interested in reading that.

Brad, have you read Zen philosophy, Zen practice by Tich Thien-An & Compass of Zen by Seung Sahn?

Did Ziggy jump off the sofa or play with Fico and hurt his knee, hip or back and it just doesn't show up on an x-ray? Maybe he get stung between one of his foot pads? I hope he feels better very soon. Really enjoyed the video. I have been studying Taoism for a few years now.

All the best to the Ziggster

It seems to me if you just take the philosophical aspects of Buddhism,Taoism and Confucianism and get rid of their cosmology they're soteriology and their eschatology you have a pretty good system of thought to steer yourself through this Labyrinth of life.

13:42 ff.: I think we can be reasonably sure the Platform Sutra is not Laozi. (This must be Thursday. I never could get the hang of Thursdays.)

Hey Brad, have you read this new book China Root by David Hinton? You really should read it, it’s great…

I thought the major significant difference between Taoism and Zen was the Bodhisattva: Rock in a river .... •Confucianism - use all our yang energy to move it •Taoism - let the Yin river wash it away • Zen- Did everyone make it across the river OK?

Dogen is correct in that Buddhism and Daoism are not the same. He is wrong in his explanation of why. Current Daoism is a mix of Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism. In the time of Zhuangzi, Daoism and Buddhism were clearly different. His roasting of Confucianism and saying Laozi was superior when comparing them. After the time of Zhuangzi, Daoism had no choice but to incorporate Confucianism because of politics. Those in charge generally like a philosophy that kisses their buns. Daoism was forced to incorporate Buddhism. When Buddhism started to take over because of the spread of Buddhism, mainly from taking care of other peasants, the number of Buddhists exploded. Genghis Khan appointed Qiu Chuji (the founder of Dragon gate) as overseer of all religions in China, and the Dragon Gate sect thus played a critical role in the conservation of Han Chinese culture. Currently, Dragon Gate is the biggest Daoist school in the world. Karma and good deeds are incorporated. Giving is more about abundance than giving the shirt off your back. Buddhism started to take over, mainly from taking care of peasants and other compassionate acts. Buddhism got stronger during the reign of Kublai Khan. The Chan masters incorporated jing chi and Shen, including internal alchemy. So yes, there is a cross-over in Chan. No Zen master I have ever met or heard about has used that system. So I assume Dogen didn't know that because that was a more secret practice. Apparently left out during the transition to Japan. I once went on a retreat with a dragon gate master. A Buddhist student asked what was better, Daoism or Buddhism. The Daoist master said Daoism is better because we have jing chi and shen. He said, Look at the time since the Buddha, not all beings have been liberated. You have limited energy in life; take care of the people around you and help whomever you can along the way. His mention of Jing Chi and Shen has multiple meanings. Mentioning Jing was saying Buddhists deny the body, so they are unhealthful. I agree that many Buddhist masters have kidney and other health problems from an unhealthy diet and a lack of exercise. In Japan, Daoism influenced many art forms, from martial arts to healing arts. So by default, there is an influence. Never listen to a Western scholar talk about Daism. They do not know what they are talking about. They interpret Daoism from a completely Buddhist perspective. When I asked the same Daoist about Jung's secret of the golden flower, he laughed and said he was completely wrong. Jung hadn't learned all the practices he just taught us. Jung's perspective was from a Western psychological perspective. Similar to Buddhism. In that, we are working with just the mind, not actual substances. Daoist alchemical terminology was intentionally made to trap the minds of intellectuals. They are entertained by other academics, thinking they know or can figure out everything. I live in the Buddhist capital of the Western world, and I can assure you that Buddhist compassion in practice looks nothing like it does in the books. They are very concerned with themselves and money. Daoists have compassion in an actual, practical way. Buddhism and Christianity are more of the world we wish we could have. In my area, Christians by far outperform Buddhists in their compassion for the poor and needy. Daoism is more of the world as it is. A philosophy you will actually do, not just talk about. As with Buddhism what they do and say where I live has no resemblance.

So just because Dogen trashes Daoism and Confucianism, we have to accept it?

Well, I haven't read all these books about history and lineage and all that. But just focusing on my own spirituality, and talking to friends who do the same, the jist I've gotten is that the difference between Buddhism and Taoism is the difference between the left and right hemispheres of the brain. Buddhism, described to me by one of my friends as "a religion of lists", analyzes everything to exhausting detail and maps it out. Very left hemisphere. Taoism looks at things in terms of metaphors that reveal the mystery, and embraces that whole "go with the flow", stop thinking so much and just listen to your instincts, that sometimes the truth won't come in words. Very right hemisphere. When I read the Tao Te Ching for the first time, it became immediately clear to me that much of the text was speaking to the subconscious mind... which is why I read it over and over (different translations) and I don't study it. I just read a few poems every day and let the messages gradually settle into my psyche. And if I sound like I'm bragging, then I apologize. I love the Tao Te Ching. It changed my life.

Red Pine talks about this in a couple of lectures. He says that historically, the Chinese were ok with Taoism, Buddhism & Confucianism co-existing without being in conflict, & that people could take the parts they needed from each one. The tripod idea in practice. He says that the idea that Zen arises from Taoism is "pie in the sky", in the sense that just because they have some similar ideas doesn't mean that one arose from the other. Finally, he mentions a historic document which is a list of bios compiled in the early 2nd Millennium of Buddhist monks who attained enlightenment or official status, saying that very few of these people were Taoists. My own feeling is that this is a tricky situation to disentangle from 800 years in the future.

Hi, thanks for this! I think it is not of interest to find out if Buddhism is Daoism but to see the interconnections is worthy. The fact that people are talking about Zen indicates that there is something about an individual style of Buddhism. And this flavor comes from Daoism as you said. To recognize this influence makes it easier to understand what Zen or Chan is about. On the other side Buddhism is just Buddhism. Greetings!

Looks like Ziggy is getting really old.

tbh, I looked at both schools. They are literally pointing at the same moon at the almost the exact same way.

"Jimmi Hendrix, sort of like Dogen.'' -Love it! yes.🙃😉

One can always stress and contrast the differences between the spiritual traditions - that appears to me to be relatively easy. There is a lot to complain about any tradition. The consequences of such contrasting to me don't seem fulfilling, oftentimes they are downright dangerous. It's more difficult to find, stress and work out the common things. Finding those is a hugely fulfilling thing in my view. In my view, that's the merit of David Hinton's work. By the way, I don't see him claiming Zen is actually Taoism in disguise. The wording is more like: Zen appeared as a consequence of Buddhism meeting Tao in China when it came from India. There are christian authors finding christian values in the Tao De King as well. As humans we might all a similar basic understanding of true spirituality. It is formulated ever so differently according to local and temporal culture .... A nice thing, actually. :-)

So Zen cuts through even Vipassana?

have you considered renaming your channel to "Dogen apologetics"?

Hey do a video about the poop chapter

" Zen goes beyond Buddha and beyond Lao Tzu. It is a culmination, a transcendence, both of the Indian genius and of the Chinese genius. The Indian genius reached its highest peak in Gautam the Buddha and the Chinese genius reached its highest peak in Lao Tzu. And the meeting…the essence of Buddha’s teaching and the essence of Lao Tzu’s teaching merged into one stream so deeply that no separation is possible now. Even to make a distinction between what belongs to Buddha and what to Lao Tzu is impossible, the merger has been so total. It is not only a synthesis, it is an integration. Out of this meeting Zen was born. Zen is neither Buddhist nor Taoist and yet both. To call Zen “Zen Buddhism” is not right because it is far more. Buddha is not so earthly as Zen is. Lao Tzu is tremendously earthly, but Zen is not only earthly: its vision transforms the earth into heaven. Lao Tzu is earthly, Buddha is unearthly, Zen is both - and in being both it has become the most extraordinary phenomenon. 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, The future of humanity will go closer and closer to the approach of Zen, because the meeting of the East and West is possible only through something like Zen, which is earthly and yet unearthly. The West is very earthly, the East is very unearthly. Who is going to become the bridge? Buddha cannot be the bridge; he is so essentially Eastern, the very flavor of the East, the very fragrance of the East, uncompromising. Lao Tzu cannot be the bridge; he is too earthly. China has always been very earthly. China is more part of the Western psyche than of the Eastern psyche. It is not an accident that China is the first country in the East to turn communist, to become materialist, to believe in a godless philosophy, to believe that man is only matter and nothing else. This is not just accidental. China has been earthly for almost five thousand years; it is very Western. Hence Lao Tzu cannot become the bridge; he is more like Zorba the Greek. Buddha is so unearthly you cannot even catch hold of him - how can he become the bridge? When I look all around, Zen seems to be the only possibility, because in Zen, Buddha and Lao Tzu have become one. The meeting has already happened. The seed is there, the seed of that great bridge which can make East and West one. Zen is going to be the meeting-point. It has a great future - a great past and a great future. And the miracle is that Zen is neither interested in the past nor in the future. Its total interest is in the present. Maybe that’s why the miracle is possible, because the past and the future are bridged by the present. The present is not part of time. Have you ever thought about it? How long is the present? The past has a duration, the future has a duration. What is the duration of the present? How long does it last? Between the past and the future can you measure the present? It is immeasurable; it is almost not. It is not time at all: it is the penetration of eternity into time."

He said the Platform Sutra is lousy because it teaches insight is possible even without zazen, that chan is a training of the mind. There is no chan without Huineng and therefore nothing to transmit adequately from China by diminishing the Platform Sutra (although it probably has another author).

Buddhism, Taoism and Confucianism are a tripod of knowledge about these three thingys - but awakening is not about gaining knowledge. If we really wanted to be clever, maybe we could say that Taoism's "wuwei" really played off the the Mahayana idea of "no self, so no effort of the self to improve the self"

pistachio

Some Taoists like Hindus maintain a centre with a self/soul/atman or pakua pearll which is incompatible with the Bud perspective of anatta (no self). Such exagerated notions of a self are bound to lead to dukka (suffering). However they do understand sunyata which they call Wu Wei, and arising and passing which they call Yang and Yin(ebb and flow). Taosist medittion is very similar to Kriya yoga or Tantric Yoga.

My take. When Buddhism went to China, the locals would have likely interpreted it in thr background of taoism, thus giving birth to zen, which for me is taoism in practice. The meditation bit of Buddhism and the non doing of taoism.

Sex Is Only Sinful outside of the marriage bonds and all cultures hold to this the majority of them do

Ziggy's limp could be psychosomatic... I feel like sometimes dogs do this to get attention .. maybe he's not getting enough atm idk

... but then again is Taoism just Zen in disguise ?

If you want to get to know authentic daoism look into Wang Liping and Nathan Brine

Ziggy might have a luxating patella

idk if i belive in re-incarnation

Thanks for the interesting video. I am a Japanese university teacher Resserchiing Zen, Buddhism, Qi and Japanese Aiki-Budo. Zen means "to be one." In other words, the boundary between "self and others" disappears. In other words, as soon as you are no longer yourself, everything becomes you. But in order to have this experience, you need a certain physical state. To create that body is "Zazen".

Won’t read the book, but refutes it? Chung Tzu is not the same person as Confucius….ignorance abounds. Why not read the book, as i have, and come to your own conclusion?

If you search about China Root online and follow that windy road, you’ll eventually discover that this poet-translator was refuted by scholars and they outline this is exactly why this kind of analysis requires some scholarship and at a minimum knowing the full landscape of the history to rightly assess and draw conclusions on a topic such as this. The more you search on this, the more you’ll find that the author made errors and so it follows that his conclusions are not based on fact.

Take your dog to a pet acupuncturist or chinese doctor he will know

All of it is just reality in disguise ;)

LOL I don't agree with Dogen take here. Chuang Tzu is genius

Question is, for whom does epistemology really matter? AND Don't read Hinton's book. Yes, I learned a thing or two, but it's par for the course for what reading books about Buddhism is usually like....unlike the books of Brad Warner.

The fact that you don't know much about Taoism as a Zen RU-vidr is quite embarrassing