PART SIX Daoism in the modern world
15 Daoism in the modern world
All that was once directly lived has become mere representation.
—Guy Debord, Society of the Spectacle (1967)
Simulation is no longer that of a territory, a referential being, or a substance. It is the generation by models of a real without origin or reality: a hyperreal…The era of simulation is inaugurated by a liquidation of all referentials…It is no longer a question of imitation, nor duplication, nor even parody. It is a question of substituting the signs of the real for the real.
—Jean Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation (1981)
These passages point towards the fragmented and surreal, perhaps hyperreal, experience of living in the modern world, especially in modern industrialized societies with their post-humanistic scales and their increasing banality. They also point towards the ascendance of disembodied forms of communication and placeless (“virtual”) community as the primary dimensions of selfhood (“digital identity”) in such contexts. As we have seen, pre-modern Daoism has tended to emphasize aesthetics, community, embodiment, place, and so forth. Such values and commitments challenge most modernist and postmodernist mentalities. This does not mean that Daoism is solely archaic and primitive.1 Rather, it suggests that Daoists and Daoist communities tend to be rooted in meaning systems and social realities that seem radically different when juxtaposed with the systems and processes of modern life. The question thus arises as to the fate of Daoism in the modern world. Some have suggested that Daoism is on the brink of extinction, while others believe that the tradition is currently undergoing renewal and revitalization. This largely depends on how one understands Daoism, and what one believes its defining characteristics and essential features are. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle: the landscape of Daoism has experienced massive erosion, deforestation and desertification, but there are communities attempting to inhabit and restore the sacred site.
There can be no doubt that Daoists, Daoist communities, and Daoist culture suffered immense difficulties during China’s Cultural Revolution (1966–76), in which religious sites were closed or destroyed and the overt functioning of religion was banned. This resulted in a “lost generation” of mainland Chinese Daoists (ages 50–80) and a massive disruption in the continuity of the tradition. At the same time, the Chinese Communist Revolution also prepared the way for the globalization of tradition-based Daoism, and mainland Chinese Daoism has gradually regained some of its vitality from the 1980s onward. However, like the near-absence of Daoist clerical voices in the modern representation of the tradition, the presence of “Daoism” in the modern world is largely a series of intellectual fabrications, fictions, and fantasies. While such constructions and appropriations are simulacra (copies without an original), actual Daoism, as an indigenous Chinese and global religious tradition, has begun to be disseminated and established throughout the modern world. Remaining rooted in and transcending its Chinese origins, the global Daoist tradition is characterized by cultural, ethnic and linguistic diversity. In that context, Daoism is both a Chinese religion and a transnational movement. Such a development requires reflection on the relationship among cultural, ethnic and religious identity.
1] Approaching global Daoism
As emphasized throughout the present book, Daoism is first and foremost an indigenous Chinese religion deeply rooted in traditional Chinese culture and history. At the same time, Daoism is now slowly becoming established throughout the modern world. With varying degrees of connection with the Chinese source-tradition, Daoism is becoming transmitted and adapted in the modern world. Beyond the Chinese cultural sphere, there are tradition-based Daoist adherents and communities in Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Great Britain, Italy, Spain, the United States, and so forth. These adherents and communities consist of people from a wide variety of cultural and ethnic backgrounds.
Before discussing the history, defining characteristics, and dimensions of contemporary Daoism, some theoretical points and interpretive frameworks may be helpful. We may map the landscape of contemporary global Daoism along a spectrum: from transmission through adaptation to appropriation and fabrication. These relate to tradition and innovation.
CHART 12 Spectrum of Global Daoism
Transmission is the most tradition-based; it emphasizes the preservation and transmission of tradition. This of course requires investigating the conception and construction of “tradition” within particular communities. However, with the religious literacy gained from the earlier chapters of the present book, the contours and parameters of the Daoist tradition should be relatively clear. Adaptation involves both a connection to the earlier tradition and a commitment to innovation. It usually involves modifying the received tradition to meet the influences of new socio-historical and cultural contexts as well as the challenges of modernity. Some degree of assimilation and accommodation is involved. A question here is at which point do “innovation” and “adaptation” become so removed from the source-tradition that they are no longer part of that tradition. Finally, appropriation involves appropriating bits and pieces of a religious tradition. In the case of Daoism, this is most often done in the name of “personal spirituality.” As a form of intellectual and spiritual colonialism (see Lau 2000; Carrette and King 2004), appropriation is the most widespread phenomenon of Western engagement with Daoism, and there are major ethical and political issues involved. Simply stated, most forms of appropriation involve denial of the defining characteristics of Daoism, disempowerment of ordained Daoists and Daoist religious communities, and disparagement of the Daoist tradition as such. Most of what goes by the name of “Daoism” in the West, especially throughout the internet and popular publications, are forms of appropriation and fabrication. They are rooted in colonialist, missionary and Orientalist legacies.
2] Daoism in contemporary China
The center of global Daoism remains mainland Chinese Daoism, followed closely behind by Taiwanese and Hong Kong Daoism. That is, Daoism as such remains predominantly an indigenous Chinese religion practiced by people of Han ethnicity in China and the larger Chinese cultural sphere. It is largely a Chinese religion rooted in traditional Chinese culture. The latter includes Chinese aesthetics, cultural values, food, language, worldviews, and so forth. The contemporary landscape of global Daoism is intricately connected to the history of modern China. As briefly touched upon in Chapter 2, the modern history of Daoism is one of turbulence, disruption, and almost complete devastation (see also Schipper 2000). It is largely a history of loss: the loss of community, cultural capital, patronage, place, tradition, and actual material culture. Prior to the 1980s, the modern history of Daoism appeared to be one of geographical contraction, cultural diminishment, and spiritual dissolution (see Pas 1989; Overmyer 2003; Miller 2006). And yet, it is also a story of revitalization.
Chinese dynastic history, with its corresponding emperors, ruling houses, aristocracy, and officialdom, ended with the Qing dynasty (1644–1911). This occurred in 1912 when the Republicans, also known as the Nationalists, established the Republic of China (ROC; 1912–49; 1949–). This government was subsequently replaced by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1949. At that time, the Republicans as well as many of the Chinese cultural elite fled to Taiwan, where they relocated the Republic of China. Unlike Hong Kong, which was reincorporated from Great Britain in 1997 as a Special Administrative Unit under the “one country, two systems” system, Taiwan remains independent from the PRC. Two other key dates should be mentioned. First, the Cultural Revolution occurred between 1966 and 1976, wherein a systematic attempt was made to destroy all remnants of traditional Chinese culture and religion. Daoists, Daoist communities, and Daoist sacred places suffered immense damage, including the forced evacuation of Daoist temples and the forced laicization of Daoist clergy. Second, following the death of Mao Zedong (1893–1976), Deng Xiaoping (1904–97) initiated the Four Modernizations, economic and social reforms that commenced in 1978. These developments opened the way for increased religious freedom and revitalization. However, unlike in the United States where there is legal separation of church and state, religious activity is monitored and managed by the state in the modern PRC. The Chinese Communist government recognizes five official religions, including Buddhism (fojiao), Catholicism (tianzhu jiao), Daoism (daojiao), Islam (yiselan jiao), and Protestant Christianity (jidu jiao) (see Poceski 2009; Yao and Zhao 2010). All of these occur within institutional structures that are overseen by the Bureau of Religious Affairs, and the corresponding religious association. In the case of historically and culturally significant sacred sites, the Bureau of Religious Affairs oversees the clergy and their activities, while the Bureau of Culture controls important artifacts and the Bureau of Tourism oversees tourist activity, including entrance fees. Thus, mainland Chinese Daoist sites are not primarily under the control of Daoists.
Contemporary Daoism in mainland China is dominated two primary movements: Zhengyi and Quanzhen, especially the latter’s Longmen lineage (see also Lai 2003; Chen 2008). While this is undoubtedly the case, such statements should also be qualified. Daoism has also been popularized through various Daoist and “non-Daoist” Yangsheng (Qigong) and internal alchemy practices, continuing the process of simplification, popularization, and laicization that began during the late imperial period. That is, there are non-clerical and non-institutional expressions of Daoism in contemporary China. This engagement with “Daoism” also appears as interest in so-called “Daoist philosophy” (zhexue) and “Daoist thought” (sixiang). A number of modern Chinese intellectuals, such as Hu Fuchen (Chinese Academy of Social Studies) and Liu Xiaogan (Chinese University of Hong Kong), have attempted to establish so-called “New Daojia” (xin daojia), in a manner perhaps paralleling “New Confucianism” in the twentieth century.
These points notwithstanding, Zhengyi and Quanzhen remain the primary forms of Daoism in contemporary China, especially when one considers Daoism as a religious tradition, an intact culture, and an integrated soteriology. As we have seen in previous chapters, Zhengyi is an alternate name for the Tianshi movement. The former name refers to the revelation and covenant, while the latter name refers to the highest clerical position, the Celestial Master. In the modern world, the Celestial Master is less important, but we should at least know something about the complex modern history of the position. The most recent Celestial Masters are as follows: Zhang Yuanxu (1862–1924; 62nd), Zhang Enpu (1904–69; 63rd), Zhang Yuanxian (1930–2008; 64th) (Kleeman 2008a), and possibly Zhang Jiyu (b. 1962; 65th). The eldest son of the 62nd Celestial Master, Zhang Enpu fled to Taiwan with the Nationalists, where he established Taipei, Taiwan as the de facto headquarters of Tianshi Daoism. Zhang Enpu was instrumental in establishing the Taiwan Daoist Association (Taiwan sheng daojiao hui) in 1950, later renamed the Daoist Association of the Republic of China (Zhonghua minguo daojiao hui), and in securing the reprinting of the Mingdynasty Daoist Canon in 1962 (see Chapter 12 herein). Following Zhang Enpu’s death, the position of the Celestial Master passed to his nephew, Zhang Yuanxian and then possibly to Zhang Jiyu following the former’s death in 2008. The circumstances of the most recent transfer are unclear, but it is significant because the Celestial Master now appears to be in mainland China, rather than in Taiwan. Zhang Jiyu is currently one of the vicepresidents of the Chinese Daoist Association.
Perhaps more important than the Celestial Master himself are the various family lineages and local Zhengyi communities, which are especially prominent in southeastern China and Taiwan (see Chapter 13). These groups have received a relatively high degree of scholarly consideration, especially through ethnographic fieldwork, and have in turn exerted strong influence on Western academic accounts of Daoism. Particularly noteworthy are the Taiwanese priests Zhuang-Chen Dengyun (1911–76), who was studied by
Michael Saso, and Chen Rongsheng (b. 1927), studied first by Kristofer Schipper, then by John Lagerwey and Poul Andersen, among others. In terms of the history of global Daoism, we should also note that both Saso (b. 1930) and Schipper (b. 1934) were among the first known Westerners ordained as Daoist priests. They are both ordained members of Zhengyi, and they have also helped to establish a model of Daoist scholar-practitioners inside of Daoist Studies. In contemporary mainland China, the two principal sacred sites associated with Zhengyi are Longhu shan (Dragon-Tiger Mountain; near Yingtan, Jiangxi) and Maoshan (Mount Mao; Jurong, Jiangsu) (see Chapter 14). It also appears that the recent reinstitution of large-scale ordination ceremonies at Longhu shan has included a number of Westerners.
Although there are Zhengyi priests and communities throughout contemporary mainland China, most of the major temples and sacred sites are under the jurisdiction of Quanzhen (see Chapter 14), and specifically its Longmen lineage. At the same time, contemporary mainland Chinese Quanzhen is deeply bound to the Bureau of Religious Affairs and the Chinese Daoist (Taoist) Association (CDA/CTA; Zhongguo daojiao xiehui). The CDA was established in 1957, with its headquarters at Baiyun guan (White Cloud Monastery; Beijing). The first assembly was attended by ninety-one representatives including Daoist scholars and priests from Daoist lineages, mountains, and temples located throughout China. Sixty-one members were elected, and Yue Chongdai (1888–1958), the abbot of Taiqing gong (Palace of Great Clarity; Shenyang, Liaoning), was chosen as president (Wang 2006: 137–72; Sakade 2008b). The activities of the CDA were suspended during the Cultural Revolution, but recommenced in 1980. The CDA functions under the direction of the Bureau of Religious Affairs, which is the primary bureaucratic organization governing contemporary mainland Chinese Daoism. Its national presidents (huizhang) have included the following individuals: (1) Yue Chongdai (1888–1958), (2) Chen Yingning (1880–1969), (3 & 4) Li Yuhang (1916–2002), (5) Fu Yuantian (1925–97; Longmen), (6) Min Zhiting (Yuxi [Jade Stream]; 1924–2004; Huashan), and (7) Ren Farong (Miaohua [Wondrous Transformation]; b. 1936; Longmen). The CDA is based at Baiyun guan, which also serves as a major research center for Chinese Daoist Studies, and as one of the principal training centers and ordination sites for Longmen novices. In terms of training, the Chinese Daoist Seminary (Daojiao xueyuan) is there.
3] Contemporary Daoism in the Chinese cultural sphere
The “Chinese cultural sphere” refers to those areas within which China was the primary cultural influence. Broadly speaking, it refers to East Asia, including Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, as well as parts of Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam. The cultural and religious situation of each of these countries is unique, and many of them are now characterized by a combination of capitalism, Buddhism, and Christianity. That is, Chinese cultural and Daoist influence are relatively minor. However, there are nonetheless examples of global Daoism in these countries. Unfortunately, very little research has been done on this topic, so the present account must be taken as preliminary and tentative.
Contemporary Taiwanese Daoism has received a relatively high degree of attention in modern Western scholarship (see Chapter 13 herein). This was largely a response to contemporary Chinese history, with mainland China being relatively inaccessible prior to the 1980s. During the Cultural Revolution in mainland China, Taiwanese Daoists played a major role in preserving traditional Daoist culture, including material culture of historical significance such as Daoist liturgical art, manuscripts, and ritual traditions (see Chapter 15). Contemporary Taiwanese Daoism is dominated by the Zhengyi movement, with hereditary priests and Daoist families who perform rituals for local communities. Generally speaking, these are full-time ritual experts whose services are commissioned by members of the local community. Like Hong Kong Daoism, Taiwanese Daoism is highly syncretic, often combining elements from Confucianism, Buddhism, Chinese popular religion, and even Christianity. In addition, due to Taiwanese laws concerning legal status, many newer religious movements such as Yiguan dao (I-kuan tao; All-pervading Truth; Unity Sect), with only tenuous connections to Daoism, have been categorized as Daoist.
Outside of Hong Kong itself, contemporary Hong Kong Daoism is less well known than its Taiwanese counterpart. To date, it has only received one Western-language study (see Tsui 1991). Much of Hong Kong Daoism is dominated by powerful and wealthy Daoist families. There are also a number of large and prominent temples, with Ching Chung Koon (Qingsong guan; Azure Pine Monastery; New Territories), Fung Ying Seen Koon (Peng-Ying xianguan; Immortal Community of Peng and Ying; New
Territories), Wong Tai Sin (Huang daxian; Great Immortal Wong; Kowloon), Yuen Yuen Institute (Yuanxuan xueyue; Complete Mystery Institute; New Territories), and Yuk Hui Temple (Yuxu gong; Palace of Jade Emptiness; Cheung Chau Island) being among the most influential. In particular, Wong Tai Sin is probably the most famous and popular temple as well as a major tourist destination (see Lang 1993). In addition, it appears that Moy Lin-shin (1931–98) and Mui Ming-to (d.u.), the co-founders of Fung Loy Kok (Penglai ge; Penglai Pavilion) in North America, had some connections with the Yuen Yuen Institute. As many of the Hong Kong temples are highly syncretic and incorporate a variety of elements of popular Chinese religiosity, their categorization as “Daoist” deserves additional research and reflection.
Due to the somewhat factional nature of Hong Kong Daoism, there are also a number of competing Hong Kong Taoist Associations. Hong Kong Daoism in turn consists of Zhengyi, Longmen, as well as various family lineages with less clear histories. With respect to Zhengyi, Zhengyi priests are the main ritual experts for festivals and for the jiao-offering rituals in the villages of the New Territories and outlying islands; they also dominate the market for “non-Christian” funeral services (David Palmer, per. comm.). In terms of Longmen, as in Taiwan, the lineage differs from its mainland Chinese counterpart; generally speaking, it is not monastic and does not adhere to foundational Quanzhen religious commitments. In fact, research suggests that the establishment of Daoist communities and institutions in Hong Kong was largely an extension of popular spirit-writing cults and charitable societies in southern China during the late Qing dynasty (1644– 1911) (see Tsui 1991; Mori 2002; Shiga 2002). Many of the former specifically focused on mediumistic activity related to Lü Dongbin (“Ancestor Lü”), a famous Tang dynasty immortal and wonder-worker identified as the patriarch of certain internal alchemy lineages (see Chapter 6). For some reason, these groups often identified themselves as Longmen. If one believes the internal histories of certain southern families, it seems that there were also formal Longmen temples in southern China, whose affiliates eventually migrated to Hong Kong. According to the Luofu zhinan (Guide to Luofu), ordained Longmen priests first established temples in Guangdong in the late seventeenth century (Tsui 1991: 66–70), but the actual relationship between these temples and the Daoist temples in Hong Kong remains unclear (see Shiga 2002). In any case, major Daoist temples and organizations began to be established in Hong Kong from the late nineteenth through the middle of the twentieth century.
The Hong Kong organizations consist of both ordained, married clergy as well as a much larger lay community. Hong Kong Daoism has developed its own unique characteristics and forms of ritual activities, including newer forms of Daoist liturgical practice. It seems that the dissemination and growth of Daoism among southern Chinese groups who eventually migrated to Hong Kong was largely due to two major factors. First, in the case of Lüzu (Ancestor Lü) cultic activity and temples, individuals were given insights into an unpredictable future through spirit-writing sessions. In addition, many people reported supernatural and healing experiences. Such events no doubt proved appealing to potential converts. Second, in the case of charitable societies, people were given assistance in times of need. Combined together, one finds a context where popular devotionalism and social solidarity flourished. Such patterns of community involvement continue in the contemporary Hong Kong Daoist emphasis on services for departed ancestors. Here we should also mention that, given their relatively high degree of cultural capital and material resources, Taiwanese and Hong Kong Daoist organizations have played a major role in the revitalization of contemporary mainland Chinese Daoism, especially in terms of funding mainland Chinese Daoist restoration projects and research on Chinese Daoism. Many temple construction and renovation projects are the result of their funding.
In terms of Japan, initial research indicates that the history of Daoism in Japan was largely one of the dissemination and adoption of specific views and practices, rather than enduring institutions (Masuo 2000; Sakade 2008a). Of the major Daoist beliefs adapted, the emergence of the “Kōshin cult” in medieval Japan is noteworthy. The kōshin (Chn.: gengshen) day, the fifthseventh day of the sexagesimal (sixty-day) cycle when the Three Deathbringers supposedly reported an individual’s moral transgressions (see Chapters 7 and 9 herein), became a popular religious festival and celebration. In contrast to their Chinese Daoist ascetic counterparts, Japanese participants engaged in extravagant banquets, drank wine, ate meat, performed music, watched dance performances, and played games. The current situation of Daoism in Japan is unclear, although Daoyin, Yangsheng, and internal alchemy, some of which have roots in Daoism, have some circulation through the larger populace.
Beyond Taiwan and Hong Kong, and within the larger Chinese cultural sphere, it appears that Korea received the greatest degree of early transmission and acceptance. Current research indicates that Daoism was first introduced into Korea when Emperor Gaozu (r. 618–26) of the Tang dynasty sent Chinese Daoist priests and a statue of a Celestial Worthy to the kingdom of Koguryo in 624, and had priests read the Daode jing before the Korean king and court (Jung 2000; Miura 2008a). The first Daoist temple, named Bokwon kung (Palace of the Auspicious Source), was built at the beginning of the twelfth century under the Koryo dynasty (918–1392). It housed statues of the Sanqing (Three Purities) and was tended to by more than ten white-robed Korean Daoist priests. It appears that some form of institutionalized Daoism, however small, existed in Korea until the Choson dynasty (1392–1910), which adopted Confucianism as state ideology. The then-extant fifteen officially recognized sites for Daoist offerings and rites that had been established during the Koryo dynasty were almost all abolished. Early Korean engagement with Daoist beliefs and practices primarily centered on the court; Daoist priests performed rituals to protect the state on behalf of the court and royal family. With the decline of Daoist state ritual under the Choson dynasty, Korean intellectuals became more interested in Yangsheng and internal alchemy practices. Around the fifteenth or sixteenth century, such interest grew into the formation of a specifically Korean neidan school, namely the Haedong sonp’a (Korean Immortal Lineage) (Miura 2008a). Although the motivations behind and degree of Korean conversion is currently unknown, Daoist internal alchemy practice became one dimension of Korean religious culture. For example, the contemporary group Kukson to (Way of National Immortals) practices a form of neidan-inspired breathing techniques. There is also Sundo (Way of the Immortals; a.k.a. Mountain Taoism), a more recent group founded by Hyunmoon Kim (d.u.). The movement is present in the United States among groups associated with Hyunmoon Kim as well as with Hyunoong Sunim (d.u.) of the Sixth Patriarch Zen Center (Berkeley, California). Both groups are principally rooted in Korean Son (Zen) Buddhism, but Son meditation is combined with Daoyin and internal alchemy practice. This is not to mention the global organization known as Dahn Yoga® (Dahn Hak) founded in 1986 by IIchi Lee (Lee Seung-heun; b. 1950). Dahn Yoga® is a form of hybrid spirituality and spiritual capitalism that utilizes some Daoist respiratory and internal alchemy practices.
The history and contemporary situation of Daoism in Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam is even less well known. A fair amount of recent research has, however, been dedicated to the Yao (see Lemoine 1982; Pourett 2002;
Alberts 2006; also Chapter 2 herein). The Yao, also distinguished as MiaoYao and Hmong-Mien, are a minority ethnic group whose members converted to Daoism. Traditionally speaking, Yao tribal culture was characterized by slash-and-burn agriculture, upland habitation, and widespread migratory patterns. People of Yao ethnic identity have lived in the southern Chinese provinces of Fujian, Hunan, Guangdong, Guangxi, and Yunnan. They eventually migrated to Vietnam, Laos, and Thailand, probably in the thirteenth century, where they continue to form a segment of those societies. The Yao have their own non-Sinitic (possibly Sino-Tibetan) language, but, similar to pre-modern Japanese, Korean, and Vietnamese, they utilize Chinese script as the primary form of written language.
Extant sources and current research suggest that large numbers of Yao most likely began converting to Daoism during the Southern Song dynasty (1127–1279). With the defeat of the Northern Song by the Jurchens, the Song imperial court and masses of northern Chinese migrated to Hangzhou in Zhejiang province. There they came in direct contact with the Yao and other indigenous peoples living in southern China. In that context, Daoism, specifically as expressed by Daoist ritual masters and communities in the newly codified “orthodox rites of Celestial Heart” (tianxin zhengfa) (see Chapters 2 and 13), formed part of the dominant Chinese state, wherein it served as a means by which to assimilate and “civilize” non-Chinese peoples (i.e., Sinification). According to Michel Strickmann’s institution-centered perspective, “T’ien-hsin cheng-fa [Tianxin zhengfa) priests worked as ambulant missionaries, bringing their exorcistic and theurapeutic rituals directly into the homes of the common people. There is evidence that they received official support…several magistrates who were initiated into the movement…made use of T’ien-hsin rites in the course of their official duties: pacifying their district, reducing epidemics, and guaranteeing the harvest” (Strickmann 1982; cited in Lemoine 1982: 22). In terms of the Yao’s own motivations for conversion, little research has been done to date. Many accounts, following a fairly conventional anthropological and sociological perspective wherein the Yao are seen as passive recipients rather than active agents, fail to consider the Yao’s own views on Daoism and their own process of “Yaoicization” of Daoism. That is, the Yao did not simply become Sinicized or Daoicized.
One of the most interesting and distinctive characteristics of “Yao Daoism,” especially as expressed among contemporary Yao communities in Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam, is its social organization. The Yao maintain a universal Daoist priesthood, with every member passing through successive levels of ordination with corresponding Daoist spirit registers (lu). Social standing within Yao society is based on one’s position in the religious community. The Yao situation is particularly noteworthy because identity formation and social standing is directly correlated to Daoist religious adherence and affiliation. To be a respected and senior member of Yao society is to be a higher-level Daoist ordinand. Here we see a context of conversion and adaptation wherein certain Yao communities have become “more Daoist” than their indigenous Chinese counterparts. While the Yao have, of course, adapted and modified Daoist beliefs and practices to their own cultural concerns, “it is still remarkable that they have maintained a non-Chinese society over an extended period of time based upon the strictures and beliefs of a distinctively Chinese religion” (Kleeman 2002, 33). In terms of global Daoism, the Yao, like the Ba (see Kleeman 1998), are especially interesting. They are clear examples of earlier historical precedents for “non-Chinese” conversion to Daoism and for Daoism as a multi-ethnic and multicultural tradition. However, as has been a consistent pattern throughout Chinese history, Ba and Yao conversion involved Sinification. They adopted major Chinese cultural traditions, including classical Chinese, and they utilized such language in scriptural and ritual contexts. It also formed the basis of ordination, including the transmission of scriptures and other religious documents. The modern fate of such patterns of adherence and affiliation, especially in the West (see below), is unclear.
Before moving on to discuss global Daoism beyond the Chinese cultural sphere, I would like to highlight two additional examples of transmission and appropriation. The first example is the Taoist Mission of Singapore (Xinjiapo daojiao xiehui; TMS). The Taoist Mission was founded in 1996 by a group of young and enthusiastic Daoists who wanted to promote Daoism, to preserve Chinese traditions and values, and to provide education on various aspects of Daoism. It is currently under the direction of Lee Zhiwang (b. ca. 1945), who serves as president (huizhang). Lee is an ordained Longmen Daoist priest, having received training and ordination under the late Sun Mingrui (1925–2010). Lee also received ritual training at Baiyun guan in Beijing. The organization offers a variety of education and culturepreserving activities, and conducts Daoist rituals for its community. The organization is also a major promoter of the International Daoism Day (2/15) and has strong connections with the Chinese Daoist Association and the Italian Taoist Association. Its members are primarily Singapore citizens of Chinese ethnic descent.
The second example relates to “Thai Daoism.” Healing Tao (Healing Dao), also known as Tao Yoga and Universal Tao, was first established in the United States in 1979 by Mantak Chia (b. 1944), a Thai citizen of Chinese ancestry who lived in America during the formative moments of the movement (see Belamide 2000; Siegler 2003, 2011; Komjathy 2004). Healing Tao/Universal Tao was created from a variety of sources (it is a form of hybrid spirituality), transformed into an international organization, and then exported “back” to Thailand, where Mantak Chia established the Tao Garden Health Spa and Resort (Chiang Mai, Thailand). Healing Tao/Universal Tao represents one of the most successful spiritual businesses appropriating Daoism. In its American expression, it includes a hierarchically ordered credential system and offers various “dream trips” to China, which represent a form of spiritual tourism. It has been instrumental in contributing to the Western construction of Daoism as reducible to techniques, specifically sexual methods with no connection to Daoism as a living Chinese and now global religion.
4] Global Daoism beyond the Chinese cultural sphere
Global Daoism may be defined as a globalized, multicultural, multi-ethnic and trans-national religion which exhibits strong family resemblances and a high degree of recognizability with the Chinese source-tradition.2 Its primary representatives are ordained priests or lineage-based Daoists, including immigrant and ethnic Chinese teachers as well as those of “non-Chinese,” most often European, ancestry. Some of these individuals trained in China, while others were ordained in their respective countries. The corresponding communities are committed to tradition-based Daoist practice and forms of community. They are addressing the challenges of modernity and of adapting Daoism to a global context with a relatively high degree of attentiveness to the Chinese tradition as source. As with any religious tradition, there are always issues of affinity, authenticity, and credibility involved in the associated teachers and communities, and I leave it to readers to find their own positions on these and other matters.
Beyond the Chinese cultural sphere, some important organizations include Associación de Taoísmo de España (Spanish Taoist Association; Xibanya daojiao xiehui; est. 2001); Association Française Daoïste (French Daoist Association; Faguo daojiao xiehui; est. 2003); Associazione Taoista d’Italia (Italian Taoist Association; Yidali daojiao xiehui; est. 1993); British Taoist Association (Yingguo daojiao xiehui; est. 1996); and Sociedade Taoísta do Brasil (Brazilian Taoist Association; Baxi daojiao hui; est. 1991). As indicated above, the use of xiehui in these organizations’ Chinese names models itself on the Zhongguo daojiao xiehui (Chinese Daoist Association), with xiehui largely being a political designation.
Of these principally European organizations, one specific example will have to suffice. The British Taoist Association was established in 1996 by four British converts and ordained Longmen priests with the support of two mainland Chinese Daoist priests. The former included Shijing (Alan Redman; b. ca. 1950), Shidao (Peter Smith; b. ca. 1970), Shiran (Paul Dunnett; d.u.), and Shizhi (Hooileng Dunnett; d.u.). The latter included Feng Xingzhao (b. ca. 1950) and Huang Shizhen (b. ca. 1965). The British Daoists were ordained by Feng Xingzhao at Leigu tai (Beating Drum Tower; Ziyang, Shaanxi). Based in Buckhurst Hill, just outside of London, the British Taoist Association is a small, non-sectarian Daoist community. It primarily consists of about 200 supporting members,3 most of whom are British citizens. BTA offers Daoist retreats with particular emphasis on “tranquil sitting” (jingzuo) and Daoyin. These retreats are held at Hourne Farm, in the Sussex countryside. They are mainly taught by Shijing, BTA’s chairman (president), but other Chinese and Western teachers have also led retreats through the organization. This organization also publishes a Daoist magazine titled The Dragon’s Mouth. It maintains connections with the Chinese Daoist Association and other European Daoist organizations. Shijing and Shidao also serve on the advisory board of the Daoist Foundation (see below).
FIGURE 25 Founding Members of the British Taoist Association Source: British Taoist Association
In terms of North America, the situation is extremely complex. Here I will simply list some tradition-based Daoist communities and organizations. From my perspective, “American Daoism” refers to the entire landscape of tradition-based Daoism in America, that is, it includes immigrant, ethnic Chinese, and “non-Chinese” adherents and communities. Some traditionbased North American communities and organizations include the following: American Taoist and Buddhist Association (New York, New York; est. 1979); Center of Traditional Taoist Studies (Weston, Massachusetts; est. 1978); Ching Chung Taoist Association (Ching Chung Taoist Church; San Francisco, California; Vancouver, British Columbia; est. 1978); Daoist Foundation (San Diego, California; est. 2007); Daoist Gate Wudang Arts (Boston, Massachusetts; est. 2011); Fung Loy Kok/Taoist Tai Chi Society (Toronto, Canada; Denver, Colorado; est. 1970); Orthodox Daoism in America (formerly in Santa Cruz, California; Seattle, Washington; 1986– 2004); Taoist Restoration Society (formerly in Nederland, Colorado; 1997– 2007); and Taoist Studies Institute (Seattle, Washington; est. 1991) (see Komjathy 2003b; 2003c, 2004; Siegler 2003, 2010).
As with the revitalization of mainland Chinese Daoism from the 1980s to the present, the establishment of tradition-based global Daoism is a slow process, a process that is still in its formative moment. Thus, the story of “global Daoism,” at once rooted in and transcending the Chinese sourcetradition, is just beginning to be composed.
FURTHER READING
Clarke, J.J. 2000. The Tao of the West: Western Transformations of Taoist Thought. London and New York: Routledge.
Iwamura, Jane. 2000. “The Oriental Monk in American Popular Culture.” In Religion and Popular Culture in America, edited by Bruce David Forbes and Jeffrey H. Mahan, 25–43. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Kirkland, Russell. 1997. “The Taoism of the Western Imagination and the Taoism of China: De-colonizing the Exotic Teachings of the East.” http://kirkland.myweb.uga.edu/rk/pdf/pubs/pres/TENN97.pdf [Accessed June 1, 2012].
Kohn, Livia, and Harold Roth, (eds) 2002. Daoist Identity: History, Lineage, and Ritual. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Komjathy, Louis. 2004. “Tracing the Contours of Daoism in North America.” Nova Religio 8.2 (November 2004): 5–27.
—2006. “Qigong in America.” In Daoist Body Cultivation, edited by Livia Kohn, 203–35. Cambridge, MA: Three Pines Press.
—2011. “Common Misconceptions concerning Daoism.” Center for Daoist Studies. www.daoistcenter.org/basic [Accessed on June 1, 2012].
Lai Chi-tim. 2003. “Daoism in China Today, 1980–2002.” In Religion in China Today, edited by Daniel Overmyer, 107–21. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Siegler, Elijah. 2003. “The Dao of America: The History and Practice of American Daoism.” Ph.D. diss., University of California, Santa Barbara.
Tsui, Bartholomew P.M. 1991. Taoist Tradition and Change: The Story of the Complete Perfection School in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Christian Study Centre on Chinese Religion and Culture.
Basic glossary
Adherent: A member of a religious tradition. Replaces earlier concepts such as “believer.” In the case of Daoism, individuals who are committed to and/or have formal association with the religious community and tradition. An English approximation of various indigenous Chinese Daoist terms, including daoren (“person of the Dao”), daoshi (“adept of the Dao”; Daoist priest and/or monastic), daozhang (“elder of the Dao”; Daoist priest and/or monastic), and so forth.
Anthropology: Comparative category referring to discourse on, study of, or theories about the human. Most often used to refer to a social scientific discipline studying human culture. As a theological category, refers to claims about human nature and personhood, especially in relation to the sacred. Following traditional Chinese culture, the standard Daoist anthropology emphasizes a composite self that consists of one hun (yangghost) and one po (yin-ghost).
Apophatic meditation: A form of contentless, non-conceptual, and nondualistic meditation first practiced and advocated by members of the inner cultivation lineages of classical Daoism. Meditation practice emphasizing emptiness and stillness. As an umbrella category, “apophatic meditation” approximates a variety of Daoist technical terms, including baoyi (“embracing the One”), jingzuo (“quiet sitting”), shouyi (“guarding the One”), xinzhai (“fasting of the heart-mind”), zuowang (“sitting-in-forgetfulness”), and so forth.
Baiyun guan (Pai-yün kuan): White Cloud Monastery. Originally named Tianchang guan (Temple of Celestial Perpetuity), it was first established in the mid-eighth century as a state-sponsored temple for officially recognized Daoist clergy. During different periods of Chinese history, control of the temple alternated between Zhengyi and Quanzhen Daoists. Located in Beijing, today Baiyun guan is a Quanzhen monastery. Also current headquarters of the Quanzhen monastic order and the national Chinese Daoist Association as well as the location of the Chinese Daoist Seminary.
Chinese Daoism: Indigenous Chinese religion deeply rooted in traditional Chinese culture and history. A religious tradition practiced largely by people of Han ethnicity and using classical Chinese, especially with respect to scripture and ritual. From a Chinese Daoist perspective, culture (Chinese), ethnicity (Han), and religion (Daoism) are intricately related, if not inseparable. The vast majority of Daoist history is the history of Chinese Daoism.
Classical Chinese: Pre-modern literary Chinese. The primary language of Daoism. The language in which Daoist scriptures have traditionally been composed and transmitted and in which Daoist ritual is conducted.
Cosmogony: Comparative category referring to discourse on, study of, or theories about the origins of the universe. The standard Daoist cosmogony emphasizes an impersonal and spontaneous process of manifestation and emanation, a movement from primordial nondifferentiation to differentiation. The process of cosmogonic unfolding includes multiple gods and sacred realms.
Cosmology: Comparative category referring to discourse on, study of, or theories about the underlying principles and patterns of the universe. Following traditional Chinese culture, the standard Daoist cosmology focuses on yin-yang and the Five Phases (wuxing). The universe is an impersonal transformative process characterized by the alterations and interactions of yin and yang.
Dao (Tao): Pinyin Romanization of a Chinese character meaning “Way” (cosmic order) and/or “way” (lifepath). As a Daoist cosmological and theological category, utilized by Daoists to designate their sacred or ultimate concern. In the case of Daoism, best left untranslated as “Dao.” From a Daoist perspective, the Dao has four primary characteristics: Source of all existence; unnamable mystery; all-pervading sacred presence; and universe as cosmological process.
Daode jing (Tao-te ching): Scripture on the Dao and Inner Power. Also translated as “Classic on the Way and Virtue.” One of the main texts of classical Daoism and a central scripture of the Daoist tradition. Attributed to Laozi (Master Lao), but actually a multi-vocal anthology with historical and textual layers from the 4th to 2nd c. BCE. Originally titled Laozi (Lao-tzu), which is conventionally translated as Book of Master Lao, but better rendered as Book of Venerable Masters. The received text, usually the Wang Bi (226–49) redaction, consists of eighty-one verse chapters.
Daoism (Taoism): Indigenous Chinese religious tradition (“Chinese Daoism”). Now a global religious tradition characterized by cultural, ethnic, and linguistic diversity (“global Daoism”), which recognizes Chinese Daoism as source-tradition. As an approximation of various indigenous Chinese terms, designates Daoist adherents, communities, and their religious expressions.
Daoist (Taoist): An adherent of the religious tradition which is Daoism. In a more restrictive sense, ordained clergy (daoshi ) with formal standing in a Daoist religious community (priests and/or monastics). In a more inclusive sense, individuals (daoren) following a Daoist religious path (householders and/or laity). Also problematically applied to individuals who “believe in the Dao.” The latter are best understood as “Daoist sympathizers.”
Daoist Studies (Taoist Studies): Modern academic field dedicated to education, research, and publication with respect to Daoism. Scholars of Daoist Studies usually have a Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) degree in Asian Studies and/or Religious Studies. There are, in turn, diverse theoretical and methodological approaches to the academic study of Daoism, including comparative, ethnographic, historical, textual, and so forth.
Daojia (tao-chia): Family of the Dao. One of the earliest indigenous Chinese names for Daoism. Primarily used to designate the inner cultivation lineages of classical Daoism. Often mistranslated and misrepresented as so-called “philosophical Daoism.”
Daojiao (tao-chiao): Teachings of the Dao. One of the most prominent indigenous Chinese names for Daoism. Conventionally used to identify organized Daoism. Often mistranslated and misrepresented as so-called “religious Daoism.”
Daojing (tao-ching): Scriptures of the Dao. Jing is usually translated as “scripture” (sacred text) and/or as “classic.” On a material culture and linguistic level, manuscripts written in classical Chinese using calligraphy. The most important genre of Daoist literature. One of the external Three Treasures of the Dao, the scriptures, and the teachers. The character jing 經 consists of the mi 糸 (“silk”) radical and jing 巠 (“underground stream”). Scriptures are threads and watercourses that form and re-form networks of connection. They connect Daoists to both the unnamable mystery and sacred presence which is the Dao and the Daoist tradition, the community of adepts that preceded one, as a historical and energetic continuum. From a Daoist perspective, scriptures are inspired or revealed. They are usually anonymous and/ or attributed to divine beings such as Laojun (Lord Lao) or Yuanshi tianzun (Celestial Worthy of Original Beginning).
Daotong (tao-t’ung): Tradition of the Dao. Term here proposed to designate the Daoist tradition, so-called daojia-daojiao. Conventionally refers to Rujia (Family of the Scholars; “Confucianism”).
Daozang (Tao-tsang): Daoist Canon. The term literally means “storehouse of the Dao.” Primary Daoist textual collection and source for Daoist Studies. In the modern world, refers to the Daoist Canon compiled during the Ming dynasty (1368–1644), which consists of 1,487 texts.
De (te): Virtue or inner power. The Dao manifested in human beings as numinous presence and as embodied activity in the world, especially as a beneficial and transformational influence that might be categorized as “good.”
Epistemology: Comparative, philosophical category referring to discourse on, study of, or theories about knowledge. Often misidentified as a central Daoist concern.
Existentialist: Comparative, philosophical category relating to existence, specifically human being. Often related to questions of meaning and purpose. A central Daoist concern.
Ge Hong (Ko Hung; Baopu [Embracing Simplicity]; 287–347): Grandnephew of Ge Xuan (164–244) and disciple of Zheng Yin (ca. 215ca. 300). Major representative of the Taiqing (Great Clarity) movement of external alchemy (waidan). Author of the highly influential Baopuzi neipian (Inner Chapters of Master Embracing Simplicity; DZ 1185) and primary author of the Shenxian zhuan (Biographies of Spirit Immortals; JHL 89).
Global Daoism: Modern Daoism as an international and transnational religious tradition. Although rooted in Chinese Daoism as historical and cultural source-tradition, global Daoism is a “trans-Chinese” tradition. With global dissemination, it is characterized by cultural, ethnic, and linguistic diversity. Comprised of Daoist adherents and communities committed to Daoism as a religious tradition and way of life.
Inner Cultivation Lineages: Name proposed by Harold Roth (Brown University) to refer to the earliest master-disciple communities of classical Daoism, specifically during the Warring States period and Early Han dynasty. Emphasis placed on aphophatic meditation aimed at mystical union with the Dao.
Laojun (Lao-chün): Lord Lao. Deified Laozi. Often identified as “personification of the Dao.” Early high god of Daoism. From a Daoist perspective, the god who manifests through various human beings, including Laozi. Also the revelatory source of many key Daoist scriptures. Eventually incorporated into the Sanqing (Three Purities) as Daode tianzun (Celestial Worthy of Dao and Inner Power).
Laozi (Lao-tzu): Master Lao. Laozi may also mean “old master” or “old child.” Pseudo-historical figure traditionally identified as the author of the Daode jing. Problematically identified as the “founder of Daoism.” Also known as Li Er, Li Boyang, or Lao Dan (Lao Tan). As Lao Dan, possibly one of the senior teachers and elders of the inner cultivation lineages of classical Daoism, with some of his teachings possibly preserved in the Daode jing and Zhuangzi.
Lingbao (Ling-pao): Numinous Treasure. Major early medieval Daoist religious movement established by Ge Chaofu (fl. 390s), a Shangqing adherent and grandnephew of Ge Hong. Systematized by Lu Xiujing (406–77). First major Daoist movement to exhibit strong Buddhist influences, Lingbao places emphasis on ritual and universal salvation.
Longmen (Lung-men): Dragon Gate. Most prominent lineage of Quanzhen (Complete Perfection) Daoism. Traditionally associated with Qiu Chuji (Changchun [Perpetual Spring]; 1148–1227). The official, “orthodox” lineage was established during the Qing dynasty by Wang Changyue (Kunyang [Paradisiacal Yang]; 1622?–80), then abbot of Baiyun guan. Emphasis placed on lineage-based internal alchemy as well as precept study and application.
Louguan tai (Lou-kuan t’ai): Lookout Tower Monastery. Located in Zhouzhi, Shaanxi, earliest Daoist monastery. Probably established in the late fifth or early sixth century. During the early medieval period, identified by Daoists as the place where Laozi transmitted the Daode jing
to Yin Xi. This version of the transmission legend arose in the mid-fifth century through Yin Tong (398–499?), a self-identified descendent of Yin Xi and owner of the Louguan estate. Now a Quanzhen monastery and tourist destination.
Lu Xiujing (Lu Hsiu-ching; 406–77): Lingbao (Numinous Treasure) adherent and highly influential early medieval Daoist leader. Organized the Lingbao scriptures into the “Lingbao Catalogue.” Also compiled the earliest known catalogue of Daoist texts, which established the Three Caverns (sandong) as the primary division of Daoist textual collections. As a major systematizer and scholarstic, Lu Xiujing was one of the principal architects of Daoism as a diverse, but unified religious tradition.
Neidan (nei-tan): Internal alchemy. Literally means “inner pill” or “inner cinnabar.” Also translated as “inner elixir.” Complex Daoist practice aimed at complete psychosomatic transformation and immortality. Usually involves sequential, stage-based methods utilizing various subtle and mystical dimensions of self. First systematized during the late Tang and early Song dynasties. One of the primary forms of Daoist meditation.
Ontology: Comparative, philosophical category referring to discourse on, study of, or theories about being. A central Daoist concern.
“Philosophical Daoism”: Outdated and inaccurate “translation” of daojia. Conventional, received Western name for the inner cultivation lineages of classical Daoism. Use of the term should be taken as indicative of inaccuracy and misunderstanding concerning Daoism.
Popular Western Taoism (PWT): New form of Western hybrid spirituality with little to no connection to the religious tradition which is Daoism. Pronounced with a hard “t” sound, PWT is primarily characterized by appropriation, fabrication, and spiritual colonialism. Rooted in colonialist, missionary and Orientalist legacies, PWT is represented through various so-called “Tao Groups” and “Tao-ists.” Through its ubiquitous presence on the internet and in popular publications, the primary influence on the popular Western construction and misunderstanding of Daoism.
Qi (ch’i): Subtle or vital breath. Often translated as “energy” or “pneuma.” May refer to both actual physical respiration or subtle breath, the subtle currents flowing through the universe and self. Best left untranslated as “qi.”
Qiu Chuji (Ch’iu Ch’u-chi; Changchun [Perpetual Spring]; 1148–1227): Youngest of the senior first-generation Quanzhen (Complete Perfection) adherents and member of the so-called Seven Perfected. Third Quanzhen Patriarch who helped to transform the movement into a monastic order.
Quanzhen (Ch’üan-chen): Complete Perfection. Also translated as “Complete Reality” or “Completion of Authenticity.” Influential late medieval Daoist movement emphasizing asceticism, alchemical practice, and mystical experience. Established in the late twelfth century by Wang Zhe (Chongyang [Redoubled Yang]; 1113–70) based on a series of mystical experiences with immortals. Quanzhen is one of the major divisions of Daoism in the modern world. Primarily comprised of monastics committed to celibacy (no sex), sobriety (no alcohol), and vegetarianism (no meat).
“Religious Daoism”: Outdated and inaccurate “translation” of daojiao. Conventional, received Western name for organized Daoism. Problematically associated with the Tianshi (Celestial Masters) movement and its derivatives. Use of this term should be taken as indicative of inaccuracy and misunderstanding concerning Daoism.
Ren Farong (Jen Fa-jung; b. 1936): Prominent mainland Chinese Longmen monastic and former abbot of Louguan tai. Current president of the Chinese Daoist Association.
Sacred: A comparative category referring to that which is defined as ultimately real by an individual or community. Relates to a variety of tradition-specific categories with distinctive defining characteristics and related theological views. In the case of Daoism, the sacred is the Dao. The Dao has four primary characteristics: Source of all existence; unnamable mystery; all-pervading sacred presence; and universe as cosmological process.
Sanqing (San-ch’ing): Three Purities. Also translated as Three Pure Ones.
The highest “gods” of the Daoist pantheon, they include Yuanshi tianzun (Celestial Worthy of Original Beginning), Lingbao tianzun (Celestial Worthy of Numinous Treasure), and Daode tianzun (Celestial Worthy of the Dao and Inner Power; Lord Lao). Anthropomorphic representations of three primordial cosmic ethers. Associated with the Three Heavens of Yuqing (Jade Clarity), Shangqing (Highest Clarity), and Taiqing (Great Clarity), respectively.
Seven Perfected: Seven senior Shandong disciples of Wang Zhe (1113–70), the founder of Quanzhen (Complete Perfection) Daoism. The Seven Perfected include (1) Hao Datong (Taigu [Grand Antiquity]/Guangning [Expansive Serenity]; 1140–1212); (2) Liu Chuxuan (Changsheng [Perpetual Life]; 1147–1203); (3) Ma Yu (Danyang [Elixir Yang]; 1123– 83); (4) Qiu Chuji (Changchun [Perpetual Spring]; 1148–1227); (5) Sun Buer (Qingjing [Clear Stillness]; 1119–82), the only female member; (6) Tan Chuduan (Changzhen [Perpetual Perfection]; 1123–85); (7) Wang Chuyi (Yuyang [Jade Yang]; 1142–1217). In early Quanzhen, Ma Yu and Qiu Chuji were especially influential as the second Patriarch and third Patriarch, respectively. In the later tradition, each senior first-generation adherent becomes associated with a particular lineage.
Shangqing (Shang-ch’ing): Highest Clarity. Major early medieval Daoist religious movement associated with the spirit-medium Yang Xi (330–86) and the Xu family. A series of revelations from the Shangqing heaven, including those of the former female Tianshi libationer Wei Huacun (251–334). The original manuscripts were later collected by Tao Hongjing (456–536). Early Shangqing placed primary emphasis on visualization and ecstatic experience.
Shengren (sheng-jen): Sage. Classical Daoist religious ideal. The embodiment of classical Daoist principles and practices. A realized Daoist elder.
Soteriology: Comparative category referring to discourse on, study of, or theories about actualization, liberation, perfection, realization, salvation, or however the ultimate purpose of human existence is defined. Usually relates to the culmination and projected goal of religious discipline. In the case of Daoism, the standard Daoist soteriology involves attunement with or realization of the Dao, though there are diverse Daoist paths to such an existential and ontological condition.
Sympathizer: Individuals who claim some affinity with a religious tradition without being committed to or formally associated with it. In the modern world, Daoist sympathizers are most often individuals engaging in appropriation and following hybrid, designer spirituality. Such individuals usually take bits and pieces, whether ideas, beliefs or practices, out of a larger Daoist religious framework. They often cling to various common misconceptions concerning Daoism.
Tao Hongjing (T’ao Hung-ching; 456–536): Descendent of Tao Kedou (d.
362) and advanced Shangqing adherent. Later compiler of original
Shangqing manuscripts and author of the Zhen’gao (Declarations of the
Perfected; DZ 1016). Also established a religious center on Maoshan (Mount Mao; near present-day Nanjing, Jiangsu), where he pursued alchemical and pharmacological studies.
Theology: Comparative category referring to discourse on, study of, or theories about the sacred. Includes various types of theology, with mutually exclusive, equally convincing accounts of “reality.” Some types of theology include animistic (gods or spirits in Nature), monistic (one impersonal Reality), monotheistic (one personal god [“God”]), panenhenic (Nature as sacred), pantheistic (sacred in the world), panentheistic (sacred in and beyond the world), polytheistic (many personal gods), and so forth. Daoist theology focuses on the Dao, with the primary theology being monistic, panenhenic and panentheistic, and the secondary theology being animistic and polytheistic.
Three Treasures: Used by Daoists to discuss primary values, key dimensions of self, and/or central constituents of the Daoist tradition. The phrase first occurs in Chapter 67 of the Daode jing. In the fully developed Daoist tradition, under the influence of Buddhism, the external Three Treasures (wai sanbao) refer to the Dao, the scriptures, and the teachers, with the latter understood as specific teachers (embodied and disembodied), community elders, and the Daoist religious community as a whole. In internal alchemy (neidan), the internal Three Treasures (nei sanbao) refer to vital essence (jing), qi, and spirit (shen).
Tianshi (T’ien-shih): Celestial Masters. Also translated as “Heavenly Teachers.” Refers to both an early Daoist movement (Celestial Masters) and its highest religious position (Celestial Master). The latter is a patrilineal position passed down through the Zhang family. As a movement, established by Zhang Daoling (fl. 140s CE), who received a revelation from Laojun (Lord Lao) in 142 CE. Also referred to as Zhengyi (Orthodox Unity). Emphasis placed on communal ritual activity. One of the major divisions of Daoism in the modern world. Primarily comprised of married, ordained priests and a larger lay community.
Traditional Chinese culture: Pre-modern Chinese culture. Also referred to as “traditional Chinese worldview.” Largely consists of Confucianism as primary value system with some elements from Daoism (indigenous), Buddhism (non-indigenous, then Sinified), and popular religion (syncretic). Includes a cosmology based on yin-yang and the Five Phases (“traditional Chinese cosmology”). Also includes cultural elements such as Chinese medicine, Fengshui, health and longevity practice (e.g. Qigong), martial arts (e.g. Taiji quan), and so forth. Many elements of traditional Chinese culture are often misidentified as Daoist.
Wang Changyue (Wang Ch’ang-yueh; Kunyang [Paradisiacal Yang]; 1622?–80): Late imperial abbot of Baiyun guan (White Cloud Monastery) and founder of the official Longmen (Dragon Gate) lineage of Quanzhen Daoism. Compiled its three precept texts: Chuzhen jie (Precepts of Initial Perfection), Zhongji jie (Precepts of Medium Ultimate), and Tianxian jie (Precepts of Celestial Immortality).
Wang Zhe (Wang Che; Chongyang [Redoubled Yang]; 1113–70): Founder of Quanzhen (Complete Perfection) Daoism. Said to have had a series of mystical experiences with the immortals Zhongli Quan (Zhengyang [Upright Yang]; 2nd c. CE?) and Lü Dongbin (Chunyang [Pure Yang]; b. 798?). Eventually gathered disciples who transformed Quanzhen from a local religious community into a regional and national movement and then into a monastic order.
Wuwei (wu-wei): Non-action. Classical and foundational Daoist principle and practice emphasizing effortless activity. Non-intervention and noninterference. Life beyond contrivance. Living through one’s innate connection with the Dao. Often misunderstood as “doing nothing” or “going with the flow.”
Wuxing (wu-hsing): Five Phases. Also translated as Five Elements. The five main constituents and processes of the universe. Part of traditional Chinese cosmology incorporated into the foundational Daoist worldview. In combination with yin-yang, referred to as “correlative cosmology” and the “system of correspondences.” Consists of Wood (minor yang), Fire (major yang), Earth, Metal (minor yin), and Water (major yin). These have various associations and relate to each other in patterns of dynamic interaction. Often misidentified as Daoist, this cosmology is best understood as “traditional Chinese cosmology” and a dimension of the “traditional Chinese worldview.” It is pan-Chinese.
Xianren (hsien-jen): Immortal. Also translated as “ascendant” or “transcendent.” Later Daoist religious ideal, especially in Daoist alchemical movements and lineages. Someone who has completed alchemical transformation and who will survive physical death as a spirit-being.
Yin-yang: Yin-yang. The two primary cosmological principles or forces from a traditional Chinese perspective. Not polar opposites or antagonistic forces. Complementary and mutually dependent principles. Yin-yang have various associations (e.g. dark/ light, heavy/light, cold/hot, earth/heaven, etc.) and relate to each other in patterns of dynamic interaction. Part of traditional Chinese cosmology incorporated into the foundational Daoist worldview. In combination with the Five Phases, referred to as “correlative cosmology” and the “system of correspondences.” Often misidentified as Daoist, this cosmology is best understood as “traditional Chinese cosmology” and a dimension of the “traditional Chinese worldview.” It is pan-Chinese.
Zhang Daoling (Chang Tao-ling; fl. 140s CE): Founder of the Tianshi (Celestial Masters) movement and the first Celestial Master. Said to have received a revelation from Laojun (Lord Lao) on Heming shan (Crane Cry Mountain; Dayi, Sichuan) in 142 CE. One of the most important leaders of early organized Daoism. In place of Laozi, often problematically identified as the “founder of Daoism.”
Zhang Jiyu (Chang Chi-yü; b. 1962): In some circles identified as the 65th Celestial Master and one of the current vice-presidents of the Chinese Daoist Association.
Zhengyi (Cheng-i): Orthodox Unity. Alternative name for the Tianshi (Celestial Masters) movement. Emphasis placed on communal ritual activity. One of the major divisions of Daoism in the modern world. Primarily comprised of married, ordained priests and a larger lay community. Places less emphasis on the position of Celestial Master and more emphasis on family lineages with their own esoteric traditions.
Zhenren (chen-jen): Perfected. Also translated as “authentic being” or “real person.” Later Daoist religious ideal, especially in Daoist alchemical movements and lineages. Someone who has completed alchemical transformation and who will survive physical death as a spirit-being.
Zhongguo daojiao xiehui (Chung-kuo tao-chiao hsieh-hui): Chinese Daoist (Taoist) Association. Centralized Daoist bureaucratic organization in mainland China overseeing Daoist religious activity. Includes national, regional, and local divisions. Division of the Bureau of Religious Affairs.
Zhuang Zhou (Chuang Chou; ca. 370-ca. 290): Zhuangzi (Master Zhuang). One of the senior teachers and elders of the inner cultivation lineages of classical Daoism. Attributed author of the Zhuangzi (Book of Master Zhuang). Zhuang Zhou’s teachings and writings are primarily contained in the Inner Chapters (Chapters 1–7).
Zhuangzi (Chuang-tzu): Book of Master Zhuang. Also referred to as the Nanhua zhenjing (Perfect Scripture of Perfected Nanhua), with Nanhua (Southern Florescence) being an honorific name for Zhuangzi. One of the main texts of classical Daoism and a central scripture of the Daoist tradition. Attributed to Zhuangzi (Master Zhuang), but actually a multivocal anthology with historical and textual layers from the 4th to 2nd c. BCE. The received text, the Guo Xiang (d. 312) redaction, consists of thirty-three prose chapters. Modern scholarship divides these into various lineages or “schools.”
Ziran (tzu-jan): Suchness. Literally meaning “self-so,” ziran has also been translated as “naturalness” and “spontaneity.” Being-so-of-itself. The state or condition realized when one returns to one’s innate nature, which is the Dao. In terms of classical Daoism, this is “accomplished” through the practice of wuwei. Often assumed in modern popular culture as the reproduction of habituation or following one’s own desires (“going with the flow”).
Zongjiao ju (Tsung-chiao chü): Bureau of Religious Affairs. Branch of Chinese Communist bureaucracy in charge of supervision of members and activities of the five officially recognized religions (Buddhism, Catholicism, Daoism, Islam, Protestant Christianity) of contemporary China, including their infrastructure. Often works in concert, and often at odds with, the Bureau of Culture and Bureau of Tourism.
