Simon E. wrote:
My critique ?
Despite your best efforts to imbue me with the means and ends of academe i am afraid that I remain both ignorant of and unconvinced by its allure in the resolutely ( or so it seems to me ) pragmatic and experiential sphere of dharma practice.
My critique of Taoism is that it not Buddhidharma...I have no interest in its history or in the evolution of its ideas.
The actualisation of one spiritual path is more than a challenge to me.
I am a simple soul.
You might be a simple soul, but you have proposed that it is clearly a problem to post Taoist content on a Mahayana board. All I'm saying is that, yes, of course they are distinct, but there has been much interesting resonance and discontinuity. What word do think was initially used to translate 'dharma' into Chinese?
If you have no interest in its history or ideas, then why do you care?
I care that sincere seekers who are interested in dharma but not yet familiar with it might mistake neo~ Taoism for dharma.
I have told the story before .
A friend had a section of his phd dissertation devoted to Taoism, and in particular it's modern presentation
He reached the conclusion that Taoism did not in fact exist. Probably never has beyond a ragbag of disperate ideas. And that if it does exist he hates it.
Whatever the truth of that, Taoism is not Dharma.