ChiDragon Posted October 30, 2011 (edited) What was ZZ saying in this parable? I think he was saying that everything are the same to begin with. Things are united as one by saying that the wind is the commonality for all the sounds came from Human and Earth. If the sounds were combined, then it becomes the sounds of Nature(Heaven). ZZ's idea here different from LaoTze. LaoTze treated Human, Earth, Heaven and Tao are four entities. Indeed, ZhuangTze had Human, Earth and Heaven blended in as one Unity but Tao is a different entity. There was no difference between Human, Earth and Heaven, holistically, because their actions are started from the same origin. ZhuangTze was saying that all the actions are predominated by the invisible wind. Thus the wind is analogous to the invisible Tao. ZhuangTze was also suggesting that the human body is predominated by an invisible soul or the spirit of the body. The Human behaves differently from each other was because each person has an individual character as suggested by ZZ about the size of the orifices. As in concepts, the basic ideas are the same but people just look at them differently then argue about. In ZhuangTze's philosophy, if we start giving names to all things to differentiate them, then individual will be insisted on one idea and try to convince others beyond reasons. e.g. All flowers have a fragrance. There is no argument there as long people called a flower as a flower. However, if a name "rose" was given to a flower, then people will start arguing when someone said a rose is not a rose. Edited October 31, 2011 by ChiDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
konchog uma Posted October 30, 2011 What was ZZ saying in this parable. I think he was saying that everything are the same to begin with. Things are united as one by saying that the wind is the commonality for all the sounds came from Human and Earth. If the sounds were combined, then it becomes the sounds of Nature(Heaven). ZZ's idea here different from LaoTze. LaoTze treated Human, Earth, Heaven and Tao are four entities. Indeed, ZhuangTze had Human, Earth and Heaven blended in as one Unity but Tao is a different entity. There was no difference between Human, Earth and Heaven, holistically, because their actions are started from the same origin. ZhuangTze was saying that all the actions are predominated by the invisible wind. Thus the wind is analogous to the invisible Tao. ZhuangTze was also suggesting that the human body is predominated by an invisible soul or the spirit of the body. The Human behaves differently from each other was because each person has an individual character as suggested by ZZ about the size of the orifices. As in concepts, the basic ideas are the same but people just look at them differently then argue about. In ZhuangTze's philosophy, if we start giving names to all things to differentiate them, then individual will be insisted on one idea and try to convince others beyond reasons. e.g. All flowers have a fragrance. There is no argument there as long people called a flower as a flower. However, if a name "rose" was given to a flower, then people will start arguing when someone said a rose is not a rose. thank you chidragon! insightful! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lienshan Posted November 4, 2011 The structure of Zhuangzi chapter 2 The opening paragraph; Zi Qui and Zi You discuss pipes; a story. Tao and philosophy. Yao and Shun; a story. Nie Que and Wang Ni; a story. Qu Que Zi and Chang Wu Zi; a story. The penumbra and the shadow; a story. Zhuangzi and the butterfly; a story. The looong paragraph 'Tao and philosophy' contains a lot of fill information. I will concentrate my reading on the passages containing the character 道 Tao or Dao and offer my own translation of these specific passages on monday after the weekend. The six stories look interesting; the Qu Que Zi and Chang Wu Zi story does too contain 道 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted November 5, 2011 ZhuangTze Chapter 2, Section C The conflict between the Confucians and Mohist was for this reason. One thought that a fallacy which was reckoned by others is correct. Also, one thought that the fact which was reckoned by others is incorrect. If one wants to prove that the fact which was reckoned by others is incorrect or the fallacy which was reckoned by others is correct. It's best not going into too deep in understanding its reasons. lienshan... I know you have quite an imagination to create and reinventing the wheel as I had told you before. You have your own stories based on your own scrambled logic. It was utterly impossible for me to follow your sense of logic. I don't think even God can neither.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted November 5, 2011 ZhuangTze Chapter 2, Section C lienshan... I know you have quite an imagination to create and reinventing the wheel ... Hehehe. You can put me in that category basket too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted November 5, 2011 (edited) Hehehe. You can put me in that category basket too. Sometimes you are logical and practical but not hopeless.......... hehehehe.....I think I will.... Edited November 5, 2011 by ChiDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
