Daoism And Buddhism Similarities

Daoism and Buddhism; Purposes and Distorted Conceptions

A number of different, unique philosophies emerged out of Asia in the distant past. Two such philosophies are Buddhism and Daoism. As philosophies of thought, there are general similarities in relation to characteristics such as the purposes of the philosophies and the misconceptions which hinder one on the path to ultimate reality. However, although similar, they also exhibit markedly different qualities which set them apart from one another. In the end, as a result of these differences, Daoism seems like a more practical and plausible philosophy in which to ultimately reap its rewards.

As philosophies, Buddhism and Daoism alike aim to cultivate the well-being of humankind. This is

clear, especially when examining the context in which the philosophies came about. For example, before Daoism came about, China was in a time “tired [by] war and chaos, one yearning for a bygone age of innocence” (Ivanhoe 162). As a result, Daoism sought to end the conflicts in society and create harmony and peace in its place. Likewise, Buddhism aims to create harmony and peace by freeing sentient beings from suffering. Both incorporate a main goal of encouraging their followers to surpass ignorance and to live more according to a cognition which flows and is not static. Ultimately, were one to follow either Buddhism or Daoism, they would learn to have the mindset of an innocent, newborn child. As a consequence to this, one would be able to throw away any acquired pieces of knowledge, which may not necessarily be true, and thus not be vulnerable to make nonsensible distinctions among different objects.
Along with creating harmony within society, each philosophy also recognizes the same common misconceptions which hinder individuals on their respective paths in life. The major misconception each philosophy attributes to this hindrance is making distinctions among objects, categorizing objects or ideas as separate and distinct from one another. In reality, as both Buddhism and Daoism show, this is a distorted conception because life is not always so full of dualistic concepts such as “you and I, this and that, [or] good and bad” (Suzuki 29). Shunryu Suzuki explores this concept in Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind, as he brings up the concept of non-duality, which could also be known in Buddhist terms as sunyata, or emptiness. In this concept, all beings or things are interconnected, not distinct or separate from another being or thing; nothing stands alone, and everything is an expression of one seamless whole. For instance, there are different perspectives on matters which, ultimately, may actually be”two sides of one coin” (Suzuki 25). For example, there are those who think they are good and those who think they are bad fathers, when in all actuality the major difference between the two is that one thinks they are good and one thinks they are bad. As a consequence to one thinking they are bad, they may put more effort into trying to be good. Thus, it is possible to be both good and bad simultaneously. Ultimately, both Daoism and Buddhism claim that one should not hold onto unnecessary distinctions such as this. Instead of following a path in the world of humankind’s creation, one should follow a path more resemblant of the path that natural parts of the world, like water, follow. This is because water provides access and nourishment to all, “benefiting the myriad creatures,” without denying access to one in favor of another through discrimination (Ivanhoe 166).
Although there are similarities, Buddhism and Daoism are not precisely the same philosophy.

For example, Buddhism’s purpose goes beyond simply creating harmony and ending the concept of duality. Instead of having just the individual realize true nature, or enlightenment, Buddhism seeks to create enlightenment among all sentient beings. This includes the noble goal of freeing all beings from suffering, which could be done by eliminating the misconception of duality and ignorance which plague the beings. Although noble, this is further complicated by Buddhist terms such as Bodhisattva, which is one who has achieved enlightenment yet still desires to free all beings from suffering. On the other hand, according to Daoism, any form of desire influences one’s experience of reality, and as a result one who desires to free all beings from suffering would be cut off from the Buddhist path towards enlightenment. Daoism advocates more for “let[ting] everything go as it goes” as a way to resolve conflicts and mistakes in conceptions (Suzuki 33). For example, one excerpt from the Daodejing remarks that “[i]n ancient times, those good at practicing the Way did not use it to enlighten the people, but rather to keep them in the dark” (Ivanhoe 195). In the end, the purpose of Daoism and Buddhism is exceptionally similar, however there is a remarkably larger focus in Buddhism in freeing all beings from ignorance and allowing all beings to become enlightened while Daoism focuses primarily on simply acting naturally and according to one’s true nature, a term Daoists call

spontaneity.
While there are distinct differences in regards to the respective purposes of the philosophies, there is less distinction among the misconceptions which they aim to correct. Each proposes that humankind is hindered by a common yet mistaken conception of duality, or unnecessary distinctions. By attempting to resolve this misconception, each promotes a sense of connection and interdependence among beings in the world. However, Daoism seems to have more of a focus on correcting these misconceptions by acting more according to one’s true nature, a term called non-action. Meanwhile, Buddhism seeks to correct these misconceptions by more involved measures such as practicing proper posture, breathing, bowing, reciting mantras, following an Eightfold Path and keeping in mind Four Noble Truths. In essence, Daoism seems significantly more simple and Buddhism more complex in terms of resolving the misconceptions which hinder one on the path towards enlightenment or the Dao.
Ultimately, Buddhism and Daoism alike share an affinity for exceptionally abstract concepts. Yet, Daoism seems more plausible than Buddhism as a philosophy in regards to steering individuals away from the misconceptions which inhibit them on their paths in life, and in fulfilling in individuals its purpose. One main reason for this is that Buddhism is significantly more complex than Daoism. While Daoism has a few abstract terms such as non-action and spontaneity, Buddhism has numerous such terms, such as emptiness or sunyata, enlightenment, suffering, the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path, and more.
In addition, another reason Daoism is more plausible than Buddhism is that Daoism also came about for a more easily believable purpose. Derived from a time of great conflict, it is easy to discern how and why Daoism advocates for non-action and spontaneity. These concepts foster peace, a much needed virtue at the time of Daoism’s conception. While Buddhism also advocates for peace and resolved conflicts, its purpose of eliminating suffering for all sentient beings simply seems too tremendous to be realistically achieved. As a result of this, Daoism seems much more plausible as a philosophical theory than Buddhism in terms of correcting the misconceptions that thwart beings on their paths in life and in fulfilling its goals.
While Buddhism and Daoism have some differences in certain characteristics such as the distorted, ordinary conceptions of things which beings hold onto and in the general purposes of the philosophies, it should be noted that there are stark similarities among these characteristics as well. Actually, the two seem remarkably similar, pointing to the idea that they may possibly be related to each other; one might be branching off of another in a philosophical family tree. Therefore, although Daoism seems more plausible as a tradition and philosophical theory, both are in fact reasonable theories in regards to bringing about peace and harmony in the world and in illuminating one’s path to follow either the Dao or enlightenment.