I’m not sure if you’ve seen this book before or not, but, it might interest you:

The author makes the argument that Zen Buddhism is really Taoism in disguise!

I find myself attracted to both ways of life. I struggle in buddhism a lot though because it seems like a lot of things are for the elite monastic. The only thing really open would be jodo shu or jodo shinshu, because even Chinese Pure Land Buddhism seems kinda of elitist. SO I do not know which path really, I am confused, but I suppose the question should be “Who is confused” or “Who is the seeker”. I still cannot find an answer to any of those questions.

Gassho
-j

Thanks for mentioning the Critical Buddhism movement. I read about that too briefly, but don’t know enough to comment.

As I mentioned to Kyoushin, I am concerned by the close interaction of the two, as it leads one to wonder if Buddhism somehow loses something in the process, but it’s also just as likely to gain in the process as well. We tend to assume the negative, but that isn’t always true, as evinced in the Christian examples cited below. Speaking as a technician, software can acquire features and code from other things, and only gain in the process (re: BSD sharing code with Linux and vice-versa) while still retaining their unique identity. So, perhaps I am just making a big deal out of thing.

Thanks to everyone for the comments so far. Been a real entertaining read.

As an aside what I meant by ‘simplicity of practice’ was ‘simplicity of attitude’, or ‘concentration’. I think that’s a clearer way of putting it.

(3) I noticed that influence as well, but I am undecided as to whether this is positive for Buddhism, or a negative (i.e. does it compromise core teachings somehow?).

Yes it is complicated isn’t it! I think that this is still very much a ‘live’ issue for both scholars and practitoners. The ‘Critical Buddhism’ debate which started in Japan in the 90s (see a href=”http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=AjlCz4xm1gIC&printsec=frontcover&dq=critical+buddhism&source=bl&ots=7RNGXRUbAg&sig=_6bRptc7WP5hTXC7H94h9Kg4ekc&hl=en&ei=nexGTPWsMdWRjAeZnrG6Cw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CDgQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q&f=false”>’Pruning the Bodhi Tree’) was/is all about whether non-Buddhist eternalistic ideas were imported into the tradition during its transmission to China and Japan (eg. the tathagatagarbha / hongaku shiso notions).

Academic: Website for Daoist Studies

Religious: The Daoist Foundation

Both are run by Louis Komjathy, a scholar-practioner who has written a number of books.

Wow. I really, really resonate with this post since this I also started out as being really into Taoism before eventually settling in to Buddhist practice. However, this exact same debate went on in my head for years and actually in spite of identifying as a Buddhist I still own far more books on Taoism than I do on Buddhism!

I’m not sure if this will be of any help to you, but eventually I came to a point where I decided that I was Buddhist, but with a Taoist sense of aesthetics. I don’t know if that makes sense, or if it helps that I’m a (lay) Zen Buddhist with ties to a Chinese Chan lineage.

Ultimately I guess there were two deciding factors for me in favor of Buddhism. The first is that “authentic”, lineaged Taoism is still something of a closed world to most non-Chinese (a point you mention in your post). Although that is slowly starting to change, I think overall Buddhism is a much more open religion, even in terms of its scriptures — the early texts aside, Taoist scripture are often highly esoteric and utilize a symbolic vocabulary that is very difficult for the uninitiated to decipher (especially if you don’t read Chinese!). In my experience Buddhist sutras tend to be much more straightforward, even at their most “mythological”.

The other deciding factor is that the aspects of Taoism I was most interested in were, I think, more philosophical, cultural, or aesthetic rather than “religious” per se. And these aesthetic strands are of course deeply interwoven with the cultures of East Asia (Vietnam, Korea, and Japan as well as China). So I think anyone who practices a traditional form of East Asian Buddhism will encounter these strands whether they realize it or not. In some ways I think the interaction between Taoism, Confucianism, and Mahayana Buddhist in East Asia is comparable to the relationship between Greek philosophy and Christianity in Western European culture: while there are occasional tensions (“Athens vs Jerusalem”), overall they harmonize each other and a great deal of Western Christianity (especially Roman Catholicism and the Orthodox Churches) draws from elements of classical Greek thought and aesthetics. It’s the same, I feel, with most schools of Mahayana Buddhism in East Asia.

Your point about mixing traditions is very well taken, but keep in mind that Taoism and Buddhism have already been thoroughly mixed together. And it’s not just one way! Most of what you read the web will emphasize the influence of Taoism on Buddhism, but actually Buddhism also exerted just as much influence on Taoism. You can see this influence in the rituals and monastic structure of the Quanzhen (“Complete Reality”) school of Taoism, for instance.

Anyway, sorry for the long-winded response, but I’ve been through this debate myself so many times I thought I would share my own thoughts and resolution with you.

P.S.

You might remember me as “Baekho”. I had a blog on wordpress a long time ago and while I haven’t had the time or energy to keep up with blogging I’ve continued to read the various iterations of your own blog. Keep it up! ^.^

Sorry for the late reply. I was going to write one thing, but then thought about it more (probably a post forth-coming), and wanted to reply back:

1) I bet you’re right on this. Trouble is is finding resources that aren’t new-agey or overly mystical. Taoists aren’t exactly the most vocal folks.
2) That’s pretty interesting advice actually. Much food for thought there. A stable path has certainly been a problem to date.
3) I noticed that influence as well, but I am undecided as to whether this is positive for Buddhism, or a negative (i.e. does it compromise core teachings somehow?).

(1) I suspect that Taoism is more complex than you imagine and that it is simply that you have spent a greater deal of time exploring Buddhism.
(2) I think that the important thing is to find simplicity of practice rather than simplcity of teaching. My teacher said to me just this weekend; “If you concentrate on one thing you become broad-minded.” This sounds paradoxical but essentially if we become settled in a path then the stability we receive can then allow us to explore the diverse world of teachings without becoming unsettled or disturbed.
(3) Taoism is a major influence on both Zen and Jodo Shinshu. In the case of the latter the notion of naturalness (jp. jinen), whilst not identical, is closely related to the Taoist ‘tzu-jan’. And Bodhiruci and T’an-Luan, both major Pure Land figures, were deeply steeped in Taoism.

All the best, K