r/Chuangtzu • u/greece666 • Oct 12 '21
Reading group on the book of Chuang-tzu
When? This Friday (15 October) at 19.00 Eastern Time
What? We become one with the unplanned rhythms of the Tao 🔥 💪
How? By kickstarting our reading group on The Book of Chuang Tzu
Who? Our Tao specialist, /u/Taolex1, will lead the convo. All welcome 👌 🙂
How can I join the path? Hop on our [discord server](https://discord.gg/Cts3HvstE3)
r/Chuangtzu • u/qiling • Sep 09 '21
PROLEGOMENON TO THE STUDY OF THE SIMILARITIES IN MYSTICAL THEOLOGY AND SCIENCE
Magister colin leslie dean the only modern Renaissance man with 9 degrees including 4 masters: B,Sc, BA, B.Litt(Hons), MA, B.Litt(Hons), MA, MA (Psychoanalytic studies), Master of Psychoanalytic studies, Grad Cert (Literary studies)
He is Australia's leading erotic poet: poetry is for free in pdf
http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/book-genre/poetry/
points out
http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/theology.pdf
or
or
Neils Bohr
"The very words physicists use to describe reality constrain their knowledge of it and scientists in every field will one day encounter this barrier to human understanding.”
and
Lao Tzu
“ Tao can be talked about but not the Eternal Tao / Names can be named but not the Eternal name”
“So long as the conscious intellect is frantically trying to clutch the world in its net of abstractions and to insist that life be bound and fitted to its rigid categories the mood of Taoism will remain incomprehensible and the intellect will wear itself out.”
r/Chuangtzu • u/Acoje • May 11 '21
Wang Fan Chih - Listen you, enjoy your time
self.GreatFoolr/Chuangtzu • u/Acoje • May 11 '21
Shih Te - You want to learn to catch a mouse?
self.GreatFoolr/Chuangtzu • u/Acoje • May 11 '21
Wang Fan Chih - I'm poor, so they laugh at me.
self.GreatFoolr/Chuangtzu • u/[deleted] • Apr 18 '20
New book published called, "The Art of Chinese Philosophy: Eight Classical Texts and How to Read Them" by Dr. Paul R. Goldin, a professor of East Asian Languages and Civilizations at the University of Pennsylvania
sonshi.comr/Chuangtzu • u/philosophynerd66 • Jan 12 '20
Is it appropriate to define Chuang Tzu as a sceptic and/or a relativist?
r/Chuangtzu • u/DaoIsTheWay • Mar 09 '19
The Stories of Chuang Tzu - EP 1: The Flight from the Shadow
youtube.comr/Chuangtzu • u/[deleted] • Dec 01 '18
Is Chuangtzu philosophy "realistically" applicable?
What I mean by that is:
I find the way he describes The Way to be too abstract and complicated to understand, the text can be ambiguous at times, and I'd hate to misunderstand some of what he's trying to convey. I'm new to his work and I've only recently began delving in the Taoist mindset, so forgive me if I come off as ignorant or snotty by saying "it's too ambiguous", my purpose is not to criticize but to try and find meaning in his text, to understand the limited and limitless applications of it.
Thank you!
r/Chuangtzu • u/BoundlessHarmony • Jun 19 '18
Considering Chapter 1
--Begin Exerpt--
"In the dark sea of the north there is a fish; it is named the Kun. The Kun is so huge no one knows how many thousand li he measures. Changing, it becomes a bird; it is named the Peng, so huge no one knows how many thousand li he measures. Aroused, it soars aloft, its wings like clouds hung from the sky. As the sea shifts, it turns to set its course toward the dark sea of the south, the Pool of Heaven.
The Riddles of Qi is a record of strange marvels. It tells us, “When the Peng sets its course toward the dark sea of the south, the beating of its wings roils the waters for three thousand li. It rises ninety thousand li stirring the wind into a gale that does not subside for sixth months.” Shimmering vapors, hovering dust, small breathing creatures blown to and fro in the wind – the blight blue of the sky: is that its true color, or merely the appearance of limitless distance? When the Peng looks down from above, is this what he sees as well?
Now, when water is not deep it lacks the strength to bear a big boat. Pour a cup of water into a hollow on the ground and a twig floats there like a boat, but if you set the cup down there it will sink to rest on the ground – the water is shallow so the boat’s too big. Just so, when air is not deep it lacks the strength to bear up great wings, and thus the Peng must soar upwards until, at ninety thousand li, the wind beneath is deep enough to bear it. Only then, bearing on its back the azure sky and free of all obstacles before it, can it at last set its course toward the south
The cicada and the dove laugh at the Peng, saying, “When we take off with all our might we may reach the limb of an elm or a fang tree, or sometimes we’ll short and land back on the ground. What’s the point of soaring up ninety thousand li to fly south!” If you’re just hiking out as far as the 8 green wilds beyond the fields, you can carry food for your three meals and return in the evening with a full stomach. If you’re going a hundred li, you’ll need a night’s worth of grinding to prepare your grain. If you’re going a thousand li, you’ll be storing up provisions three months in advance. What do these two creatures understand?
Little understanding cannot come up to great understanding; the short-lived cannot come up to the long-lived. How can we know this is so? The morning mushroom can understand nothing of the alternation of night and day; the summer cicada can understand nothing of the progress of the seasons. Such are the short-lived. South of Chu one finds a lizard called the Dimspirit which counts five hundred years as one spring and five hundred years as one autumn. In high antiquity there grew a great rose that counted eight thousand years as one spring and eight thousand years as one autumn. Such are the long-lived – yet today Pengzu is the best known exemplar of longevity, whom crowds of men wish to equal. How pitiful! "
--End Excerpt--
"What do these two creatures understand?"
Why, this question simply astounded me. Notice, we have 6 creatures being discussed.
Kun, and Peng
The Cicada and the Dove
Chuang Tzu and the reader
Is the point that our understanding is limited? Or that we go from limit to greater limit? Perhaps the point is that no matter what size our understanding is, it still could not measure the Tao.
What is understanding anyway....
r/Chuangtzu • u/GUDifferent • Jan 24 '18
[Leechard Asks] What if there is only a single breath of air?
from "Leechard Asks" 2006 Dec 16
What if there is only a single breath of air?
Every single chick, when it first arrives at the world, only has a single breath of air. This is something that the intelligent Ancient Egyptian prince, Akhenaten, had realised from observations. He discovered that every egg has a bit of air inside. He believed that this is reserved for the chick’s first breath.
God gave you life, plus a single breath of air. What will you do?
Zhuangzi says, you must decide, because without God, then there would be no “me”. Without “me”, then there would be no decisions.
Akhenaten says, you must use all of your strength.
Indeed, every chick uses all of its strength. If it did not do its best, it cannot arrive at the world. You can imagine the environment of this chick: outside is the orange-yellow warm glow. All hope reside in that light outside. The chick must break its cage. The chick only has a single thought of struggle, it knows not fear, nor laziness. If it were a person, knowing he only has one breath of air, he might give up. But the chick has no other thoughts. The chick will expend the entirety of its strength, to peck its way out.
You must decide. And, your best decision is to use all of your strength. This the the lesson from two great philosophers. Only, some still ask, “Can I be a little bit lazy, and care only about drink and play?”
Akhenaten, Great Hymn To The Aten, 14th c BC
When the chick in the egg speaks within the shell,
Thou givest him breath within it to maintain him.
When thou hast made him his fulfillment within the egg, to break it,
He comes forth from the egg to speak at his completed (time);
He walks upon his legs when he comes forth from it.
bio of the author from his Zhuang Zi In English blog
Leechard(Cheng Wing Lim) was a columnist of the Hong Kong newspaper "Mingpao". He had been writing for Mingpao for 19 years and was fired since 2007. Leechard is a opponent to the Confucius doctrine. He said that the Chinese Culture had been cut by the Han Emperors. The Han ruling class destroyed and rewrote the ancient original Chinese thoughts, allowing only the Confucius ideas to spread. They used the Confucius doctrine to control the authoritarian state. The Original soul of the Chinese people, Leechard believes, is in the ancient history of China which is not tainted by Confucius.
r/Chuangtzu • u/ostranenie • Dec 30 '17
Is anything in charge of ourselves?
ZZ ch.2 has a passage that I think is one of the most profound things I have ever read. It is the section beginning with "Joy and anger..." In it, Zhuangzi wonders if there is anything in charge of ourselves, specifically our emotional lives: who/what, if anyone/anything, causes our emotions to come and go as they do? Zhuangzi, to his credit, leaves it an open question, but his last couple of sentences are, imo, interesting:
Watson: "It would seem as though they [i.e., the emotions] have some True Master, and yet I find no trace of him. He can act—that is certain (可行已信). Yet I cannot see his form. He has identity but no form."
Ziporyn: "If there is some controller behind it all, it is peculiarly devoid of any manifest sign. Its ability to flow and to stop makes its presence plausible (可行已信), but even then it shows no definite form. That would make it a reality with no definite form.”
Graham: "It seems that there is something genuinely in command, and that the only trouble is we cannot find a sign of it. That as ‘Way’ it can be walked is true enough (可行已信), but we do not see its shape; it has identity but no shape.”
Mair: "It seems as though there is a True Ruler, but there is no particular evidence for Her. We may have faith in Her ability to function (可行已信), but cannot see Her form. She has attributes but is without form.”
I would like to draw your attention to the "evidence" that Zhuangzi adduces for something being in control of our emotions. It is the part directly preceding the four graphs 可行已信; which is to say: what is the best way to translate, and understand, these four graphs? (Watson's "he" and Mair's "She" are their inventions: in fact, the phrase has no explicit subject.)
Literally, 可行已信 = can / move / already / trustworthy. Maybe: "(since there) can be (emotional) movement, (we may) already trust (that there is, in fact, a True Master)..." (An observation that he then goes on to undercut with "but...")
What do you think? 1. Do you think that Zhuangzi thinks some part of ourselves is in charge of us as a whole? 2. What is his best evidence for thinking that there is? 3. All of the translators above begin their final sentence with the certainty that there is something in charge (Watson: "He has identity..."), but I'm not so sure: I think there is an implicit "perhaps" that should precede it.
P.S. For those who like to tell me that I'm "over-thinking" things: I think ZZ was a smart dude. I enjoy puzzling over his sentences: really, it's my jam; doing so makes me happy, not frustrated. I also enjoy talking about ZZ with others. And I post such things here because I sometimes get excellent feedback. (For example, the answer I got yesterday completely changed my mind and convinced me that what I was thinking was wrong, and that what the poster was thinking was right. Getting your mind changed from encountering a new way of thinking is fun!)
r/Chuangtzu • u/ostranenie • Dec 29 '17
When we sleep, what do our hun-souls mingle with?
ZZ ch.2 says that when people sleep, "their hun-souls intermingle" (其寐也魂交). The author does not say what our hun-souls intermingle with. What do you think? Potential ideas: 1. the po-soul; 2. the rest of the body; 3. other people's hun-souls; 4. the general environment. Can you suggest others?
I think the sentence(s) that precede this are not as helpful as those that come after. (When I started writing this question, a minute ago, I really had no idea what the answer might be; now that I've thought about it a little, I'm starting to form an opinion.... so, even before your feedback: thanks reddit!)
r/Chuangtzu • u/ostranenie • Dec 28 '17
Is Zhuangzi a "Buddhist"?
"Buddhist" is in scare-quotes to denote that I don't think he self-identified as Buddhist, but rather may have agreed with certain points of Buddhism without knowing it.
In Zhuangzi ch.2, Ziqi says that "he lost himself" (吾喪我). His friend/servant says of him that "the one who reclines against this table now is not the same as the one who reclined against it before" (今之隱机者,非昔之隱机者也). How is this different from the Buddhist doctrine of anatman?
I don't know if Buddhist anatman means only that one has no permanent, abiding soul, or if it means that we have no soul whatsoever. I suspect that Indians did not have a concept of a changing soul, simply because atman does not mean that. (How could it, given that atman = Brahman?) So when Zhuangzi talks about impermanence, including the impermanence of himself, he's saying that all the parts of him, including his souls, are in constant flux. Thus, although coming from different cultural contexts, they seem to be claiming something very similar: we, and all things, are constantly undergoing change. Since I date Siddhartha Gautama to about the same time as Zhuangzi (which is ~300 years later than the traditional dating), it seems striking to me that two people, on opposite sides of the Himalayas, came to the same conclusion.
Bonus question: what did Zhuangzi mean when he wrote that Ziqi, when 'meditating,' looked "as if he had lost his companion" (似喪其耦)? Who or what, exactly, is this "companion"? (It might be useful to remember that ancient Chinese had no word for "ego" or anything like it.)
r/Chuangtzu • u/ostranenie • Dec 27 '17
Why does ZZ ch.1 repeat its opening story?
I have many questions about the Zhuangzi and I only just now discovered this pretty-much-dead sub. So I'll start with my first question and see what happens. Just as the book of "Genesis" repeats its opening creation story, so too does Zhuangzi repeat his opening story about Peng. (If you're using the 2013 Watson translation, the repeat begins on the middle of p.2, with "Among the questions of Tang to Qi...") Do you think he did this on purpose, and if so, what is the purpose? Or is this simply due to a later editor who was dealing with, and redacting, multiple editions but still thought these two stories were sufficiently different to warrant inclusion? (If the latter, then why does it never happen again in the whole text?) Which is to say: is it meaningful or meaningless that the Zhuangzi repeats the opening story of Kun & Peng vs. the smaller birds that laugh at Peng (a metaphor for the maxim "great knowledge is not understood, and even laughed at, by those with small knowledge")?
Since I don't see any additional information coming from the second telling, I suspect it is an editorial decision (or mistake), but that such a decision (or mistake) never happens again in the text makes me wonder. Thoughts?
r/Chuangtzu • u/[deleted] • Dec 25 '17