namste. i don't know how to say this, but what i'm saying isn't the least bit false.
i know about buddhism and taoism (
www.healingtaousa.com ) because i used to be a taoist for a while and also a buddhist ( chan and also other sects-a lot of them ) for a WHILE.
perhaps you didn't understand the historical context of what i was saying regarding buddhism.
in buddhism there are there is the middle way and also the stuff about right livelyhood, right speech, right thinking, right actions etc.. these thing all came from the precepts that buddha taught- the ones about having no desires, attachments or emotions. if you don't believe this then tell we, what causes attachments? is it not thinking about something and indulging in certain behaviors? if it's not this then what does?
i see you also highlighted about what i said about people not having complicated lives back in his time.
please tell me, were people back then as complicated as they are today? -i don't think they were .anyone else is invited to answer that question. people back then didn't have the things we have today.
the truth is this, the ordinary people who became monks/nuns after buddha, did not reach the realm of tahatgatta and therefore were unable to understand the true meaning of his words since they did not know the things at his realm of awareness. as a result when they compiled his teachings in written form they translated things to mean what they believed it meant based on their level of awareness and based on the manifestations of buddha law they were able to know at their realm of awareness, as a reslut, the darma taught by shakyamuni was altered beyond its original meaning. this point shoud be clear to grasp.
what i'm trying to say is that the buddhism of today is not the buddhism taught by shakyamuni back in his time, it's been altered
buddha only taught precept, samadi and wisdom, sitting cross legged to eliminate karma and having bowls to beg for food. as a simple metaphor to understand.
if i make a set of hand movements, then those hand movements could be said to be mine.
but if someone added something to it, could it then be said to be mine?
it's the same with buddhism people added stuff to what buddha taught based on bringing them in from other schools or from misinturpretation of the high level truths he taught.
the best example of the misinturpretation part involves zen buddhism.
zen buddhism believes the darma can't be taught because once taught it won't be darma anymore. zen was founded by bodhidarma one of buddha's disciples. he founded zen based on one thing buddha said, which was " no law is absolute "
darma then came up with thee notion of emptiness
that's why zen people hit you when you go to them and ask questions. -they believe the law can't be taught and only emptiness exist
but if there is only emptiness how can one become enlightened if there is nothing which can cause on to become enlightened?
-so what did shakyamuni mean by no law is absolute?
he mean that what's the proper thing to do might be wrong to do in certain situations.
based on what i know, buddha was teaching while he was improving himself and each time he improved one level he would look back and see that the law he taught was wrong when viewed from the laws of higher levels, but that the laws of lower levels did serve as a guide on that level to reach higher levels but that not one law was the absolute truth of the universe. buddha also did not teach all of the law he knew while he was still alive on this planet. buddha talked about the day of the law's end. according to what i know, he was referring to today- what he meant by this is that the law/tao/ is no longer in people's hearts and that even monks in monasteries would find it difficult to save themselves because of the nonsesne they've doing.
an example of this is the light opening.
based on what i know and based on what i've experienced, i can tell you that some monks simply don't know what they're doing.
some monks believe that taking mirors and shining lights on a buddha statue is called light opening. but that's not really what light opening is
light opening is about inviting the fa-shen ( law bodies ) of buddhas onto statues to rectify abnormal conditions in the environment and to protect monks/nuns while they do their cultivation.
this can only be done if one chant's sutras with such concentration that it would shake the world of the buddha of that discipline and invoke his/her law bodies. it can also be done by taking the pictures of genuine buddhas, doing the big lotus hand position and then asking that diety to invite the fa-shen onto the statue of the specific buddha for one.
as an example of people bringing stuff from other practices into buddhism- some buddhist sects worship kuan yin ( boddhisattva of mercy and compassion ) and some buddhist practices have become multi buddha worshipping disciplines, such as worshipping amitahbah, the great sun tathagatta, melarepa, or other buddhas. and some have even let taoist stuff like stories about the queen mother of the west and the jade emperoe into their monasteries.
again i'm not saying that the buddhism you follow does these things because i don't know what discipline you follow.
) I believe all subgroups of Buddhism were founded after his death. Most of Buddhism focuses on the Four Noble Truths and the 8-Fold Path ( a sort of recommended style of living not to be confused with commandments) 
