XieJia

let me join you with the dancing and laughing.

@Xabir Thanks for the guidance The scenary seen, the hearing is the heard. what is it that you see in me? thus is what I heard; heating, melting, liquid metal and condense it on glass. the glass itself is made of sand. the glass is then polished (loads of scratching). This is how mirrors are made. need not to break the mirror just a scratch, to see the mirror not as a mirror but the combination of its aggregates. thus is what I heard... "Without words, without silence; how can you express the truth?" -Wumengguan c.24 what is it that you see in me?

what is is what is is what is is what what is is what and is what is also what is. Two sides make one line. One line makes the entrance. But the exit? It's just my statements that is the perverted absurdity.

how did you get the file type? Apologies I misunderstood the thread as a metaphysical jokes.

Sorry, english is not my first language. thank you

Look up and down. Who is looking up and looking down? What is up and what is down?

with dust and the broken shards... the answer is there but i dare not speak. @Harmonious Emptiness I am replying to your thread, but I am too lazy to add a new reply. In my experience, what you said is true; I can't deny any of that. From my experience, there are only Buddhism and not such and such schools; I don't think the Gautama Buddha ever want this. There can be no-selves in the pride/vanity/conceit as well as there can be no-selves in the Boddhisatva-like qualities. The Boddhisatva-qualities are the anatta version of the pride/vanity/conciet. When such is seen and experience all can be let go, such as letting go of the Dharma. When the fetters are uprooted, the tools for the uprooting is only good for that job. Keeping it will only be a fetter aswell. People with higher realizations struggle with even more fetters, for it is more that they see. For if the self-arised any way, they do have to be become; this is done up to the process of extreme enlightenment -> become a Buddha that is. I wish you goodluck and wisdom; it is not that you are far off in anyway. I yet to be there myself aswell.

like like! let me join in... "what I say is quite easy to know, quite easy to do. myriads things under heaven can't know, can't do. Doctrines have lineage, offices have holders. individuals knows not this, they knows not me. knowing me is rare, for my method becomes valuable. hence the sages can wears dull clothes and in chest a precious jade." My opinion is that one cannot comes eye to eye with the unless one sees the connect-ness of all under heavens; if one see one as a name, function or purpose. one cannot see. Like Chidragon said 天下is used here. I think this chapters goes with chapter 1 quite nicely...

Hard to say; by names and classic definition. My living-teachers follows that of the Theravadin. You could say I am a Theravadin. I consider Hui-Neng and Huang Po also my masters and tries to put their teachings into practice. You could say I am a Mahayanist. My inspirations and teachings comes from that of the Buddha. You could say I am a Buddhist. I don't really see that much differences in the vehicles, I don't believe it existed during Gautama Buddha's time. Hard to say

dusts! from the shattered mirror... and maybe some shards.... you almost got me there too

Hahaha me like the way this thread is going. Though I am not familiar with a Koan tradition. Let me try... Dust is dust Mirror is mirror mirror itself, the dust. dust itself, the mirror. The two comes together stands together goes together How can we be partial and wipe the mirror? both are dusts, both are mirrors what is there to see when two mirrors reflects? dust and mirror becomes one, what does one goes to? @Xabir There's some realisation but yet to pass through the gate. I still see myself outside. I am still partial between the Dukkha, Anitjun, Anatta. @Informer +1 hahaha Goodluck to one

Finished reading the things on the blog ie. Thompson's and the blogger's translation. Here are my observations: Much as Thompson have already stated 1 - 67 is coherent; I do think the conclusion and leftovers are added. Shenzi is strictly a Legalist; the Dao he associated with is not strictly the same to our Dao. Legalist views things differently, though some concepts can be found in both school of thoughts which is common in all Chinese school of thoughts. I don't think Shenzi is in anyway Daoist according to Thompson's translation, although I could be wrong. The later chapters were additions to the scripts; written by his disciple or some other scholar that managed to acquire his text/teachings. We wouldn't know without going straight to the Chinese text. My other remarks is the Shenzi that the first part of the text is just about the way of antiquity. IMO the middle part's ideas and arguments is similar to each other can could be attributed to 1 or 2 author. The last part I think is the notes of however is copying this text then... IMHO Shenzi's teachings is very useful to an able ruler/minister who can implement it, and uses the laws to balance and govern the state. In other cases, it is not useful when the ruler/minister are unable. The teachings can only be adapt by able rulers so that they can govern the state and nourish those they governed. I don't think Shenzi is related to Daoism at all, and hence the Daoism we know today is the results of the things being lost in translations and scholar misinterpreting the masters' work. But I am not stating that I am anyway right.

I would like to second Forest's statement and acknowledge Xabir's post. Even over here in Thailand; Buddhism is all over the place as well. There are those that rejects Buddhism and view it as unusable tradition. There are those that, follows tradition; what they do is just give merit, build monastery to uphold the Sangha hoping to get acquire good merits. - Most Thais are here... There are those that preach and studys the literatures and only of the literatures. There are those that practices and managed to obtain Samadhi but yet still they are astray, and though they acquire powers; they are unable to eliminate their fetters. There are those that practices, obtained Samadhi and managed to breakthrough it to Vipassana; wisdom to cut away the fetters. And hence the different stages of enlightenment. The Masters here; mostly in the Theravada tradition. Despite the different traditions, the enlightened masters preach the same thing. The Three Vehicles is fused into One whether Theravada, Mahayana or Vajrayana -> Bodhiyana I hope to provide you guys with some perspectives from Thailand (Where we would like to claim that we are a Buddhist country; there will be a big change that will threaten our way of life soon though but that's just life ). From my experience, I shared my views with forest about learning; paper and fleshes. But I am not saying that Paper is not important or that it is useless.

@Steve @xabir2005 thus is what I have heard dust see dust in the mirror mirror see itself by the dust when there's no dust; there's no mirror how can mirror still be mirror? what is there to reflect? @Harmonious When there isn't falsehood; where is the truth? Right Views is the undoing of the Wrong Views. As Sila, Samadhi (Concentration) and Prajna (Panna or Wisdom) is the undoing of Desire, Anger and Ignorance. How can anything exist independently? other than the Conditioned dependent of itself. How could one say that this exist, not exist, or either exist or not exist? Thus is what I have heard. Goodluck to all

@Marblehead If I could help you finish and wrap up TTC in anyway; please do tell. Thank you and others aswell. @Lienshan I am halfway through Thompson's Shenzi stuff, will read Xunzi aswell then. I don't found the thing on the Springer and the academia so useful so far. I got access, if anyone want anything from there pm me.

I was translating halfway before Lienshan made his reply; Thompson did a good job, I think a lot better than mine. I don't have access to his text. This is what I found from google: I don't think the number is aligned on this one: http://haquelebac.wo...0%99s-shen-dao/ Some kind of essay, I don't have access to Springer's site. Will find a way round. http://www.springerl...2386n014460208/ Lienshan, I am starting to get the sense from Shenzi's work; and why the author of that Zhuangzi's chapter claimed so. I now understand your point about the different kind of Dao. The Dao and De used in the context of these two prose is all high and mighty but not usable to a Living; it is such a high ideal. Let me read the Thompson thingy and we can discuss. Let me leave you guys with my attempt, I tried to be original but I don't have to ability to stray much from Thompson's and Lienshan's. De, Its small essence can't be conceived. Its clear brightness can't be emitted. Is thus why the external doesn't implicate its internal. Dao, Is the place that send out goodness without asking about the looks. Is the place that send out wisdom without asking how stupid. This is to say, such is the greatness of Dao. P.S. Yes, Marblehead. I think it'll be nice if we can do Zhuangzi; there's a lot of people here. Maybe we should ask whether they would join in.

Thus I have heard; maybe enlightenment exist maybe it don't what two could be one, for one is realised and known by the two. seeing the dust attach to the mirror and the mirror attach to the dust. what does dust see when it look at the mirror? what is mirror is dust, what is dust is mirror. thus how can dust be dust, how can mirror be mirror? when one sees, there's only the one that is being seen. Maybe the make-believe is the playing and living; there is no playing or living outside of that. Thus is what I have heard. Who knows, I don't know. What is it then that knows? Silence is still a sound is it not?

Where's the apple pie and my pancakes?

Hence the 84,000 dharmas; Well said, Well said! There are alot of nice Buddhists here. Without question, without purpose; where are we? @Dear Darin I am still sleeping but thus is what I have heard. I would try to put it into something easily digest. Though things can be said; the things you are looking for are not taught or said. Dive in and witness the Present nature of the experience; this is the 5 skandhas. Skandhas means Vessels; the 5 vessels of self. Prajna Wisdom, the undoing of Ignorance; in it self it is the same. It is easier to view it as a elastic band; Ignorance is the pulling, Prajna is the relaxing of the pulling. Without Ignorance, there can be no Wisdom. dharmakaya, sambhogakaya and nirmanakaya have many names in different tradition but it's the same thing; all can be directly related and coherent to what Sir forestofemptiness shared. Buddhism -> directly means Knowing-ism (Knowing can be a bit misled). As Sir Ambrose pointed out; different illness have different medicines and cures. There is no use in taking Ginseng to cure an upset stomach. Everything is surmised in Sir Ambrose's post. My advice to you is to forget what you read, forget what you learned. Knowing that the universe are experienced through your six senses and slowly work from there. Examine things as it happens; whether internal or external. Thus is what I have heard Goodluck on your journey I am a fool, a fool is me. If you can see the fool, you can see me. You will become a fool, you will become me. I am a fool, a fool is me. Knowing the fool is Knowing me. Then where is the fool?, where is me? where are you?

I can see and understand the point in making aswell, all I want is just to try to give an alternatives. I do like to give ShenZi a touch of Daoism and a touch of Legalism; though I need to read his work. Laozi and Shenzi are gone; ok maybe Laozi is in Chinatown and Shenzi at the Pawnshop but who knows. @Marblehead It will be nice of you to share with us as well or perhaps maybe a little nudge by putting yourself behind? Born on Land, nurtured by water; the good swimmer forgot he's in water. So did the fishes; the birds, snake and the millipedes.

Bravo! let me look at the Chinese text and lets share opinions; maybe somewhere outside this thread?

I have yet to read Shenzi's work. But and reading the following from Marblehead's remarks; I would like to try to give another interpretation: 害 The character hai or hurt; denotes a roof over the what I see as Wang (Unification of Heaven, Earth, Man) and Kou (Opening). I would dare to speculate as the Will of Self upon Heaven, Earth and Man. 勁而害能則亂也, 雲能而害無能, 則亂也. Could also translate to something along this line: The Able Toughs, the Unable Cloud-Heads; it is the will of these that governs the times of Chaos. So to say that time of Chaos arised when the Toughs have ability and the Cloud-Heads have no ability. Chaos is sustained with the existence of the two Without these two, how can there be Chaos? These two factors creates Chaos and govern Chaos. When the Cloud-Heads is unable, bad governances follows. The Toughs took up arms, they fought each other. Even when one unites all the Tough, if the Cloud-Heads are still unable; there will not be peace. We can see the example of Qin, Wei (Cao Cao's), Mongols, Alexander, Rome... etc... So if this is so, could we also say the time of peace is when the Toughs is unable and the Cloud-Heads able?

Enjoyed your guys insights and translation. Let me try with my humble attempt. Thus the seas and rivers are kings of hundred mountain-streams, By means of the ability to be below all that of hundred mountain-streams, Hence so the seas and rivers are kings of hundred mountain-streams. Thus the sages moves humanity forward while being behind, he moves humanity upward by being below. Humanity wont be behind, only that of forward; humanity wont slander, Thus happiness fills all under Heaven without peak. By means of one not fighting, no one under Heaven can fight with one. *The character wang - King -> line uniting heaven,earth and man. -> To rule is to be the one that unites three, thus the phrase Son of Heaven. Sheng from the word Sheng Ren -> Sage -> is also a character that denotes the Vessel of Heaven, Earth and Man. The become the vessel of all; hahaha it's a wonder indeed.