[TTC Study] Chapter 5 of the Tao Teh Ching

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Some passages from Chuang Tzu (Watson trans.) which I think help to illuminate the ideas presented in Chapter Five. I opened a random page of Chuang Tzu last night and came upon the following in section 14, which led me to read section 13 tonight. I think you will see that they help to support my earlier assertions about the context of Chapter Five:

 

from section 14:

 

Music Master Chin said, "Before the straw dogs are presented at the sacrifice, they are stored in bamboo boxes and covered over with patterned embroidery, while the impersonator of the dead and the priest fast and practice austerities in preparation for fetching them. But after they have once been presented, then all that remains for them is to be trampled on, head and back, by passers-by; to be swept up by the grasscutters and burned.

 

 

We can see here that the straw dogs, though discarded after the ceremony, were also treated with utmost respect and care, where priests would even fast and practice austerities before even picking them up. Furthermore, the evidence doesn't show that they were trampled as part of the ceremony. It is only afterwards, when the effigies lie abandoned on the field, that they are trampled on "by passers-by" and eventually swept up and burned by those who tend the field.

 

 

 

 

(from section 13)

 

Lao Tan said, "May I ask your definition of benevolence and righteousness?"

Confucius said, "To be glad and joyful in mind; to embrace universal love and be without partisanship - this is the true form of benevolence and righteousness."

Lao Tan said, "Hmm - close-except for the last part. `Universal love' - that's a rather nebulous ideal, isn't it? And to be without partisanship is already a kind of partisanship. Do you want to keep the world from losing its simplicity?

Heaven and earth hold fast to their constant ways, the sun and moon to their brightness, the stars and planets to their ranks, the birds and beasts to their flocks, the trees and shrubs to their stands. You have only to go along with Virtue in your actions, to follow the Way in your journey, and already you will be there. Why these flags of benevolence and righteousness so bravely upraised, as though you were beating a drum and searching for a lost child? Ah, you will bring confusion to the nature of man!"

 

[...] (also from section 13)

The Master said: The Way does not falter before the huge, is not forgetful of the tiny; therefore the ten thousand things are complete in it. Vast and ample, there is nothing it does not receive. Deep and profound, how can it be fathomed? Punishment and favor, benevolence and righteousness - these are trivia to the spirit, and yet who but the Perfect Man can put them in their rightful place?

When the Perfect Man rules the world, he has hold of a huge thing, does he not? - yet it is not enough to snare him in entanglement. He works the handles that control the world, but is not a party to the workings. He sees clearly into what has no falsehood and is unswayed by thoughts of gain. He ferrets out the truth of things and knows how to cling to the source. Therefore he can put Heaven and earth outside himself, forget the ten thousand things, and his spirit has no cause to be wearied. He dismisses benevolence and righteousness, rejects rites and music, for the mind of the Perfect Man knows where to find repose.

Men of the world who value the Way all turn to books. But books are nothing more than words. Words have value; what is of value in words is meaning. Meaning has something it is pursuing, but the thing that it is pursuing cannot be put into words and handed down. The world values words and hands down books but, though the world values them, I do not think them worth valuing. What the world takes to be value is not real value.

What you can look at and see are forms and colors; what you can listen to and hear are names and sounds. What a pity! - that the men of the world should suppose that form and color, name and sound are sufficient to convey the truth of a thing. It is because in the end they are not sufficient to convey truth that "those who know do not speak, those who speak do not know." But how can the world understand this!

 

 

From this we can also see that people are much like words. We have higher purposes and reasons for being where we are and doing what we're doing, frequently without our even knowing those purposes. Words are also stand-ins for meaning, like straw dogs are stand-ins for live dogs, and people are stand ins for Dao.

 

The depth of Dao is unfathomable, and depth of intended meaning in the Dao De Jing should not be underestimated. It works with harmony, like a master musician who can follow his whim and forget the chord changes while still revealing the tones of each chord without even needing to know what chord it is.

[Marblehead]

We can see here that the straw dogs, though discarded after the ceremony, were also treated with utmost respect and care, where priests would even fast and practice austerities before even picking them up. Furthermore, the evidence doesn't show that they were trampled as part of the ceremony. It is only afterwards, when the effigies lie abandoned on the field, that they are trampled on "by passers-by" and eventually swept up and burned by those who tend the field.

I'm still with the first four lines of the chapter.

 

Yes, in my life I have been the "straw dog" many times. I have been treated with respect and care in order to become open and giving. But once everything that could be taken was taken I was thrown to the gutter to be trampled upon.

 

I know the Sage would not behave in such a manner. Mother Teresa did not behave in this manner. Neither have so many other worthy people.

 

Tao, and therefore the nature of the universe, has no choice of what it does nor what/who it effects. The Sage has choices. People have choices. Compassion, which is linked to benevolence, is one of the Three Treasures. Therefore I still think it is wrong to say the Sage is not benevolent or that the Sage is ruthless.

[Apech]

I'm still with the first four lines of the chapter.

 

Yes, in my life I have been the "straw dog" many times. I have been treated with respect and care in order to become open and giving. But once everything that could be taken was taken I was thrown to the gutter to be trampled upon.

 

I know the Sage would not behave in such a manner. Mother Teresa did not behave in this manner. Neither have so many other worthy people.

 

Tao, and therefore the nature of the universe, has no choice of what it does nor what/who it effects. The Sage has choices. People have choices. Compassion, which is linked to benevolence, is one of the Three Treasures. Therefore I still think it is wrong to say the Sage is not benevolent or that the Sage is ruthless.

 

Yes but doesn't bu ren mean non-benevolent? In any case non-benevolent does not mean nasty, aggressive or hateful. It just means the sage acts out of wu wei, spontaneously responding to whatever the situation or the person before him needs ... or perhaps what is appropriate to them. I think its like this ... when they are in front of him he deals with them naturally, when they walk out the door they are gone ... no clinging, no attachment, no ties.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Yes but doesn't bu ren mean non-benevolent? In any case non-benevolent does not mean nasty, aggressive or hateful. It just means the sage acts out of wu wei, spontaneously responding to whatever the situation or the person before him needs ... or perhaps what is appropriate to them. I think its like this ... when they are in front of him he deals with them naturally, when they walk out the door they are gone ... no clinging, no attachment, no ties.

 

Yes, and also, this focus of the straw dogs being trampled on appears largely to be a more modern scholarly thing, based on the excerpt from Chuang Tzu which came much later than Chapter Five.

 

The excerpt from Chaung Tzu is talking about timing. Confucius wants to teach about rituals, but rituals change and the places he wants to go are in changing circumstances. For him to do so would be like taking the straw dogs and sleeping under them to have good dreams, except taking them after the ceremony when they have been discarded would bring bad dreams because they they were no longer objects of veneration and had been sitting on the ground etc.

 

I think our main mistake here is understanding straw dogs as things that are treated badly. It seems the use of bu ren, followed by the description in Chuang Tzu has led to the confusion on the chapter. With more context of what bu ren means, we can have a better understanding of how the people are straw dogs (wei can also say that something is something)

Edited July 25, 2014 by Harmonious Emptiness

[Marblehead]

Yes but doesn't bu ren mean non-benevolent? In any case non-benevolent does not mean nasty, aggressive or hateful. It just means the sage acts out of wu wei, spontaneously responding to whatever the situation or the person before him needs ... or perhaps what is appropriate to them. I think its like this ... when they are in front of him he deals with them naturally, when they walk out the door they are gone ... no clinging, no attachment, no ties.

Yes, but that is different than treating the people as straw dogs.

 

I really don't disagree with what you said.

[Apech]

I agree with HE that treating people as straw dogs (which by the way is given in my copy of the Richard John Lynn trans. of Wang Bi) does not mean treating them badly. I think the point was made by me and others way back in this thread that a straw dog has an actual function and effect while it is being used ... its just when that function has ended it is thrown away. This kind of goes back to the 'life is sacred' from that other thread ... life is an amazing thing and doing harm to it is to be avoided ... but in nature things are born and die and life goes on regardless there is no attachment to individual things.

[Daeluin]

Without motive or ambition, things follow their momentum, and the tao is impartial, and the Sage follows wu wei.

 

Following their momentum and the laws of Heaven and Earth, two planets crash upon one another, myriad deaths, myriad transformations, and Heaven and Earth might be considered ruthless. The Sage follows wu wei, and responds to the environment using destruction when necessary, deciding not by the mind, but by remaining in connection with the tao.

 

Edit: The straw dog is a metaphor for our attachment to the illusory world. We are all straw dogs, pretending to be real when we ignore our deeper real selves. We cling to sentiment and illusion and rail at the ruthlessness of nature rather than plunging to the depths of reality and seeing beyond the temporal.

Edited July 25, 2014 by Daeluin

[Marblehead]

I would continue my concerns but that would be like beating a dead horse. Hehehe.

 

(I don't agree with everything Nietzsche said either.)

[Daeluin]

I'm still with the first four lines of the chapter.

 

Yes, in my life I have been the "straw dog" many times. I have been treated with respect and care in order to become open and giving. But once everything that could be taken was taken I was thrown to the gutter to be trampled upon.

 

What is built up can only be brought down. What is hoarded can only be robbed.

We flow like water, so we may forever be humble and not coming from a perspective of what we have or do not have.

 

Our hearts are open and nurturing, but not attached to a mutual return. What is given is given, let it go.

 

By practicing non-attachment, we always have the choice to change our circumstance if we find ourselves becoming drained by others. It is when expect validation and mutual return of what we give to others that we end up staying in the situation that is draining us, ever asking to be nurtured by those who drain us. There are many who value what others give without giving in return, no matter what their words say. The way to handle them lies in equanimity.

 

I know the Sage would not behave in such a manner. Mother Teresa did not behave in this manner. Neither have so many other worthy people.

 

Bodhisattvas are interesting. Their very purpose is to give endlessly of their own cultivation to heal and uplift others. In one sense their gift might cause a spiritual atrophy, and in another sense it serves to show others the way. This is the nature of all healing. We need to heal ourselves, but sometimes don't know how. Healers can help show us the way, be we need to recognize that it is our own patterns that damage the natural state of our good health.

 

Some people like having someone to look up to, so they don't have to fully listen to their own hearts and do their own work. Bodhisattvas stand in this role of disseminating compassion and healing and become a visible focal point for others to attach. Being such a focal point is also the wrapping of one's self in a spiritual net, and one does not find freedom from reincarnation in this way.

 

Tao, and therefore the nature of the universe, has no choice of what it does nor what/who it effects. The Sage has choices. People have choices. Compassion, which is linked to benevolence, is one of the Three Treasures. Therefore I still think it is wrong to say the Sage is not benevolent or that the Sage is ruthless.

 

Ultimately the path of the way is similar to the Bodhisattva, but the Sage does not become a focal point for others to attach to. Their work is invisible, but greatly healing never the less. Benevolence is paired with Righteousness, Wood and Metal. When Benevolence does not rest upon Righteousness, it is not balanced. When balanced they act in concert as one. Righteousness follows the directive of Social Harmony and is not biased, while Benevolence follows the directive of Righteousness, and thus is kind without fixation on sentiment. Thus it become free to be ruthlessly benevolent when the situation calls for it.

 

• An overgrown plot of land full of invasive species may need to be eradicated so that one may plant native species and cultivate a more healthy ecosystem in it's place. From the perspective of the weeds, they are sovereign and it is inhumane and ruthless and dis-compassionate to eradicate them.
• A teenager who is raised with abundance grows accustomed to a lifestyle of ease and luxury without hard work, is overwhelmed and shocked when the stock market crashes and suddenly they have nothing and need to work for a meager living.
• One culture nurtures the land in peace, but another power hungry culture expands their boundaries and invades a new continent, murdering the peace loving culture because they are in the way.
• A massive volcano erupts filling the planet's atmosphere with ash and killing most forms of life. Over time things rebuild.

 

The Web of Life is inherently attached to the members of the ecosystems which support it, between Heaven and Earth. And yet things between Heaven and Earth operate on many different scales. Various different scopes with their own Web of Life exist. What is in the harmonious flow of one scope may appear destructive in another scope. What appears to have been alive and evolving for eons in one scope may appear as a mere seed in another scope.

 

So when things seem unnecessarily destructive from the perspective within one Scope, how can one judge that from the perspective of another Scope? Even when things appear to be in harmony from one perspective, is it not possible that things are causing great disharmony in a different dimensional sense? From what perspective can we judge the truth in order to make the correct decisions?

 

From every death comes new life. From every change comes transformation. The Sage recognizes the laws of Heaven and Earth and flows within the constructs and frameworks of the various scopes, through the practice of wu wei. Achieving ultimate oneness the Sage is able to create a field of utter harmony which slips between all things. Those who want the Sage to be or do something specific might call the idea of the Sage uncaring or even sometimes violent, but the Sage is merely wielding the power of harmony appropriate for maintaining oneness with the tao, and is not likely to be noticed performing violent actions in any case. The implications of this are subtle and profound, vague and indistinct.

Edited July 26, 2014 by Daeluin

[Marblehead]

What is built up can only be brought down. What is hoarded can only be robbed.

We flow like water, so we may forever be humble and not coming from a perspective of what we have or do not have.

What you have said is consistent with what little I know of you at this point in time so I accept your rationale.

 

However, I give a shit. I value those things I have worked hard for. I will pull the weeds out of my garden so that the flowers are more attractive to my eyes.

 

If I didn't have attachments I wouldn't have my gardens and fish ponds. I wouldn't even know if I would be able to pay all of next month's bills. Attachments are not bad as long as we don't make them a part of ourself.

 

Anyhow, the Three Treasures: compassion, frugality, and humility. But even these have their limits.

[Daeluin]

We all have our attachments and important things. Giving it all up all at once is extreme. I find I only need to surrender some things to understand the principle and feel the invitation of the tao. By getting better at navigating the tao in little ways, I begin to understand how much potential I hold back by "giving a shit" and controlling the rest of my reality, which is not reality at all. Clinging to illusion is fine, its a choice. But I think our difference in belief hinges around where the limits are perceived.

[Marblehead]

But I think our difference in belief hinges around where the limits are perceived.

Hehehe. Yeah, it is pretty obvious that we have differences in our beliefs. Duh.

 

We each have our own journey to engage in. I must walk mine and you must walk yours. Nice though that we seem to be walking with each other right now.

[dawei]

If straw dog = straw and dog, then

monkey brain = monkey and brain...???

 

That's why some question Wang Bi's received version which is the most popular around the world. He had some good ideas but this may not of been one of them.

[ChiDragon]

That's why some question Wang Bi's received version which is the most popular around the world. He had some good ideas but this may not of been one of them.

 

I don't think that was his original interpretation, not from a native like him. It must be a misinterpretation and mistranslation from a non-native speaker. I would like to see his native original document saying it, rather than reading it from a translation in another language. Can you cite that source....???

[dawei]

 

I don't think that was his original interpretation, not from a native like him. It must be a misinterpretation and mistranslation from a non-native speaker. I would like to see his native original document saying it, rather than reading it from a translation in another language. Can you cite that source....???

 

WANG BI commentary to his own work.... about 15 pages back.

 

I know you don't think westerner's are capable of understanding the text, but for those who have an open mind, refer to:

 

A Chinese Reading of the Daodejing Wang Bi's Commentary on the Laozi With Critical Text and Translation

[ChiDragon]

Where does Wang Bi says that "straw dog" were interpreted as "straw" and "dog".......???

[dawei]

I said Wang Bi's commentary... we're talking about chapter 5.

 

 

For those who want to see what the german sinologist Rudolf G. Wagner said in the aforementioned book: (various sections put together below)

 

The opening "He" below is is talking about Richard Lynn's book on the Wang Bi Commentary...

 

 

He will translate the first phrase of Laozi 5 as “Heaven and Earth are not benevolent and treat the myriad things as straw dogs” in the way hundreds of translators have done before him and will then translate Wang Bi’s commentary to this phrase: “Heaven and Earth do not make the grass grow for the sake of beasts, yet beasts eat the grass. They do not produce dogs for the sake of men, yet men eat dogs.” Evidently, Wang Bi did not read “straw dogs” but read “grass and dogs.” As the reader is kept in the dark about this, he or she will have to wonder why Wang Bi should write such a stupid commentary. In general, the translation seems to lack an understanding of the historicity of the meaning of a text.

The modern Western translations have routinely translated chu gou as “straw dogs.” Straw/grass dogs in fact appear in the Tianyun chapter of the Zhuangzi (Zhuangzi yinde 37/14/31 and 38/14/33). According to this passage, the grass dogs were made for a sacrifice; they were treated with great deference during the sacrifice and discarded directly afterward. Apart from Zhuang Zun, from whom no statement is known to survive which spells out his reading of this expression, the Xiang Er, Wang Bi, and Heshang gong commentaries all agree to read it as “grass and dogs.” For the Xiang Er and Heshang gong commentaries, “grass and dogs” stands for something utterly worthless. Furthermore, the Xiang Er commentary gives quite a different story about the term. In the commentary to the next phrase of the Laozi about the Sage’s not being kindly and treating the Hundred Families like grass and dogs, it writes: “Taking his model on Heaven and Earth, the Sage is kindly towards the good and not kindly towards the evil. As a king He will control and extirpate the evil ones, and also [like Heaven and Earth] regard them as being [as worthless and despicable] as grass and dogs. Therefore [true] human beings [the term ren alone has this meaning in the Xiang Er commentary, who directly confronts it in the commentary on Laozi 17.4 with “grass dogs”] should accumulate merits of good [deeds].

Their spirit communicates ith Heaven, and, should there be someone who wishes to attack or hurt them, Heaven will come to their rescue. The vulgar people [on the other hand] all belong to the category of grass and dogs. [Their] spirit cannot communicate with Heaven, because their harboring evil is like that of robbers and thieves who dare not meet eye to eye with an offi cial. [in this way their] spirit will quite naturally not be close to Heaven [so that], when [they] come to a critical juncture between life and death, Heaven will not know them [and not come to their help]. The benevolent Sage Huangdi knew the minds of later generations [when mankind deteriorated and not every man was a true human being anymore]. Therefore he bound grass and made it into dogs and attached [the grass dogs] above the doors [of family houses]. [in this manner] he wanted to say that the ‘doors’ [families] of later generations would all belong to the category of grass and dogs [i.e., would be as worthless as grass and dogs]. People [however] did not understand the subtle intention of Huangdi [which was to warn them against becoming so worthless], and in a meaningless manner imitated him [in placing the grass dogs above their doors] without reformingtheir evil hearts. This may be called a great evil.” In this reading, the grass/dogs are defi nitely not the sacrifi cial grass dogs but symbolic contraptions, where out of worthless material a worthless animal is made as a symbol of utter worthlessness. It is quite unlikely that the above-quoted commentators were unaware of the existence of the statements about “grass dogs” in the Zhuangzi, Huainanzi,and elsewhere. In fact, Wang Bi had a copy of the Zhuangzi and quoted him often.

The commentators thus opted for the “grass and dog” reading in full knowledge of the option of the ritual “grass dog,” unanimously rejecting it. In fact, were one to read the passage as referring to the ritual grass dog, the Laozi would read, when translated into plain language, “Heaven and Earth are not kindly, they treat the ten thousand entities fi rst as something very precious, and then discard them as worthless.” There is to my knowledge not a single statement in the other parts of the Laozi that would confi rm that this text assumed that there was such a change in the attitude of Heaven and Earth. The modern Western translators have thus opted for the “straw dog” version against both the inner evidence of the text and the unanimous opinion of the early commentators. Needless to say, Wang Bi also accepted the “grass and dog” reading but interpreted it differently. In his reading, they were entities manifestly related to others [who would consume them], so that these others might be considered benefi ciaries of the kindliness of Heaven and Earth. He reads the Laozi here as arguing against this assumption.

The Xiang Er Commentary reads: “Modeling themselves on the Dao, Heaven and Earth are kindly towards all those who are good, and not kindly towards all those who are evil. Thus [their] being not loving [a “translation” of “not kindly,” bu ren], means that they exterminate the evil ones among the ten thousand entities, and regard them as worthless as grass and as dogs.” This comment thus reads the Laozi statement against a reader’s assumption that Heaven and Earth establish justice. Although the text is quite clear in its claim that Heaven and Earth are treating all ten thousand entities as grass and dogs, the Xiang Er introduces a distinction between good and evil ones. Extrapolating from the commentary, the main text has thus to be read as “Heaven and Earth [in their establishment of justice] are not kindly [towards all the ten thousand entities]. They treat [some of] the ten thousand entities as grass and dogs.”

The Heshang gong Commentary takes still another line. Commenting on the first sentence, it writes: “Heaven’s initiating and Earth’s generating does not happen by way of kindliness and favor, but by relying on That-which-is-of-itself-what-it-is” [of the ten thousand entities]. Commenting on the phrase “they treat the ten thousand entities like grass and dogs,” this commentary writes: “Heaven and Earth generate the ten thousand entities. [Among them] man is the most precious. That they regard [even man] as grass and dogs means that they do not expect any [gratitude] in return. Extrapolating from this commentary, the Laozi text has to be read as “Heaven and Earth [who create the ten thousand entities] are not kindly [towards even the most exalted among them]. They treat [all of] the ten thousand entities alike as [if they were not more exalted] than grass and dogs.”

For Wang Bi’s commentary, the assumption of the Laozi’s implied reader concerning Heaven and Earth matches none of the three options described above [leaving aside the question of the Heshang gong Commentary’s date]. Here Heaven and Earth manage that “the ten thousand kinds of entities order and regulate each other,” so that, although the entities have many interactive relationships with each other, their order does not come about by interference with their own nature but by living out their own nature. In this way grass is not produced for cattle, but cattle will still eat the grass, and so on. Thefour commentators thus imply four rather different assumptions about Heaven and Earth in the reader’s mind against which the Laozi statement has to be read.All of these assumptions were in fact present.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Personally, I feel like the straw dogs and offering analogy is similar to the Buddhist teaching of emptiness.

 

All things are empty, yet all things are substantial. We know their emptiness without forgetting that they are also substantial and so respect them as substantial without forgetting that they are ultimately empty.

 

Straw dogs are treated with great respect, but it is not forgotten that even though they are treated with such utmost respect, they are ultimately empty of substantial existence. So we may still appreciate and even admire their awesomeness and beauty, but we know that underneath, they are still simply straw.

 

This does not mean they should not be valued, but that the ultimate reality should not be forgotten. Nurture and care for the people, but do not become distraught over the ultimate reality that we are all no more substantial than dry grass destined to evaporate and dissolve back to Heaven and Earth.

 

One only needs to look at the language of wu/non-existence and you/existence in the Dao De Jing to know that such ideas were already present in China, previous to the arrival of Buddhism and Buddhist philosophies.

Edited July 27, 2014 by Harmonious Emptiness

[Marblehead]

Okay, that holds some good rationale. Some of Chuang Tzu's stories speak to this.

[Stosh]

_{The straw dog thing makes sense if one values the spiritual significance of things and disregard the material nature of them.}

_{Treating men as straw dogs , the important things are the feelings ideas etc they have -and honoring these things foremost.}

 

_{The straw dog has greatest importance , the mortal component , the straw, is destroyed .}

_{men live and die not lasting forever , ephemeral changing feeling living they have value}

_{They live beyond their flesh in the repercussions of what they have been ,,the effect on everyone who is left.}

_{If the value was attatched to the flesh, then whatever a man was,}

_{would come to an end with his death , and that would be the end.}

 

_{Dust may return to dust but the lives of all men are to be valued BY THE SAGE}

_{Would one say it was wise or sagely , to disrespect ignore devalue lives? because the body decays.}

[dawei]

_{The straw dog thing makes sense if one values the spiritual significance of things and disregard the material nature of them.}

 

 

That is an interesting line of thought... wondered if you would say more directly to this?

 

_{Treating men as straw dogs , the important things are the feelings ideas etc they have -and honoring these things foremost.}

 

_{The straw dog has greatest importance , the mortal component , the straw, is destroyed .}

_{men live and die not lasting forever , ephemeral changing feeling living they have value}

_{They live beyond their flesh in the repercussions of what they have been ,,the effect on everyone who is left.}

_{If the value was attatched to the flesh, then whatever a man was,}

_{would come to an end with his death , and that would be the end.}

 

The straw dog was made of straw and not clay or concrete for the very reason they wanted to step on it (maybe really insignificant except to a demonstration of superiority) but ultimately it must be flammable; it must succumb to something else... despite its apparent or presented form-value.

 

_{Dust may return to dust but the lives of all men are to be valued BY THE SAGE}

_{Would one say it was wise or sagely , to disrespect ignore devalue lives? because the body decays.}

 

value and devalue are but dualistic concepts to apply to the manifest world. But after the dust returns to dust... what else is there that returns... to what or where?

 

Even if we don't want to turn this too spiritual, we can say that Oneness is all there is... and thus, we are really being asked to drop the dualism too. So we neither value nor devalue, but accept all things equally.

 

Now, while I may accept a tree the same as a man.... and it takes some pains to see the man as worthy as the tree at times... but I can understand that my interaction with the two is not the same but that is simply recognizing form as I see it.

[Stosh]

That is an interesting line of thought... wondered if you would say more directly to this?

Sure Ill clarify whatever opinion I toss out , but Im not sure what bit I should address.

 

The straw dog was made of straw and not clay or concrete for the very reason they wanted to step on it (maybe really insignificant except to a demonstration of superiority) but ultimately it must be flammable; it must succumb to something else... despite its apparent or presented form-value.

I was told they destroyed the thing AFTER the ritual , not as part of it ,, but I dont see it that one MUST see the whole thing as corrective-punative destruction. The point of fires can also be a 'rejoicement' as in , out with the old- in- with the new ,, or it could be ,, "let ol acquaintance be forgot " or it could be 'I hereby reject my own materialism ,, so there! '

Or it could just be getting rowdy when everyones having a good time.

This kind of thing shows up all the time like fireworks ,, smashing a glass at a jewish wedding ,,or throwing glasses after an agreement.

 

value and devalue are but dualistic concepts to apply to the manifest world. But after the dust returns to dust... what else is there that returns... to what or where?

That depends on your or my worldview , but in this case Im thinking they saw it similar to the greeks platonic idea form which was eternal , and that is not made of dust. ( as do I , the form we take is temporary - manifest in mud )

 

Even if we don't want to turn this too spiritual, we can say that Oneness is all there is... and thus, we are really being asked to drop the dualism too. So we neither value nor devalue, but accept all things equally.

 

Now, while I may accept a tree the same as a man.... and it takes some pains to see the man as worthy as the tree at times... but I can understand that my interaction with the two is not the same but that is simply recognizing form as I see it.

Well theres the big Tao which makes no judgement and has no illusion , then theres little tiny us, who are of the Tao and yet have a dao of our own , we do judge and we do have illusions , these things are part of what we are and are essential for us to carry on as living things in a world that doesnt look after us.

 

That a person might come to more harmony and happiness as they trend toward the mode of a sage -so be it, but , for us there can also be taking things too far and losing good stuff , like beauty and weddings , (and yes even funerals- which though sad, also are a way of paying respect - and honoring , the straw dog,, one isnt honoring the body, one honors the memory of the man )

Even if one is talking about rival warlord clans etc , honoring the symbolic and traditional status of the quality of the man , rather than his temporary military strength etc,, )

 

( eventually the greeks adjusted the idea forms as distinct from a form itself , and decided the idea form was inherent in the thing itself - )

 

Every wave that ever crashed a beach left a mark. though it be obscured now , the memory of it , in its repercussions lives on , since the past can never be undone ,once done,and with all things being connected , ripples of what has happened plays out as causative for that which happens today ,, there is no disconnect , though we might percieve there to be one.

Which is why they say the whole world lies within a grain of sand.

Edited August 5, 2014 by Stosh

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Some more thoughts on chapter five.

 

 

Chuang Tzu showed that the straw dogs were presented to Heaven as offerings. Also that a priest and another person praying to Heaven would infuse the straw dogs with their intentions and energy.

 

from Chuang Tzu, section 14:

 

Music Master Chin said, "Before the straw dogs are presented at the sacrifice, they are stored in bamboo boxes and covered over with patterned embroidery, while the impersonator of the dead and the priest fast and practice austerities in preparation for fetching them.

 

 

It's not just a nice straw sculpture that's being offered, it's a purified vessel, infused with prayers and energy that is being offered.

 

So, if the sages treat people as straw dogs, it's because they purify them, and try to infuse them with virtuous energy.

 

 

See chapter 51 of the Dao De Jing:

 

51
1. The Way gives birth to them and Virtue nourishes them;
2. Substance gives them form and their unique capacities complete them.
3. Therefore the ten thousand things venerate the Way and honor Virtue.
4. As for their veneration of the Way and their honoring of Virtue—
5. No one rewards them for it; it's constantly so on its own.

6. The Way gives birth to them, nourishes them, matures them, completes them, rests them, rears them, supports them, and protects them.
7. It gives birth to them but doesn't try to own them;
8. It acts on their behalf but doesn't make them dependent;
9. It matures them but doesn't rule them.
10. This we call Profound Virtue.

 

 

The sage follows the ways of Dao and De.

[Marblehead]

Some more thoughts on chapter five.

 

 

Chuang Tzu showed that the straw dogs were presented to Heaven as offerings. Also that a priest and another person praying to Heaven would infuse the straw dogs with their intentions and energy.

 

from Chuang Tzu, section 14:

 

Music Master Chin said, "Before the straw dogs are presented at the sacrifice, they are stored in bamboo boxes and covered over with patterned embroidery, while the impersonator of the dead and the priest fast and practice austerities in preparation for fetching them.

 

 

It's not just a nice straw sculpture that's being offered, it's a purified vessel, infused with prayers and energy that is being offered.

 

So, if the sages treat people as straw dogs, it's because they purify them, and try to infuse them with virtuous energy.

For whatever the reason, what you said here brought to my mind an alternative to human sacrifice.

[Taoist Texts]

For whatever the reason, what you said here brought to my mind an alternative to human sacrifice.

Good hunch sir.

There was hardly a tomb or a building consecrated without the sacrifice of a dog. At one site, Xiaotong, the bones of a total of 825 human victims, 15 horses, 10 oxen, 18 sheep and 35 dogs were unearthed. Dogs were usually buried wrapped in reed mats and sometimes in lacquer coffins. Small bells with clappers, called ling (鈴) have sometimes been found attached to the necks of dogs or horses. The fact that alone among domestic animals dogs and horses were buried demonstrates the importance of these two animals to ancient Chinese society. It's reflected in an idiom passed down to modern times: "to serve like a dog or a horse." (犬馬之勞).

Shang oracle bones mention questions concerning the whereabouts of lost dogs. They also refer to the ning (寧) rite during which a dog was dismembered to placate the four winds or honour the four directions. This sacrifice was carried over into Zhou times. The Er ya records a custom to dismember a dog to "bring the four winds to a halt." (止風). Other ceremonies involving dogs are mentioned in the Zhou li. In the nan (難) sacrifice to drive away pestilience, a dog was dismembered and his remains buried in front of the main gates of the capital. The ba (軷) sacrifice to ward off evil required the Son of Heaven, riding in a jade chariot, to crush a dog under the wheels of his carriage. The characterba gives a clue as to how the ceremony took place. It is written with the radical for chariot (車) and a phonetic element which originally meant an animal whose legs had been bound (发). It was the duty of a specially appointed official to supply a dog of one colour and without blemishes for the sacrifice. The blood of dogs was used for the swearing of covenants between nobles.

Towards the late fifth century BC, surrogates began to be used for sacrifice in lieu of real dogs. The Dao De Jing mentions the use of straw dogs as a metaphor:

Heaven and earth are ruthless, and treat the myriad creatures as straw dogs;

the sage is ruthless, and treats the people as straw dogs.^[3]

However, the practice of burying actual dogs by no means died out. One Zhongshan royal mausoleum, for example, included two hunting dogs with gold and silver neck rings.

Later, clay figurines of dogs were buried in tombs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogs_in_ancient_China