/lit/ - Literature

>>17592634
To be honest, I have been studying Chinese history for a long time, I even read Wenyan a little (with a dictionary), well, I can make out a simple text, in general, I have been fond of China for a long time and consider myself a relatively intelligent person. (Apparently in vain and arrogant, since I visit this cesspool of the Internet.) Never mind.
So I honestly admit that I do not understand anything about Taoism. I don't believe that anyone other than the Chinese can understand, and since the Chinese have now turned into shit and have renounced the ancient culture, I doubt that anyone on Earth can at all.
For me, Taoism was the invisible soul of Chinese culture, in contrast to the Confucian "face". I think Taoism is completely alien to us non-Chinese.

Secondly, "Taoism" combines different trends from the sophisticated philosophy of Chuang Tzu and Lao Tzu (and not yet the fact that they are compatible), to the expulsion of spirits and elixirs from mercury.
Buddhism is also not very homogeneous and it is often difficult for different Buddhists to understand what they have in common besides the name.

>It seems to me Taoism is the embracement of life while Buddhism is the renunciation of life.
With all of the above, you have a point.
I would really say that Buddhism goes through the renunciation of life to its attainment.
It was a bit of a strange thought (not mine) that Shakyamuni had just begun to truly live only after becoming a Buddha. That is, life without enlightenment is generally non-life.
I'm not sure where the Taoists are heading, but it seems that their acceptance of the Tao is not as life-loving as it seems.
Lao-tzu he loves people, but without warmth, people are simply funny to him, like "straw dogs". They are just ridiculous and ridiculous, how can you hate a scarecrow? I don't know, I'm not sure.

In general, vitality is a pretty scary thing. One must also love decay, horror, anger, despair, pain, death. Yes, some people love it. As a real gambler who likes to put everything on the line and lose with a smile, enjoy the fall. Yes, some people love all this, but usually they do not create philosophical systems.

>>17592634
>Would you consider Philosophical Taoism and Buddhism to be at odds?
The early Tang dynasty Taoist master Fu Yi called Buddhism a demonic religion in his work Gaoshi zhuan

>>17594090
Sounds very based. Death to those who insult the great mother's work.

>>17592634
Syncretism is the most enlightened path (taking the best from everything).

> 11th generation Dragon Gate priests Min Yi-De (闵一得) combined three religions (Taoism, Confucianism and Buddhism) together to develop the "Dragon convenience methods". The principle is "learn from Buddhism, to comply with the precepts, diligently practice inner alchemy arts", so that the Dragon Gate branch became thriving. Dragon Gate is currently the largest existing Taoism branch in the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_Gate_Taoism

There is also a Buddhist I Ching (an interpretation of the I Ching from the viewpoint of Buddhist teaching)

>>17593766
>I think Taoism is completely alien to us non-Chinese.
I see people saying this, why is alien (or even as in someone else's words "unknowable") to the non-Chinese?

I don't think there's anything to get in Tao, it's not a gotcha nor does it demand enlightenment. Fairly similar to zen buddhism I suppose, for obvious reasons.

>>17594535
>it's not a gotcha nor does it demand enlightenment
this is what confuses westeners often
i myself am a westener but i remember we took a look at taoism for our highschool philosophy club -- everybody kept questioning it. i was the one who got people interested, and so i defended it, but i tried to make it clear it isn't a thing necessairly "defended". as an example i tried to explain how school shootings can coexist with taoist thought that everything is perfect -- you can imagine how well they agreed with that point kek. and no, they didn't get freaked out by me, they had enough experience in philosophy to understand the difference between observation and action, as well as the grayness of philosophy.
at the end of the day they had not a hatred for taoism but a sort of confusion they refused to accept as natural for any philosophy.

sorry for my shitty writing. whenever i'm typing something personal i change writing styles.

>>17593766
Stoicism has been very popular in recent times among westerners, and I heard it was very similar to Taoism. Is that a misunderstanding or something?

>>17594833
>Is that a misunderstanding or something?
Ethics of stoicism is built upon deterministic metaphysics so yeah.

>>17594833
i mean... both accept life as is and don't fuss about it. taoism embraces life, putting it above god even, whereas stoicism accepts life for what it is and silently endures with questions about death or whatever else.
for a taoist heaven is manifest on earth through the existence of the tao -- though depending on how you interpret "heaven" you may find issue with this statement. for a stoic life just is. a taoist will acknowledge the perfection of his life. whether he celeberates in a happy manner his tribulations is another question entirely dependent on his views within taoism.

if you haven't gotten the point already i'll simplify it more:
the taoist and the stoic will drink from the bottle of life without complaint; but the taoist will have the feeling of perfection when he has finished the drink -- the stoic will say the drink was a drink, in contrast. one embraces a hard to define, even admittedly impossible to define, by admission of tao te ching, view on life that may best be aproximated as perfection. not happiness, not sadness, etc, but a feeling of wholeness.


are you okay with living? do you not feel a need to augment your life? do you not think there can be a singular definable purpose to life? all these the stoic and taoist answer "yes". but the next question, is life perfect, is what divides them.

Why all taoist thread are so blessed?

>>17595114
life is based

>>17594090
>>17592634
>>17594219
Buddhism filters 99% of the people. It's not for the masses and non-enlightened people, ie NPC, hate it since Buddhism contradicts everything they love

>>17596237
>t. person trying to become a literal npc
Me? I'm happy with this thing called "Life", you know, the most insane impossible thing to imagine -- so insane you can't even imagine it. I'm happy with the great mother -- go ahead and become a literal object divorced from all her gifts; enjoy ego death.

>>17594298
>Urantia faggot
>advocates for syncretism in the worst way imaginable that Guenon warned us about
Checks out.

>>17594743
>>17592634
What translation do you recommend to the Tao?

>>17596499
What exactly is Guenon's argument against syncretism?

>>17594872
Barely anyone cares about that though

>>17595018
Thanks, I see. I think the Taoist answer to the last question can be found among lots of Christians ("God writes straight with crooked lines", "God has a plan", "He knows what's best for us" and that kind of stuff), specially very simple people. So it seems to me that, although a very uncommon combination, with some syncretism between western traditions (Stoicism, secularism and simple-minded Christianism) the "spirit" of Tao could be reproduced and assimilated

>>17592634
Buddhism has very clearly taken influence from Taoism once it left India to become East Asian Buddhism as we commonly know it today, spread throughout China and Japan etc.

And its doctrines somewhat changed as a result of the outsider influence, which by that point the original version of Buddhism in India was hollowed out and replaced with Hinduism with little trace.

>>17596499
>The reasons for Guénon’s belief are complex, but they have to do with his view of the ages as a gradual movement (and decline) from a pure and direct contact with the primordial source of Tradition, which he associates with prehistoric polar civilisation known as Hyperborea. Over the millennia, contact with this Tradition has become more and more occluded so that in our time we are almost entirely cut off from it.
https://www.newdawnmagazine.com/articles/rene-guenon-counterinitiation-are-things-getting-better-or-worse

Wacky if true, no?

>>17596578
You're not wrong that it's a similiar line of reasoning, but when you investigate it further you realize some massive differences that have massive impacts on your life... Christians often don't see life good per se but good like the journey to a place. A Taoist finds such... you know the drill, no word to describe it -- that he is content with life per se. No need for a greater plan or anything else.

One argues that life seems so horrible because we lack God's wisdom, we aren't to judge with our mortality, the other argues life's wretchedness is it's gift -- non per se; per res ex nihilo. I don't want to misrepresent the Taoist position, so I'll just say my own; when I die I will look upon life and say "It could be no other way or I'd not be -- this is all mine and no other's, all chance and no chance led here. I have no desire to change anything, especially my small desires to change things, they made it all worth living." I'll die happy then. The insanity of life is it's gift. Try to make sense of it and you'll fail, be dumbfounded if an earnest attempt, but you might just learn the natural state, an awe of the Dao, from a new angle.

>>17596582
I might have my history wrong, but Hinduism predates, Buddhism. Buddhism moved East partially because Islam had begun to spread to India and while they had an easy time killing all the Buddhist, the much older Hinduism proved more resilient toward the invading forces.

>>17596626
I'm more referring to the Vedic Brahmanism that predates present Hinduism from around 500 BC, which is around the same time as Buddhism which I should've stated.

And by replaced I mean it didn't arise from it, just became the predominant religion in the country once Buddhism slowly became more prominent outside of India than within.

I'm no scholar on this myself but I think you got your history correct there.

>>17596624
Sorry, let me amend that a little: I won't die happy, I'll die content. There won't be a thrashing about to fix x and z and all else. There will be a thought, "So this was Anon... How he played Mario on that bed! How he danced in elementary school to his beats! Oh, how he suffered then!", etc etc.
From a young age I've had a depressive side of me dominate, my shadow, and I've mostly integrated it into myself. I know I do not desire a life without sadness. I know I do not desire a life with only sadness.
That is why I will not thrash, I think anyway. I know I've lost sight of the Dao before and likely will again -- it wouldn't be the Dao or me if it weren't so. Maybe you can feel the resigning yet free self in those words, what a beautiful thing we have.

>>17596576
Basically, he says mix and matching parts of religious doctrines and rituals, especially when taken out of context of their respective metaphysics, is nonsensical and you wind up with something that's schizophrenic.
>>17596587
Says Guenon is wacky
>Posts a link to a wacky New Age magazine
Pot calling the kettle a nigger.

>>17596626
The vedas predates buddhism, but buddhism shits on everything normies enjoy, and with the brahmins infiltrating buddhist monasteries 500 years after the buddha, they changed the teachings and now nirvana is just ''having no thought'' , ''live laugh love'', ''resting in the eternal mind'' and ''living in the present moment''.

>>17596764
I mean Buddhism seemed to be a response to the Hindu belief of reincarnation. It offered a way to break the cycle. As for the YOLO stuff, I feel that is mostly western misunderstanding of Buddhist thought.

>>17596761
Mr vulagrian brainlet, the source doesnt matter if its true; does Guenon's ideas of Tradition stem from his belief in this Hyperborea?

And no one intelligent is advocating for an irrational or random mix-mashing of traditions, but to absorb the highest truths and wisdom from every tradition. Seems like a strawman conception of syncretism.

>>17596805
I don't know about the Hyperborean thing, but he did say the surviving traditions today have a common ancestor in the Primordial Tradition, and even if he did say it originates from Hyperborea, so what? Wat I said wasn't a strawman. You literally said taking the best from each religion has to offer, which is mish-mashing. So, what sets Traditionalism apart from syncretism? Traditionalism looks beyond the exoteric and the forms the traditions take shape, and see what principles they all have in common.

i wonder if there's a chinese forum out there with anons larping as european pagans

>>17597011
I would say it's as likely as Europeans larping as shintoists, but you never know.

>>17597020
european shintoists exist, the difference is that european paganism is dead and a artifcial construction (not a living tradition) euro-paganism is a pure larp

>>17596578
There is a permanent tension in Christianity between the idea that the world is providentially organised by God and also that it's a fallen world in which things happen that God doesn't approve of. You see this in Christian reactions to mundane things, if they get a job they wanted, it's a blessing from God, if they're treated badly at a job, it's because of bad people, not God. This view can be held even though both scenarios were caused by human agents. A recent example can be seen in the US elections, if a candidate they like wins, it's because of God's plan; if a candidate they like loses, it's because of human corruption.

>>17596999
Taking the best from each religion is not mish-mashing, it is not done randomly or haphazardly. However you recognize truth, wisdom or spiritual values in one tradition, you can recognize them in all. There is no reason not to take in and honor the best in them all.

After Traditionalism 'sees what principles all the traditions have in common', then what? What does it do?

>>17594298
>Dragon_Gate_Taoism
Is that like the dragon service the Asian girls at massage parlors offer?

>>17597062
You jest, but the male organ here is referred to as a Jade Dragon, with the Dragon Head, Dragon Body, and Dragon Tail being the Three Palaces of the Jade Stem.

>>17596237
Cope

>>17597055
>After Traditionalism 'sees what principles all the traditions have in common', then what? What does it do?
The end point? Gnosis, and I don't mean that in the sectarian sense either.
>Taking the best from each religion is not mish-mashing, it is not done randomly or haphazardly
But it is. For example, how does the law of karma work with Christianity? Part of the function of karma is to govern transmigration, which is incompatible with Christianity, and Christianity doesn't need it because you can remove sin with repentance and asking Christ for forgiveness.

>>17597135
Even sects within the same Tradition can have conflicting doctrines and incompatible viewpoints, but even then the best from each sect can be syncretically absorbed.

Karma can be seen in the idea of 'you reap what you sow'.

>>17597164
>Karma can be seen in the idea of 'you reap what you sow'.
This is what I am talking about by looking past the forms. Usually, atheists and the nominally religious would interpret this as "what goes around, comes around," but esoterically, this means our immoral actions taint our spirit, which makes us less human and further removed from God.

>>17597135
In what sense of Gnosis do you mean?

And in your example, just because someone wants to reconcile two incompatible teachings, it doesnt mean they are right to do so; a rational person would have to have valid reasons to justify their syncretism. Religions and traditions can contain truth as well as errors.

>>17597270
92:7.3.The many religions of Urantia are all good to the extent that they bring man to God and bring the realization of the Father to man. It is a fallacy for any group of religionists to conceive of their creed as The Truth; such attitudes bespeak more of theological arrogance than of certainty of faith. There is not a Urantia religion that could not profitably study and assimilate the best of the truths contained in every other faith, for all contain truth. Religionists would do better to borrow the best in their neighbors' living spiritual faith rather than to denounce the worst in their lingering superstitions and outworn rituals.

92:7.4.All these religions have arisen as a result of man's variable intellectual response to his identical spiritual leading. They can never hope to attain a uniformity of creeds, dogmas, and rituals—these are intellectual; but they can, and some day will, realize a unity in true worship of the Father of all, for this is spiritual, and it is forever true, in the spirit all men are equal.

>>17596547
The Jane English version, because it was actually mostly translated by Gia-Fu Feng who was wildly based.

>>17594833
stoicism doesn't have three demons who leave your body every 60 days to report your misdeeds to the king of heaven in return for permission to make you sick and shorten your life, so I'm gonna say the similarities are mostly incidental.

>>17597363
can i vanquish these demons thru some sort of semen related ritual?

>>17597292
>However you recognize truth, wisdom or spiritual values in one tradition, you can recognize them in all. There is no reason not to take in and honor the best in them all.
>92:7.3.The many religions of Urantia are all good to the extent that they bring man to God and bring the realization of the Father to man. It is a fallacy for any group of religionists to conceive of their creed as The Truth; such attitudes bespeak more of theological arrogance than of certainty of faith. There is not a Urantia religion that could not profitably study and assimilate the best of the truths contained in every other faith, for all contain truth. Religionists would do better to borrow the best in their neighbors' living spiritual faith rather than to denounce the worst in their lingering superstitions and outworn rituals.
If you are "taking the best" from each religion, then that implies they are each lacking part of the Truth. If each and every religion only contain the partial Truth, then ipso facto, none of them are True. Second, Truth can't be privatized, and there is no such thing as different truths. Either they are all True despite their expressions of it, or none of them are.

>>17597379
this is going to shock you, but yes

>>17597389
Religions can contain spiritual truth, wisdom, and value without having to be the manifestations of absolute Truth.
Religions can be a mixture of truths and errors, religions are true to the extent that they align with spiritual reality (God).

The t in Tao is supposed to be unanspirated, right? I find it reslly hard to produce that sound clearly distinguishing it from d.

>>17597599
it's dao

>>17597135
>For example, how does the law of karma work with Christianity?
My understanding is that original sin is the application of karmic principles to an infinite line of material existence. Infinite existence means infinite negative karma (original sin), which can only be redeemed by escaping the karmic cycle (asking Christ for forgiveness and achieving the beatific vision).

>>17597599
the way it's pronounced in chinese is kind of between a d and a t

>>17597389
I suppose this is Guenonian thought, or Perrenialism?
Did he actually think every religion was absolutely true in all regards, with no errors?

>>17594535
It seems to me that Taoism is inextricably linked with traditional Chinese culture. You may not be Chinese by blood, but you need to grow up in a traditional Chinese society (not the PRC). Then it all comes naturally.
Well, it's like feng shui. People start to move some things in their apartment, change mirrors, hang bells, etc. Although first you need to live in a house built according to the ancient canons of Chinese architecture, you know, for example, when the roof is made with a special bend, which does not allow evil spirits to enter the dwelling. That is, you need to start with the basics.
>>17594833
You can find common ground. But it seems to me to simplify this greatly.
Well, for example, according to stoicism (I think that many do not know), the souls of the wisemen became stars. In Chinese mythology, there is a similar theme that the stars are the official spirits of the Jade Emperor.

>>17597866
c'mon, the peasants in rural mainland china believe in this shit just as much as their counterparts elsewhere

>>17597877
What do you mean? I didn't get it.

>>17592634
Unironically great book about Tao.
I expected it to be just another propaganda piece which tries to devalue Christianity and show it in a more pantheistic, eastern mysticism way but, surprisingly, it does the opposite.

>>17597928
you need to grow up in a traditional Chinese society (not the PRC).

>>17597950
The title is - Christ the Eternal Tao.
It is written from an Orthodox Christian perspective.

>>17594090
Extremley based

>>17594298
>urantard
Ignore this, if you want syncretism between the two its already exists fine in Chan/Zen Buddhism

Taoism just seems like primitive Buddhism the philosophy isn't fleshed out as well is primarily centered around Chinese self help rather than any transcendence

>>17596761
>guenon
>complaining about schizophrenically picking and choosing
lmfao that's fucking rich.

>>17598553
Buddhism isn't about transcendence either. Taoism, properly, is not nearly as focused on soteriology as Buddhism, certainly, but it's anything but "not fleshed out". It's just not concerned with the same goals.

>>17598582
>Buddhism isn't about transcendence either
how do you rationalize this

>>17598593
Buddhism isn't about what 99% of Westerners use "Transcendence" to refer to, which is moving yourself to another place in space (literally "to move over, to step over").

Perhaps anon is just redefining "transcendence" to be even more vague, but in that case, Taoism can hardly be said to not be about "transcendence" because the term is vague to the point of meaningless.

>>17592634
I'm only familiarized with Zen Buddhism, which has lot of similarities with Taoism and take a lot of its idea from it. I will attempt to point out some of them:

>Non-attachment as opposed to renunciation of life
The idea that Buddhism is a life renouncing path of liberation is a misconception, monks would of course refrain from various activities, but rather than being a moral or spiritual imperative (Zen is at its core non-moral) its existence is pragmatic and developed to facilitate the attainment of enlightenment, but most Buddhists were not monks.
In both Tao and (Zen)Buddhism a great part of its work is pointing out to the non-conceptual, non-symbolic, non-dualistic nature of reality.

"Those who know it do not speak about it.
Those who speak about it do not know it."

“To him who knows nothing of Buddhism, mountains are mountains, waters are waters, and trees are trees. When he has read the scriptures and understood a little of the doctrine, mountains are to him no longer mountains, waters no longer waters, and trees no longer trees. But when he is thoroughly enlightened, then mountains are once again mountains, waters waters, and trees trees.”

>>17598625
>Buddhism isn't about what 99% of Westerners use "Transcendence" to refer to

you're probably caught up in semantics at this point
Buddhism is about exiting samsara

Taoism is just a more mystical Buddhism imo. Whereas Buddhism is more concerned with taking a practical approach to combat suffering Taoism urges you to sort of sync yourself to some natural universal fluctuation.

>>17598593
It's about annihilation

>>17598713
>The idea that Buddhism is a life renouncing path of liberation is a misconception
Have you ever read the suttas? Siddhartha asks his followers to renounce literally everything. Sensual pleasures, mental pleasures, anything that isn't strictly meditation or the bare minimum for survival is to be abandoned.
The laypeople don't do it and so they hope to be reborn as monks. The entire system is about renouncing everything

>>17598803
If Siddhartha ask his followers to renounce everything then Siddharta ask his followers to renounce everything, no inferences to be took from here.

>>17598713
>The idea that Buddhism is a life renouncing path of liberation is a misconception, monks would of course refrain from various activities, but rather than being a moral or spiritual imperative (Zen is at its core non-moral) its existence is pragmatic and developed to facilitate the attainment of enlightenment, but most Buddhists were not monks.
Mahayanists removed the renunciation path, which left them with the merit path, which is exactly why they push merit so much.
In buddhism merit and devotion never lead to liberation.


>>17598713
>In both Tao and (Zen)Buddhism a great part of its work is pointing out to the non-conceptual, non-symbolic, non-dualistic nature of reality.

Nirvana as no-cognition is a the brahminical idea of emptiness.


Perfection of Wisdom in
8,000 Lines was written by a Sarvastivādin monk who was from a Maitrayaṇī Brahmin family in Mathura in the last half of the first century, CE, and that it intended to present a Buddhist compatible version of brahman, and further, that is was a fundamentally political move to secure a position at court. He further argues that Mahāyāna arose in Brahmin communities where "Buddhist" and "Brahmin" were ambiguous distinctions at best. .

https://youtu.be/G3NZKuhsKfM?list=LL

you all retards talking about daoism listen to this, the western conception of daoism is a literal jesuit meme

>>17598881
By stating that the god is really empty or a formless Brahman, the Empty Lord
allows for the interpretation that he can manifest in any form (an idea that
was already fundamental to Pañcarātra tantra although the term “emptiness”
wasn’t used in that regard). This enabled worshippers to see past the form of
the post toward a transregional (and śāstric) formless Brahman/emptiness while
still accepting a post as a legitimate form of the Lord.21 Hence we find Acyutan-
anda Dasa (b. ca. 1502), author of the Śūnya Saṃhitā, emphasizing the fact that,
although he appears in a form, his form is formless:

It has no shape, no colour,
It is invisible and without a name.
This Brahman is called Śūnya Brahman.22

In a poem entitled Śūnya Śūnya Boḷi, he writes:

There is nothing but only śūnya and śūnya, as if it is endless.
There is no mark or sign so that it can be recognised. How
shall I explain it? With what illustration? For no description can fit it.23

>>17598786
no its not

>>17598803
That only makes it "life renouncing" if you consider the point of life to be about acquiring sensual pleasures, though.

>>17598730
I'd agree, which is why I don't like the word at all. It just leads to everyone having a different opinion and arguing about a word that effectively means nothing as far as communication is concerned.

>>17598924
Nice try but Siddhartha specifically says all forms of pleasant feelings are to be abandoned, including the mental ones.
Buddhism according to the suttas is spiritual suicide, no way around it.

>>17598924
>That only makes it "life renouncing" if you consider the point of life to be about acquiring sensual pleasures, though.
This is so disingenuous. It's not about the point of life being sensual pleasure, it's about sensuality being a part of life. Buddhists always argue that their religion isn't life denying but why would they even take offense at this since they hate existence and want to extinguish themselves from it?
The fact daoism doesn't fixate on how the entirety of the world's phenomena are supposedly worthless is why it'll always be superior to nih- I mean buddhism.

In the end, each of these santhas is steeped in the Vaiṣṇavite and Kṛiṣṇaite
theology of the Mahābhārata and Bhagavad Gīta, and while they identified Bud-
dha with Viṣṇu, institutionally they would have considered themselves more a
part of the budding network of Hindu monasteries (maṭhs) than any network
of Buddhist monasteries (i.e., vihāras). Thus when they invoke emptiness as
the ultimate, it was not understood to necessarily be Buddhist. For example,
Balarāma Dāsa has Kṛṣṇā say:
“Mahāśūnya is my abode, how can speech reach me. In fact, no name can be
ascribed to me since I am the formless Brahman.”24

Gnosticism is better.

>>17597054
Why do christiand do this?

>>17597054
don't christians believe good things are from god and bad things from people though? so how is 'contrarian'? it might be a terrible philosophy to believe that your good job is from god and bad job from bad people but it makes sense to them.

>>17598882
Thanks for the vid rec anon.
Very interesting and I haven't heard of this guy before.

>>17593766
>For me, Taoism was the invisible soul of Chinese culture, in contrast to the Confucian "face". I think Taoism is completely alien to us non-Chinese.


I think it is important to understand two concepts, Daoists and the Dao. Obviously the Dao that can be understood is not the enduring Dao etc etc, but to understand it is a shared concept across pretty much all of Chinese philosophy. Confuscians speak of the Dao, Buddhists speak of the Dao, naturalists and legalists speak of the Dao. It is as core to chinese philosophy like god has been to the west.

What then are Daoists? Daoists or "people of the way" are the various shamans, philosophers and mystics of Chinese philosophy. Some famous Daoists we know as Lao Tze and Zhuang Tze (Their names meaning Old master and Powerfull master respectively, wether they were historical persons who knows).

Now there exists a religion named Daoism, whose adherents deify various masters and emperors and the like into Gods and Angellike beings, this however is not the only Daoism and the Daoism you have to follow to be a Daoist. I for one, consider myself to be a Lao-Tze-ist-Daoist-Protestant-Christian, But when people ask i just say im an atheist.

>>17597638
As far as revelation and orthodoxy goes, yes.