Daoism

Historically, the Daoist tradition has consisted of several schools, or rather lineages, usually based on one or more primary texts and associated with one or more divine or semi-divine beings. As a whole, these lineages and corpora have represented the higher but "unofficial" form of native religion in China. This definition points to the complexity of questions that surround the status of Daoism and its relation to Chinese religion; it is also relevant to its relation to Chinese thought, for the status of Daoism as a religion was often defined with reference to ideas and notions formulated in its early doctrinal texts.

In relation to the different forms of common religion in China, the stated purpose of Daoism is "transforming" (hua) people, in the sense of educating them to venerate pure deities that impersonate the Dao, instead of joining other cults—those defined as "vulgar" (su) or "illicit" (yin), which often included sacrifice and involved the assistance of spirit-mediums. The continuous incorporation of new deities and ritual forms, resulting from the interaction of Daoism with local communities and cults, upgraded these deities by admitting them into the "correct" (zheng) hierarchy of gods and of amending them by integrating them into the proper way of communicating with the divine world. As has often been noted, the spirit-medium, and not the Confucian officer or the Buddhist monk, was the first competitor of the Daoist priest within local communities.

The relation between Daoism and Buddhism has been fertile, with reciprocal borrowings of doctrinal formulations, theological elements, technical terminology, and forms of practice. Even though Buddhist polemical authors have often accused Daoists of appropriating Buddhist notions and topoi and even of plagiarizing their scriptures, these disputes have usually occurred in the surroundings of the imperial court. In that milieu, providing evidence of doctrinal preeminence in order to obtain official patronage was more important than highlighting any shared ground. Daoism provided Chinese Buddhism with some of that ground in the early stages of its development and, in turn, drew from it in later times. For the average faithful, anyway, subtle doctrinal distinctions surely were not the main concern, and Daoist or Buddhist deities could equally be addressed as suitable and practicable.

Daoism's relation to Confucianism—the dominating influence behind the system of social norms, upheld by the central government, maintained by the local officers, supported by the literati, and transmitted through education—has been complex. Classical Confucianism focuses on the social aspects of human life. Daoism is by no means uninterested in these issues, but its views are based on different doctrinal grounds. Despite this, and with exceptions with respect to Neo-Confucianism, the contrast between Daoism and Confucianism has not primarily involved their philosophical views (the respective claims in this respect were known and quietly acknowledged by both), but their religious aspects. As Anna Seidel has noted (1997, pp. 39–41), although Daoism is the higher form of Chinese native religion, it has always occupied a position subordinate to the imperial—that is, official—cults. For the Confucian officers, the Daoist priests represented spiritual powers over which they had no control. Replacing the state ceremonies to Heaven and Earth, or to paragons of Confucian virtue, with rituals performed by Daoist priests and addressed to the divine personifications of the Dao, would be equivalent to granting Daoism an official role in the administration of the empire. For this reason, the Confucian officer and literatus did not hesitate to acknowledge Daoism only in its philosophical, mystical, or literary aspects, and even to regard it as equal to common religion.