Comparing Buddhism, Daoism, Yoga and Brahmanism

[Morphius]

I’d very much like to know what those experienced practitioners think of this paper:

https://www.researchgate.net/public...nships_of_Buddhism_Daoism_Brahmanism_and_Yoga

Do you agree with this root of non-action?

 

[danieldemol]

I’d very much like to know what those experienced practitioners think of this paper:

https://www.researchgate.net/public...nships_of_Buddhism_Daoism_Brahmanism_and_Yoga

Do you agree with this root of non-action?

I'm not an experienced practitioner of any of the above, but welcome to RF

 

[PureX]

The "root" is Taoism. A very old eastern philosophy based on an idea that relates humanity to the world in such a way as to create a kind of profound conundrum; that is then resolved by what is often referred to as "inaction".

 

[Morphius]

I'm not an experienced practitioner of any of the above, but welcome to RF

Thanks Daniel.

 

[Morphius]

The "root" is Taoism. A very old eastern philosophy based on an idea that relates humanity to the world in such a way as to create a kind of profound conundrum; that is then resolved by what is often referred to as "inaction".

Pure X could u explain more please.

 

[rocala]

A nice question Morpheus, thank you. I have only skimmed the document but I see things that I like. The common root idea does tie in with my own viewpoint.

 

[Morphius]

Thanks Rocala.

 

[PureX]

Pure X could u explain more please.

Man exists sort of suspended between two realms of being; the physical realm, and the metaphysical realm. We might label these the material realm and the divine realm. The divine realm being the realm of meaning and purpose, and the physical realm being the expression of that meaning and purpose.

But in such a halfway state, man is not fully aware or either, even though we are partially aware of both. So we do not know our purpose, and we therefor do not know 'how to be'.

To resolve this conundrum, Taoism asserts that we can fulfill our purpose, nevertheless, by aligning ourselves with the 'flow of being', or the 'way existence exists'. The word Tao refers to this way, or flow. That through the practice of honesty, humility, and spontaneity, we can fulfill the nature of our own being. And therefor the purpose of our being (without having to know it).

"Inaction" is a term used to refer to that alignment with the flow of 'what is', as opposed to our constantly trying to bend or alter or stem that flow to gain our own determined state of being.

 

[Morphius]

Man exists sort of suspended between two realms of being; the physical realm, and the metaphysical realm. We might label these the material realm and the divine realm. The divine realm being the realm of meaning and purpose, and the physical realm being the expression of that meaning and purpose.

But in such a halfway state, man is not fully aware or either, even though we are partially aware of both. So we do not know our purpose, and we therefor do not know 'how to be'.

To resolve this conundrum, Taoism asserts that we can fulfill our purpose, nevertheless, by aligning ourselves with the 'flow of being', or the 'way existence exists'. The word Tao refers to this way, or flow. That through the practice of honesty, humility, and spontaneity, we can fulfill the nature of our own being. And therefor the purpose of our being (without having to know it).

"Inaction" is a term used to refer to that alignment with the flow of 'what is', as opposed to our constantly trying to bend or alter or stem that flow to gain our own determined state of being.

Thanks!

 

[metis]

Welcome, and I may have a comment tomorrow whereas I have more time.

 

[The Hammer]

Man exists sort of suspended between two realms of being; the physical realm, and the metaphysical realm. We might label these the material realm and the divine realm. The divine realm being the realm of meaning and purpose, and the physical realm being the expression of that meaning and purpose.

But in such a halfway state, man is not fully aware or either, even though we are partially aware of both. So we do not know our purpose, and we therefor do not know 'how to be'.

To resolve this conundrum, Taoism asserts that we can fulfill our purpose, nevertheless, by aligning ourselves with the 'flow of being', or the 'way existence exists'. The word Tao refers to this way, or flow. That through the practice of honesty, humility, and spontaneity, we can fulfill the nature of our own being. And therefor the purpose of our being (without having to know it).

"Inaction" is a term used to refer to that alignment with the flow of 'what is', as opposed to our constantly trying to bend or alter or stem that flow to gain our own determined state of being.

Wu wei

 

[Rival]

***THREAD MOVED TO COMPARATIVE RELIGION***​

 

[Twilight Hue]

I’d very much like to know what those experienced practitioners think of this paper:

https://www.researchgate.net/public...nships_of_Buddhism_Daoism_Brahmanism_and_Yoga

Do you agree with this root of non-action?

He really dosent address in detail what non action is supposed to be.

 

[Vitality]

He really dosent address in detail what non action is supposed to be.

Haven’t read this in its entirety due to time constraints. However, a quick skim revealed the goal is not to define non-action, but instead offer a comparison of what non-action entails for each discipline along with the origins of such practices. Seems pretty on-point from what I did read thus far. What I find interesting about the different schools of thought is the different intentions behind non-action; a subject of ongoing discourse among friends of mine.