american daoism

in the 21st century

American Daoism in the 21st Century

Summary: Religious syncretism and variant, decentralized practices among immigrants and converts are a struggle facing
21st century Daoism practices in the United States. This diversity may result in the practices of “American Daoisms,” rather
than one monolithic American Daoist tradition.
In the early years of the religion’s formation, Daoism quickly integrated several aspects of Chinese
cosmology that were not obviously an initial part of the religion. The most prominent of these were the
concepts of yin and yang. Daoism’s ability to syncretize with its surrounding context continued
throughout the tradition’s history. When Buddhism entered China, Daoism absorbed many elements still
seen today, elements such as the presence of altars to the bodhisattva Guanyin in many Daoist temples.
Since Daoism did not travel in the same manner as, and lacked the popularity of, Buddhism, its numbers
in America have grown relatively slowly. Today, it is estimated there are around 30,000 Daoist
practitioners living in the United States. Now that American Daoists are becoming a larger part of the
religious landscape, this openness to change is shaping the religion in distinct ways and presenting
unique issues.
One issue facing Daoism is the culture of religious syncretism in the United States. Many Americans
may take an aspect of Daoism and incorporate it into their own spiritual practice. Practitioners of
Healing Tao may belong to or identify with a different religious tradition and often do not consider
themselves religious Daoists, even as they seek to enjoy the benefits of taiji and qigong. This trend
leaves many American Daoists grappling with the question: Should such a practitioner be considered a
“Daoist”?
While Daoists may teach non-Daoist neighbors about their beliefs and practices, they often do not reach
out to other Daoists. This could be due to several factors, including geographic distance and low
numeric representation. Long-standing disagreements between groups in Asia may also ensure that
Daoists interact less with each other than with people of other faiths.
Without large, visible Daoist communities, many Americans interact with Daoism solely through its
scriptures. While the “founding” texts of Daoism, the Daodejing and the Zhuangzi, are de-emphasized in

China, they have become the center of focus for many individual practitioners and small groups across
America for whom the texts are philosophical and spiritual guides. These practitioners often consider
themselves Daoists, but do not belong to a temple, engage in rituals, or interact with monastics. Again,
Daoists are dealing with the question of what it means to be a “Daoist” in the American context.
American Daoists are highly decentralized, a factor that contributes, at least in part, to their vastly
divergent forms of practice. This decentralization can be traced back to China, where no official records
track the number of Daoist lay practitioners, and where popular Daoist festivals and rituals are freely
intermingled with Buddhist and Confucian practices without concern for sectarian differentiation or
definition. There is also the sheer diversity of popular folk practice, with groups such as the Celestial
Masters, the Complete Perfection sect, Red-head Daoists, and Black-head Daoists, to name just a few.
This diversity is further compounded by regional differences—from the once-British colony of Hong
Kong, to the mainland People’s Republic of China, to Taiwan—that make obvious the potential for
Daoist decentralization. In short, Daoists brought a decentralized system to America, a land with its own
rich history of decentralized individual engagements with religious practices.

As is often the case in America, the experiences of convert Daoists and immigrant Daoists are different.
Often Daoist immigrants, in contrast to converts, do not concern themselves with scriptures or individual
practices but instead are content to attend important annual rituals. Daoist immigrants tend to preserve
their local traditions, and only slowly, and to a lesser extent, experience change. Converts to Daoism,
however, often do not make attempts to preserve traditions they find unfamiliar. While there is naturally
overlap between the two categories, generally speaking the ritual devotion to deities and the creation of
talismans found in a Daoist temple in San Francisco’s Chinatown will be much different than the
scriptural studies and taiji groups scattered across American suburbia.

Currently, American Daoism in the 21st century is undergoing a phase of self-definition as it grapples
with issues of interfaith interaction, decentralization, and the contrasting practices of converts and
immigrants. Some scholars have suggested that a specific form of “American Daoism” will not form;
rather, the great diversity of practice within America will result in “American Daosim.”

Copyright ©2020 President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Pluralism Project at Harvard University. For permissions please
contact the Pluralism Project at (617) 496-2481 or [email protected]. For more resources and essays, please visit www.pluralism.org