08/10/2026
Some thoughts on the eclectic nature of Neidan ,
and the confusion it causes in the West
My friend Robert C***s wrote recently on Substack about the way Buddhist concepts were introduced into Neidan, but how people often have misunderstood those ideas. In great lines I would agree with his statements.
In some of my recent posts on the Dutch Neidan Study group page ,and in this Substack, I have also dedicated some time to the interaction between Buddhist and Daoist ideas.
Being myself exposed to Buddhism and Daoism and to a minor extend Confucianism for the biggest part of my life and being interested in Neidan for a big part of my life , I might add some more words from my own experience and research.
I am not an academic, just a simple practitioner, who happened to have read a lot of books and had the fortune to meet some genuine masters and practitioners along the way.
So my own views are definitely not the ultimate truth, but I hope my insights can contribute a little to the confusion which is often seen in the West and also exist in Asia as well.
When it comes to Neidan it is hard to define what it really is in the first place. It grew out a very eclectic environment which was shaped in China over many centuries in which the three teachings ; Confucianism , Daoism and Buddhism merged. Although Neidan is often associated with Daoism, and till a certain degree rightly so, and has often been imbued with religious Daoism, it could also be said that it’s a tradition on its own.
Although many of the roots of Neidan are steeped in religious ideas, especially in the end of Qing , Republican China and in the People ‘s Republic of China, there have been attempts to secularize Neidan. One of the great advocates of this secularization process was Chen Yingning (20 th century)
There can always be debate whether one likes this attempt or not, personally I think Chen Yingning’s attempt was genuine . To take Neidan out of the esoteric and religious context, bring it as a technique which one can practice, whatever your background is, makes it available to anyone.
We also have to take in account the social and political dimensions at the time of Republican China, the threats from outside, including Western and Japanese occupation and the following forming of the People’s Republic, in which religion was taken out of the public domain during its early years. Neidan and Qi Gong were spaces which were left open by the Communist party, since it was considered to strengthen the health of Chinese citizens.
But even long before we can see arguments in Neidan texts, which show that it was a tradition on its own and that anyone could practice, whatever their background. For example in the introduction of the 太乙金華宗旨 Tàiyǐ Jīnhuá Zōngzhǐ, (In the West known as the Secret of the Golden Flower and firstly partially and inadequately translated by Wilhelm) it is said that anyone , with whatever background, even Muslims, could practice Neidan.
We see later in Republican Taiwan also examples in the Fang Dao Yu Lu 訪道語錄 , a compilation of texts written by practitioners, mainly inspired by Chen Yingning, people with different backgrounds practicing Neidan, even a Catholic Priest.
Turning back to even much older times we see that different currents influenced Neidan significantly. And people with different backgrounds practiced Neidan and contributed to its eclectic nature.
Different figures brought different ideas into Neidan, from Wang Chongyang , Qiu Chuji and Ma Dan Yang (Yuan Dynasty) important figures of the Quanzhen School (Northern School) , (the Quanzhen order would turn out to be the most dominant order) which clearly has Daoist religious hallmarks, though Quanzhen would also borrow heavily from Buddhism in its liturgy and systemic build up as monastic order and rules.
Another figure like Zhang Boduan, (Song Dynasty) founder of the Southern School states in his famous Wu Zhen Pian 悟真篇, one of the most influential texts in the whole Neidan tradition, that after the Neidan process is completed, one has to practice Chan to obtain full completion. (there is debate if this part was added later on actually).
We should be aware that this was still in the early and forming days of Neidan, and the practices described are way less coherent than later manuals.
A great example of Neo Confucian influence is Li Daochun, (Yuan Dynasty) considered the founder of the Middle School. His Zhong He Ji 中和集 is a great example of many Neo Confucian ideas entering Neidan and he is very critical of the so called Pang Men (side doors) or inferior practices.
Later in the Ming Period we see Ruist literati like Lu Xingxing (founder of the Eastern School) practicing Neidan, a person also highly imbued by Neo Confucian thinking.
In the Ming Dynasty we see also eclectic texts like the Xing Ming Gui Zhi, which for the first time is written in less esoteric language, (still a lot of code words) and made available for a much wider audience. It includes Buddhist (Chan, Tiantai and even some Vajrayana notions) next to the usual Daoist imagery and Neo Confucian elements.
Another example is the Wu Liu school which is highly influenced by Buddhist ideas, texts like the Hui Ming Jing 慧命经, bear a lot of Buddhist imagery and its author Liu Hua-Yang (Qing dynasty) was deeply steeped in Daoism and Buddhism . Some sholars have argued that this text is Neidan for Buddhists.
One important point is that all Buddhist or Confucian notions imported into Neidan have definitely got a twist. So when you read Neidan texts and you see Buddhist imagery, realise that their interpretation is often very different than the original notions. Many of the Neidan authors were well versed in Buddhist learning, especially Chan and Tiantai Buddhism, but they intentionally changed the meanings to integrate it into a Daoist Neidan framework.
This all brings the question, how we must perceive this. Is Neidan Daoist, or is it something on its own? Is Neidan a potpourri of all kind of East Asian currents, does anything goes? Or should it be seen under the umbrella of religious Daoism?
I would suggest that it is something on its own since it is highly eclectic and people from all different backgrounds have practiced it, some clearly in a religious Daoist context, others different like some Ruist literati, or Buddhist monks.
But the total framework remains to be seen in a Daoist context.
In the West there is a tendency to lump everything together and many people are not well informed about the history and details of Neidan.
Nowadays some “Guru’s” pretend to teach Neidan in the West, but it is often more Qi Gong/Nei Gong. Neidan remains today one of the most poorly understood meditation systems.
It took myself many years to unravel some aspects of Neidan, and I am still learning. I have not the pretension to call myself a specialist in this field.
Neidan is sometimes equaled with Qi Gong, and though Qi Gong definitely borrowed ideas from Neidan it’s a different story. (Qi Gong is actually a quite recent phenomenon, developed in the 20th century although it has much older roots)
Some confuse even Neidan with Yoga , and some call it Daoist Yoga. Which is a very mistaken formulation.
Many people struggle with this eclecticism and also some feel tempted to align Neidan along other Asian Internal Cultivation systems like Vajrayana.
Though there are clear parallels between Vajrayana and Neidan, they definitely differ a lot. Yes both Vajrayana or Ta***ic Buddhism as we know in Tibet, and Neidan could be called Internal Alchemy in the sense that both use the body as an alchemical crucible. (Earlier transmissions of Esoteric Buddhism in China and Japan, don’t share that similarity). But Vajrayana is highly centred on Deity practice (visualisation of oneself as a Deity) . The creation phase is very much focused on these often very complex visualisations , the completion phase is more focused on the subtle body.
Though the Vajrayana subtle body has some parallels with the subtle body of the Neidan, it is also very different again. If there is a common point, it would be the central channel and there is some discussion if the central channel has been imported from Vajrayana into Neidan. Some scholars like Monica Esposito have suggested this, since the central channel (Huang Dao/Yellow Path) starts only to be discussed clearly by Min Yide (Qing Dynasty) . There are however hints to the central channel in earlier Neidan literature, but this remains a debated territory and more research needs to be done.
Another great difference is the way of practice, Vajrayana is in general much more intention oriented practice. In Neidan there are of course also some currents which involve more intention, but over all Neidan is much less affect oriented.
In Vajrayana , there are a lot of forceful breath practices, while in Neidan often very subtle breathing is recommended.
Of course there are many variations.And there is much more to say to that.
Also in terms of outcome they are very different. Vajrayana intends to obtain Buddhahood in one lifetime, Neidan originally intended to obtain immortality , though later on these ideas might be amended and sometimes attaining Buddhahood is mentioned. In some texts like Xing Ming Gui Zhi, there is talk of becoming Buddha Vairocana. But we should realise that Buddhist notions take a different dimension in Neidan texts.
Most probably over the course of time there have been many different ideas. Still the creation of the Yuan Yang Shen, and leaving the body after the elixer is refined and completed is seen as the main goals of Neidan. Whether that means actual immortality is open for debate. And more secular Neidan practitioners might have different ideas about that.
Again there remains confusion about the end goals and indeed Buddhist and Daoist ideas are often mixed up in Neidan texts. So there is no definitive answer, although often it’s argued that the Buddhist Path , mainly Chan in this discussion, gives only an immortal Yin spirit at the most, which has to reincarnate one day.
And the Daoist path would only lead to an immortal Yang spirit.
The idea of becoming a Buddha helping other beings to attain enlightenment, a central concept in Mahayana Buddhism, is generally not subscribed to in Daoism.
I don’t want to get partisan in this discussion , and don’t want to judge which way is superior. Buddhism, Daoism and (Neo) Confucianism have all greatly contributed to innovative thinking. They all have borrowed from each other.
If there is influence of Buddhism in Neidan it is mainly though Chan and Tiantai Buddhism and not Vajrayana. Although there are traces of Vajrayana in Neidan, and some texts might bear influence, like in the Nüdan Hebian (a collection of Nüdan , female alchemy texts collaborated in Qing West China , which bears influences of the Kalachakra Ta**ra , see Sara Neswald) we should be cautious to what extend Ta***ic ideas have influenced Neidan. This field needs to be researched much more thoroughly to make any conclusion.
I have been myself always fascinated by the similarities and differences between Vajrayana and Neidan.
Having practiced myself Vajrayana and Neidan over longer periods of time, I think it is possible to practice both alongside. But I would not mix them. They have definitely their own beauty and positive outcomes, if done properly, but to think they are the same or you can just fuse it in a mix is pretty mistaken.
There is much more to say to this subject, and it’s also a field which needs way more research . Especially the interaction between Vajrayana and Neidan in the history.
I hope this small discussion shines a little more light on this topic. This is definitely one of the fields of my own research and it is my hope that also more serious academic research is done on this field.
I will definitely turn back to this subject in future posts. Hope I haven’t bored you with this discussion today.
Image : White Cloud Temple - Beijing, main seat of the Quanzhen Order
and the confusion it causes in the West
