I loved Zhuangzi + Questions

[Mendelssohn]

Hello everyone,

 

I am from Ontario, Canada, and have not met anyone else who knows about Taoism. I am new to Taoism in general, but not very new to eastern philosophical concepts. I came across Zhuangzi by chance, after already reading Tao Te Ching. I read all three of the books and I have to say it is the best thing (in philosophy) that I ever read. His thoughts were so akin to my own. It was very refreshing, and also very thought provoking. It was meant to make you think and not just tell you the way it is and although at first some things that are written may seem simple, upon further thinking there seems to always be more depth to it. Some passages could be a book of their own but they are kept so beautifully simple. On a side note, science is what I read most of all, and as a result I am skeptical, thus many older writings, in fact most philosophy I have heard seems very outdated and absurd. Zhuangzi seems timeless! (until the human race is wiped out of course =) ). Anyway, I loved Zhuangzi; my favourite philosopher. On the other hand, I don't know much about Toaism, in general. Although from what I've seen of modern Taoism, which is not much, there is a lot of ritual, fancy clothing, tradition. Does focusing on such things not contradict the words of Zhuangzi? I've noticed the same with Buddhism. Therefor I would not be Buddhist or Toaist, because the ritual and tradition have overcome the philosophical foundation that they are based upon! I do not know anyone else who has learned about Taoism but I would like to hear another opinion on this. I love to be contradicted, so feel free to do so! =)

[doc benway]

Welcome Mendelssohn. I am also a fan of Zhuang Zi.

It's my feeling that most religions have a beautiful, profound, and simple core.

At their core is a unique language for pointing the seeker toward the truth, toward reality, in a way that is determined by their cultural, geographical, and temporal characteristics.

On top of this is piled all of the distractions, misinterpretations, corruption, and baggage of generations of misguided, well-intentioned, or opportunistic people.

So Daoism is full of wisdom and beauty but there's plenty of chaff as well.

Don't let that keep you away.

[Marblehead]

Hi Mendelssohn,

 

We are currently running a series of chapter by chapter comparison of the Tao Te Ching in the "Taoist Discussions" forum.

 

It is my plan that when we finish the TTC we can do something similar with the Chuang Tzu.

 

Buyer Beware Warning: I speak only to the philosophy aspect of Taoism so if you are looking for info in the other fields you will have to work with other members.

[Mendelssohn]

Welcome Mendelssohn. I am also a fan of Zhuang Zi.

It's my feeling that most religions have a beautiful, profound, and simple core.

At their core is a unique language for pointing the seeker toward the truth, toward reality, in a way that is determined by their cultural, geographical, and temporal characteristics.

On top of this is piled all of the distractions, misinterpretations, corruption, and baggage of generations of misguided, well-intentioned, or opportunistic people.

So Daoism is full of wisdom and beauty but there's plenty of chaff as well.

Don't let that keep you away.

 

Thanks a lot Steve,

 

That's the impression I got too, but I had never really heard anyone else comment on that.

It won't keep me away =)

[Mendelssohn]

Hi Mendelssohn,

 

We are currently running a series of chapter by chapter comparison of the Tao Te Ching in the "Taoist Discussions" forum.

 

It is my plan that when we finish the TTC we can do something similar with the Chuang Tzu.

 

Buyer Beware Warning: I speak only to the philosophy aspect of Taoism so if you are looking for info in the other fields you will have to work with other members.

 

Thank you,

 

I would be interested in reading the discussion on Zhuangzi. Hopefully that happens =).

[ChiDragon]

Hi, Mendelssohn....

 

Welcome to TTB.

 

Good thing you had sensed that there are two sides to Taoism. One side is the philosophy and the other is religion. What happened was some people study the philosophy in the Tao Te Ching, originally, laid out by LaoTze. However, a group of people came along and interpreted certain part of the Tao Te Ching in favor for their religion purpose as canon. If you pay closed attention to Heshang Gong's copy of the Tao Te Ching, you will see lots of places were changed to mention something for the good health of a human body. Legendarily, he was known to be a very active in the Taoist religion.

[doc benway]

Hi, Mendelssohn....

 

Welcome to TTB.

 

Good thing you had sensed that there are two sides to Taoism. One side is the philosophy and the other is religion.

I'd like to add at least a third - cultivation.

It really doesn't fit into either of the other categories.

[Marblehead]

I'd like to add at least a third - cultivation.

It really doesn't fit into either of the other categories.

 

Hehehe. Well, I'm going to add the martial arts.

[ChiDragon]

Hehehe. Well, I'm going to add the martial arts.

 

Maybe Steve has healing in mind....

Edited August 18, 2011 by ChiDragon

[Mendelssohn]

Thanks guys. That makes sense. I guess all I'm really interested in is the philosophical aspect. (Although I think Tai Chi is very beautiful, I wouldn't take the time to learn it).

[Miro]

Although from what I've seen of modern Taoism, which is not much, there is a lot of ritual, fancy clothing, tradition. Does focusing on such things not contradict the words of Zhuangzi? I've noticed the same with Buddhism. Therefor I would not be Buddhist or Toaist, because the ritual and tradition have overcome the philosophical foundation that they are based upon! I do not know anyone else who has learned about Taoism but I would like to hear another opinion on this. I love to be contradicted, so feel free to do so! =)

 

Hi, Zhuangzi is one of my favourite Chinese writers (years ago I did read him in original Chinese). However, he is not philosopher in my view - philosophy usually comes to us as a result of speculative thinking or as a result of life practice (although nowadays it is a rare thing). You can find many examples of his deep spiritual practice thourough the book. And because no philosopher can discover that breathing is done from the heel etc., therefore I call him simply practitioner. So feel free to consider him philosopher, of course, just do not forget where his philosophy comes from, please.

With regards to fancy clothes and ritual, well, it is called tradition. Did you ever teach people? If yes, you should know that if you will speak anything more than common, most people will not understand you. So you have to give them things in a way they can understand. Some people need the most basic interactions, some people can use advanced... Some people need fancly clothing, others are satisfied with rags... Unfortunately, most intelligent people (especially Westerners) have tendency look down at those simple things like rituals, prostrations, meditations. They think these are something less than philosophy. They are wrong. There is a great difference between understanding by mind and understanding by heart - and when Taoism and Buddhism talk about pure understanding, clear mind etc., they always mean understanding by heart, not by mind. Without that (often boring) ritual and tradition, there is no real understanding, just the floating superficial mind. In other words, that philosophical foundation (you speak about above) is based on the ritual and tradition (you dislike), philosophy is based on personal practice. I am saying that without that you will never fully understand Zhuangzi. I think if you read it just by your mind or brain, if you take it as philosophy, you miss the most important points of his book - a personal practice of his life.

 

Miro

[Marblehead]

Hi, Zhuangzi is one of my favourite Chinese writers (years ago I did read him in original Chinese). However, he is not philosopher in my view - philosophy usually comes to us as a result of speculative thinking or as a result of life practice (although nowadays it is a rare thing). You can find many examples of his deep spiritual practice thourough the book. And because no philosopher can discover that breathing is done from the heel etc., therefore I call him simply practitioner. So feel free to consider him philosopher, of course, just do not forget where his philosophy comes from, please.

 

Hi Miro,

 

I must agree with what you have suggested above. Lao Tzu was the philosopher. Chuang Tzu developed many (but not all) of the philosophical thoughts presented by Lao Tzu. I like to look at it as Chuang Tzu was Lao Tzu's "First" disciple.

 

Sounds like you have a pretty good base knowledge of the philosophy and I would really enjoy having you around when we get our Chuang Tzu series started.

 

BTW You are welcome, as is everyone, to take part in our TTC Chapter studies.

[oat1239]

I am saying that without that you will never fully understand Zhuangzi. I think if you read it just by your mind or brain, if you take it as philosophy, you miss the most important points of his book - a personal practice of his life.

Miro

 

Your thoughts are my thoughts.

[Mendelssohn]

Hi, Zhuangzi is one of my favourite Chinese writers (years ago I did read him in original Chinese). However, he is not philosopher in my view - philosophy usually comes to us as a result of speculative thinking or as a result of life practice (although nowadays it is a rare thing). You can find many examples of his deep spiritual practice thourough the book. And because no philosopher can discover that breathing is done from the heel etc., therefore I call him simply practitioner. So feel free to consider him philosopher, of course, just do not forget where his philosophy comes from, please.

With regards to fancy clothes and ritual, well, it is called tradition. Did you ever teach people? If yes, you should know that if you will speak anything more than common, most people will not understand you. So you have to give them things in a way they can understand. Some people need the most basic interactions, some people can use advanced... Some people need fancly clothing, others are satisfied with rags... Unfortunately, most intelligent people (especially Westerners) have tendency look down at those simple things like rituals, prostrations, meditations. They think these are something less than philosophy. They are wrong. There is a great difference between understanding by mind and understanding by heart - and when Taoism and Buddhism talk about pure understanding, clear mind etc., they always mean understanding by heart, not by mind. Without that (often boring) ritual and tradition, there is no real understanding, just the floating superficial mind. In other words, that philosophical foundation (you speak about above) is based on the ritual and tradition (you dislike), philosophy is based on personal practice. I am saying that without that you will never fully understand Zhuangzi. I think if you read it just by your mind or brain, if you take it as philosophy, you miss the most important points of his book - a personal practice of his life.

 

Miro

 

Thanks for your input, Miro.

 

I agree to an extent. When I read Zhuangzi I always have to put it into practice rather than just think about it and let it sink into my heart. It's not only thought based, and I understand that. However, when I speak of traditions I am talking about the modern ones that came after Zhuangzi was written, so it certainly wasn't what was trying to be portrayed if it had not yet existed. Also there are many parts in Zhuangzi that speak against tradition, fancy clothing and things like that. You say I dislike tradition, but that's not really the case, it just doesn't do much for me. If I put on some traditional clothes it doesn't change my heart. It is just me trying to make myself appear righteous or exalted above others. Zhuangzi talks directly against such things which is why I asked the question.

[ChiDragon]

Zhuan Tze is not a philosopher.

Hm........I am not sold on that.

Perhaps, we should consult with a different source.

[Marblehead]

Zhuan Tze is not a philosopher.

Hm........I am not sold on that.

Perhaps, we should consult with a different source.

 

Hehehe. It's all a matter of prespective.

 

Did he talk about life and how one might live it? Of course he did, therefore he was a philosopher.

 

Do I speak of these things? You betcha'. Am I a philosopher? Well, in a way, yes. But still, I am only a disciple.

[doc benway]

I'm going to agree with everyone.

 

Philosophy literally means "love of wisdom" but more generally can be defined as an approach to understanding the general and fundamental questions and problems associated with existence. This doesn't mean that the understanding must be limited to verbal and intellectual understanding.

 

Zhuang Zi tries to teach us wisdom. He also helps us to approach the fundamental problems and questions of existence.

As Miro says, you cannot understand Zhuang Zi fully if you simply approach him intellectually or analytically.

To take that a step further, I'll say that you cannot understand Daoism if you simply approach it intellectually or analytically. Western philosophers have tended toward and intellectual approach in general, so we tend to think of philosophers as intellectuals. Eastern philosophers are sometimes intellectual (Confucius) and sometimes more experiential (Zhuang Zi) and sometimes both (Lao Zi).

 

So I have no problem referring to Zhuang Zi and Lao Zi as philosophers - they are lovers and teachers of wisdom. It is their methods that differ from the stereotypical Western intellectual philosopher.

 

Mendelssohn - you may not bother to take the time to learn Tai Ji Quan but if you have an interest in understanding Daoism I would suggest you consider spending some time with some experiential practice such as meditation. And it doesn't have to be a specifically Daoist method for you to benefit. It will take your understanding of what the classics are trying to say to another level - I can guarantee that (if you haven't already, of course). I recognize that I'm making an assumption here.

[Mendelssohn]

I'm going to agree with everyone.

 

Philosophy literally means "love of wisdom" but more generally can be defined as an approach to understanding the general and fundamental questions and problems associated with existence. This doesn't mean that the understanding must be limited to verbal and intellectual understanding.

 

Zhuang Zi tries to teach us wisdom. He also helps us to approach the fundamental problems and questions of existence.

As Miro says, you cannot understand Zhuang Zi fully if you simply approach him intellectually or analytically.

To take that a step further, I'll say that you cannot understand Daoism if you simply approach it intellectually or analytically. Western philosophers have tended toward and intellectual approach in general, so we tend to think of philosophers as intellectuals. Eastern philosophers are sometimes intellectual (Confucius) and sometimes more experiential (Zhuang Zi) and sometimes both (Lao Zi).

 

So I have no problem referring to Zhuang Zi and Lao Zi as philosophers - they are lovers and teachers of wisdom. It is their methods that differ from the stereotypical Western intellectual philosopher.

 

Mendelssohn - you may not bother to take the time to learn Tai Ji Quan but if you have an interest in understanding Daoism I would suggest you consider spending some time with some experiential practice such as meditation. And it doesn't have to be a specifically Daoist method for you to benefit. It will take your understanding of what the classics are trying to say to another level - I can guarantee that (if you haven't already, of course). I recognize that I'm making an assumption here.

 

Well said, Steve. I think we're in agreement. I actually meditate a lot, and put many of Zhuangzi's teachings (along with others) into practice. I understand fully that it's not only intellectual. I certainly don't think it's about appearances and traditions though. I think it goes deeper than that; methods for getting into harmony with nature. I can see how Tai Chi and meditation are methods, but wearing a fancy hat so everyone respects you? I think such things are a little contradictory to the spontaneity of nature and your true self. Not that it really matters whether people wear hats, or what they do on the outside. I could not really care less, but if one focuses on these things they will miss the boat, and I can remember big rants Zhuangzi went on saying this exact same thing =P

[doc benway]

.... but wearing a fancy hat so everyone respects you? I think such things are a little contradictory to the spontaneity of nature and your true self. Not that it really matters whether people wear hats, or what they do on the outside. I could not really care less, but if one focuses on these things they will miss the boat, and I can remember big rants Zhuangzi went on saying this exact same thing =P

I agree with you there. At the same time I do understand how having a familiarity and understanding of cultural, social, and language factors can have a big impact on how we interpret things.

 

For example, I'm not a native Chinese speaker but I do some translation for my Shifu and it's fascinating to see the differences in how the Chinese and American mind work based on the structure of language.

I don't want to get into it too much but the nature of alphabetical for symbological writing has a profound affect on how we approach meaning. Cultural and social factors can have similar impact on how we interpret and percieve things. I'm guessing that is Miro's point, at least in part.

Miro - please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Mendelssohn]

I agree with you there. At the same time I do understand how having a familiarity and understanding of cultural, social, and language factors can have a big impact on how we interpret things.

 

For example, I'm not a native Chinese speaker but I do some translation for my Shifu and it's fascinating to see the differences in how the Chinese and American mind work based on the structure of language.

I don't want to get into it too much but the nature of alphabetical for symbological writing has a profound affect on how we approach meaning. Cultural and social factors can have similar impact on how we interpret and percieve things. I'm guessing that is Miro's point, at least in part.

Miro - please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Okay. That's understandable. To introduce someone to the main ideas and things like that maybe cultural things are necessary as a gateway into meditation and more serious practice. That makes sense! Different things are necessary to communicate to people in different cultures to get the main ideas across. Thanks a lot. I didn't look at it this way before =)

[ChiDragon]

.............

[Marblehead]

.............

 

Really nice posts Y'all!

[Lotus7]

When I was in my "Seeking anything" phase, religious Taoism is what brought me to meditation. I remember reading an article on the subject, and it spoke of Daoist meditation. And thus rendered my true spiritual journey. In the beginning, I attempted to approach any philosophy or religious teaching with pure intellect. I gained a tremendous amount of "knowledge". If asked, I could quote scriptures or explain to you the difference between yin and yang. The problem was I could ever capture the underlying meanings and how they applied to my life. Once I started to let go of all the stigmas and interpretations of what I was learning, I became liberated in a beautiful way. Looking past the words, the practices and teachings became to permeate my being, and I began to gain intuitive understanding. That is how I try to approach every new step in my learning.

I have a great book called "The Whole Heart of Yoga" by John Bright-Fey. It is basically commentary on the original Oral teachings of the Indian "Music" masters. He gives a fair warning in the introduction, that one will gain absolutely nothing by trying to process the yogi's words if approached purely with the mind.

 

I enjoy all the Daoist and Buddhist writings, but none more than Lao Tzu. The Tao te Ching, in my opinion, perfectly sums up the philosophical essence of Tao. I am actually reading Zhuangzi right now. It, to me, is beautifully simple and yet speaks of so much!

 

Love and light, Matt

[Marblehead]

I enjoy all the Daoist and Buddhist writings, but none more than Lao Tzu. The Tao te Ching, in my opinion, perfectly sums up the philosophical essence of Tao. I am actually reading Zhuangzi right now. It, to me, is beautifully simple and yet speaks of so much!

 

Love and light, Matt

 

Yeah, I have mentioned this before but I will mention it as well, it was only after reading Chuang Tzu that I had an 'inner' understanding of what Lao Tzu was telling me. My first readings of the TTC were mental exercises only until reading Chuang Tzu.

[Mendelssohn]

Well said, Lotus. I understand exactly what you're saying, although I'm sure I have a long way to go =)