I've been wondering for quite a while now why so many CN novels like to mention Daoism, while all these sects with martial arts practioners have close to nothing to do with Daoism? Daoism is primarily a philosophy and not much of a religion, immortality in the physical meaning is not even once mentioned in Laozi's "Daodejing" and the same goes for "I-Ching" and "Zhuangzi", which are all considered to be the foundation of Daoism. The religious aspects were added later on in many schools/sects, because most people couldn't deal very well with the very abstract concepts of the main teachings. I know that the authors of CN novels like to create lots of bs and don't really care whether everything makes sense, but I'm still confused why Daoism is so much liked by these authors despite their complete lack of understanding for what it actually is.
Some novels mention of Taoism too. But the strange use of it doesn't matter imo. In cultivation they just show some ideologies in the end readers entertainment is what matter. Because if they use the Taoism and Taoism "properly" most readers would be unable to understand it and would thoroughly lose interest in the novel. history's strongest senior brother tries it in the later chapter and god it was just a train wreck.
"not much of a religion" and then proceed to make your first point irrelevant by your own later point, "The religious aspects were added later on". Typical arrogant elitism when thinking that anything that wasn't in place originally doesn't deserve to be there. I have same problem regarding game mods. Many people who denounce fanfics for plagiarism are also elitist jerks who think that other than original anithing else doesn't deserve to exist. Might as well return to their original caves and eat their original raw meat. Entire human civilization is built upon copying whatever you can for yourself.
Actually not, because the "religious aspects" are often used while they are more a part of traditional chinese culture/folklore. As I wrote, the central pieces of literature that are considered to be the core of Daoism have nothing to do with religion.
Might as well return to their original core caves and eat their original core raw meat. Entire human civilization is built upon copying whatever you can for yourself and spreading it as far as possiblepossible twisting and changing it in the process.
Though I understand people's obsession with originality and condemning any change. It is typical of us, humans to contradict our own lives. Life is contradiction in itself. To have others and counter them to the point that there is no others left and there is no life.
I don't know anything about Chinese philosophy and the like, but the way it is explained and used in novels makes sense to me. I don't like it being used though because it can be oh so vague. I'd love to read a novel with a more accurate portrayal of daoism and other eastern philosophies. It'd probably be a good one.
It would certainly be a different one. Imagine if the "Daoists" actually cultivated wisdom and ethics, and practiced qi gong purely for health and spiritual benefits.
A lot of jealous idiots barking at someone for things me and others' might be interested in. You never know, what will set dumbasses off.
I have the impression that you're neither giving an answer to my actual question nor making any useful point, rather just being seemingly angry and aggressive for no reason. No need to let steam off in a random discussion. First of all, you're not really giving an answer to my question, which was why chinese authors like to use the word Daoism and connect it to concepts that have nothing to do with it. I wasn't asking about the transformation of Daoism in popular culture or it's relationship to religion and how it developed for the general population as a result. And the second point is, that you argue about something while using inadequate exmaples and I presume that you haven't read any of the literature which I mentioned in my first post. You might perceive me as an elitist, because I think that it's a requirement to read at least one or two of them to be able to discuss the topic. But the same goes for anything, you can't argue about the effectiveness of the Pzkw VI Tiger I in WWII, if you haven't read the neccesary literature, nor can you make a point in a discussion about quantum mechanics if you don't have the required knowledge. You assume that I'm against transformation and development, because I denounced the "religious aspects" that later became part of what we nowadays perceive as the whole "movement" of Daoism and because I emphasized the "core literature". But if you would have even basic knowledge on the topic, you would know that the majority of what was later added as "popular belief" or religion in order for each sect to gain popularity and followers, already by default contradicts the essential doctrines of Daoism. You could just open Wikipedia and look at the main doctrines of Daoism, three of which are "wu wei", which means something similiar to action without action and emphasizes that everything should be part of a natural order, that is not forced by anything and this principle alone is violated by religious practice and rituals, that are inherently forced on to the person, since they are not unique and individual for each person and as result can not lead to any kind of "enlightenment" (which in Daoism can only come from within). Another one would be the principle of "naturalness" which is somewhat similiar to wu wei, but puts more focus on being in a state of non-desire, that let's you be in a "natural state of living" and enables you to appreciate simpler things more easily. Non-desire is also connected to the Daoist understanding of constant change that makes a materialistic view senseless, because you can't hold onto something when everything is changing. A person should be like water, being able to adapt to any kind of environment whitout difficulty, in a "natural way". And the last example would be the "Three Treasures" of which "the refusal to assert active authority" is worth mentioning in this context. It's pretty much self-explanatory and such a refusal is in total contradiction to religious authority. Basically any kind of shrine or temple with all their rituals, shamans, priests and whatever has no actual connection to Daoism, due to the previously mentioned issues. Aside from that, adding religion never makes something better, it rather leads to degradation and goes contrary to the initial thought. Make sure to actually inform yourself on the topic next time before making baseless accusations, not every thought or idea can be used universally and not every change has to be neccesarily good. And a last rather amusing point would be that Daoism in itself is what you might call an "elitistic philosophy", Laozi writes in Daodejing that he's not teaching the common man from the street, but rather "the wise man" or ruler of some kind. Which makes a lot of sense, considering that only the elite could read in ancient China. How about making an actual argument of substance and not insulting others as "dumbasses". You don't prove any point and seem childish if you can't present your opinion without getting rude.
Fire should met with fire; water should be drowned. I will answer however I am offended. The quickest solution is the best.
Most Xianxia are inspired by Journey to the West , and JttW does have a pantheon of Immortals Taoist and Buddhist Bodhisattva. And the roots of the work are even older legends and myths. So I'd say there is the true Taoism and Buddhism . And its myths. Xianxia and Xuanhuan are obviously inspired by its myths not by its real practice.
Yeah, well, there're Dao of Cooking, so there... It's not meant to be taken seriously. Dao in novel is like stand-up comedy, laugh when you're being signalled to laugh.
Hold on a minute. I disagree with everything you said, but I thought I'd let it go because it's your personal opinion. But you are completely misguided in calling everyone who denounce fanfics for plagiarism are elitist jerks. Fanfic is without a doubt a bastardization of the author's original work, as it makes characters or plots or scenes that would have contradicted not taken place in the original work for the simple fact that the fanfic author is not the original author of the work. Therefore, what the fanfic author wrote wouldn't have been canon and therefore cannot be treated the same as the original work. Also the 'elitist jerks' have the law on their side. Fanfics are illegal for the very fact that it is indeed plagiarism in every meaning of the word. The only reason it's not stamped out is because either fanfics help the original works get exposure, they're written by amateurs for free and thus don't make the authors lose money, or the authors simply don't care enough to sue. If you like fanfics, that's fine. That's you and your choice. But you cannot deny that it is illegal and the 'elitist jerks' have the right to state their opinion that they shouldn't exist, just as you have the right to choose to read a plagiarized work if it's offered to you.