Chuang Tzu Chapter 2, Section G

[ChiDragon]

One problem is the phrase 麗之姬 ???

麗姬 Li Ji occurs in the previous 'Nie Que asked Wang Ni story':

 

毛嬙 麗姬 人之所美 也 Mao Qiang and Li Ji were accounted by men to be most beautiful ...

 

And 麗姬 Li Ji occurs too in this not translated story but one line from it:

 

晉獻公伐虢 得麗姬 Jin offer Duke to stab Guo to get Ji Li

 

麗之姬，艾封人之子也。晉國之始得之也，

 

OK. It was the way that the phrase was worded. Yes, 麗姬 is a girl.... Sometimes, I see that the "之子" was referred as "the child of" instead of "the son of" . It was rare though.

 

I hope we are clear on this, now, from our meaningful dialogue....

Edited November 9, 2011 by ChiDragon

[Marblehead]

Well, I am glad she was a she because it would just have been soooo wrong if she was a he in that story.

[lienshan]

麗之姬，艾封人之子也。晉國之始得之也，

 

Yes, 麗姬 is a girl....

And 麗之姬 is both a concubine and a widow!

 

Zhuangzi used the I ching hexagram formula 'hexagram X becomes hexagram Y' (X之Y)

姬 means 'concubine' and was too an Jin marquis/duke ancestral name.

So becoming a widow is why she weaps and cryes and becoming a concubine is why she

So the daughter of Confucius became widow and the criminal Chang Wu Zi her new husband?

 

A feature in classical chinese was 'exposure of the object' equal to underlining.

The 'exposured object' was placed in the front and a 之 marked where it belonged.

The beginning of story could, if so, be read like this:

 

麗之姬 艾封人之子也 晉國之始得之也

 

Border-warden Ai's son, the first of the Jin state, got Ji made Li.

 

 

That'll say the subject of story is someone not born marquis/duke of Jin

[lienshan]

Section G

 

... These words seem very strange; but if after ten thousand ages we once meet with a great sage

who knows how to explain them, it will be as if we met him (unexpectedly) some morning or evening.

 

inserted text

 

The Penumbra asked the Shadow, saying, 'Formerly you were walking on, and now you have stopped;

formerly you were sitting, and now you have risen up - how is it that you are so without stability?' ...

I've in section F told, that an inserted text doesn't belong here in section G

The reason why is, that it breaks the connection of the two texts shown in the quote above

 

'The great sage' one meets in the morning and the evening is 'the Shadow'

 

He is absent when night and too when noon, while the sun is straight vertical above.

[Marblehead]

I've in section F told, that an inserted text doesn't belong here in section G

The reason why is, that it breaks the connection of the two texts shown in the quote above

 

'The great sage' one meets in the morning and the evening is 'the Shadow'

 

He is absent when night and too when noon, while the sun is straight vertical above.

 

Nope. I don't buy that. Hehehe.

 

What you quoted is speaking of a Sage who might one day appear and explain all the 'unknowns' of life whereas, what you inserted is speaking to the fact that we all are dependent on some (energy, force, whatever) that moves us.

[lienshan]

Nope. I don't buy that.

The structure of chapter 2

 

dialoque - Zi Qui and Zi You

monoloques

dialogue - Yao and Shun

dialogue - Nie Que and Wang Ni

dialogue - Qu Que Zi - Chang Wu Zi + 'inserted text'

dialogue - Penumbra and Shadow

monologue

 

The 'inserted text' was inserted here by the editor Gao Xiang 300 CE

 

A. C. Graham placed the 'inserted text' after the monologues, but that's wrong,

because the 'inserted text' is in dialogue mode but without mentioning names.

 

I think the 'inserted text' fits as an end of the Nie Que and Wang Ni dialogue.

 

Chang Wu Zi would never say: "Then suppose I and you discuss ..."

because he is equaling Confucius and Qu Que Zi in a 'him against them' mode.

 

But it fits perfectly with Wang Ni's 'How should I know' mode!

Edited November 10, 2011 by lienshan

[ChiDragon]

Classic Text

麓之姬，艾封人之子也。晉國之始得之也，涕泣沾襟。及其至於王所，與王同筐床，食芻豢，而後悔其泣也。予惡乎知夫死者不悔其始之蔪生乎？

 

Modern interpretation.

這一段開首舉麗姬為例。麗姬是春秋戰國時代麗戎國艾地守封疆人之女，被晉國俘虜，起初涕泣沾襟，及後得晉獻公寵愛，生活很舒服，吃得很好，就後悔當年何必哭泣呢。按照這個例，你就可以知道，「予惡乎知夫死者不悔其始之蔪生乎。」現實上都是這樣，都是顛倒的，顛三倒四。

 

麓之姬: A girl named 麗姬(Li Ji) is a daughter of a feudal king of the State of 麗戎(Li Rong). She was a captive of the Jin State. At the beginning she was crying and wetting her dress; but later the King of Jin treated her well by given her good foods and comfortable living quarter. Then, she was regretted that was crying so sad at first. This is an irony showing how people change their feelings and have different sentimental values in different situations.

 

The confusing part was that the name of the girl 麗姬(Li Ji) has the same character, 麗, in the state 麗戎(Li Rong).

 

麓之姬: 麗戎 之 麗姬; Li Ji of Li Rong. <<--- The sentence structure in English and Chinese are reverse as in this case.

 

Analogous to:

1. lienshan of Sweden

2. Charles of Wales.

Edited November 10, 2011 by ChiDragon

[lienshan]

Modern interpretation.

 

麓之姬: A girl named 麗姬(Li Ji) is a daughter of a feudal king of the State of 麗戎(Li Rong). She was a captive of the Jin State. At the beginning she was crying and wetting her dress; but later the King of Jin treated her well by given her good foods and comfortable living quarter. Then, she was regretted that was crying so sad at first. This is an irony showing how people change their feelings and have different sentimental values in different situations.

 

The confusing part was that the name of the girl 麗姬(Li Ji) has the same character, 麗, in the state 麗戎(Li Rong).

 

麓之姬: 麗戎 之 麗姬; Li Ji of Li Rong.

Your 'modern interpretation' doesn't fit well with the official story of Li Ji

 

姬 was the ancestral name of her husband the deceased Duke Xian of Jin.

Her name was 麓姬 Li Ji while he lived and 麓之姬 when she became widowed.

 

The phrase 晉國之始 'the first of the Jin state' must therefore refer to the heir!

 

Ji Li had the legal heir killed before Duke Xian died and her own 15 years old son Xiqi installed as new ruler.

She was thus de facto 'the King' of Jin one month until Xiqi was assassinated. Maybe that's the pointe?

 

But I do still not understand 'son of the border-warden Ai'

 

The only Ai that could fit in is 'Duke Ai the lamentable' (494-467 BC) known from Zuo Zhuan.

One of Ai's stories looks like the beginning of Nie Que and Wang Ni dialogue:

 

He sent Ran You to ask Zhong Ni (Confucius) about the subject.

He replied that he did not know about it.

Three times he gave this answer to inquiries pressed upon him.

 

Nie Que asked Wang Ni, saying, 'Do you know, Sir, what all creatures agree in approving and affirming?' 'How should I know it?' was the reply. 'Do you know what it is that you do not know?' asked the other again, and he got the same reply. He asked a third time, 'Then are all creatures thus without knowledge?' and Wang Ni answered as before,

Edited November 11, 2011 by lienshan

[ChiDragon]

Your 'modern interpretation' doesn't fit well with the official story of Li Ji

 

姬 was the ancestral name of her husband the deceased Duke Xian of Jin.

Her name was 麓姬 Li Ji while he lived and 麓之姬 when she became widowed.

 

The phrase 晉國之始 'the first of the Jin state' must therefore refer to the heir!

 

Ji Li had the legal heir killed before Duke Xian died and her own 15 years old son Xiqi installed as new ruler.

She was thus de facto 'the King' of Jin one month until Xiqi was assassinated. Maybe that's the pointe?

 

But I do still not understand 'son of the border-warden Ai'

 

The only Ai that could fit in is 'Duke Ai the lamentable' (494-467 BC) known from Zuo Zhuan.

One of Ai's stories looks like the beginning of Nie Que and Wang Ni dialogue:

 

He sent Ran You to ask Zhong Ni (Confucius) about the subject.

He replied that he did not know about it.

Three times he gave this answer to inquiries pressed upon him.

 

Nie Que asked Wang Ni, saying, 'Do you know, Sir, what all creatures agree in approving and affirming?' 'How should I know it?' was the reply. 'Do you know what it is that you do not know?' asked the other again, and he got the same reply. He asked a third time, 'Then are all creatures thus without knowledge?' and Wang Ni answered as before,

 

lienshan........No, no, no.....

 

姬 can be both an ancestral name and a first name.

It happens to be the first name of 麓姬(Li Ji). Her first name has nothing to do with the ancestral name of another man.

 

FYI Her maiden name was 麓姬.

 

 

PS...

I love you very much.

Please don't do this to me again.

 

 

[lienshan]

The passage without the story looks like this in Burton Watson's translation:

 

"How do I know that loving life is not a delusion?

How do I know that in hating death I am not like a man who,

having left home in his youth, has forgotten the way back?

How do I know that the dead do not wonder why they ever longed for life?"

 

 

Three 'How do I know' questions about life and death.

The subject of the second is about a man, having left home in his youth,

which confirms the translation 'son of Ai the border warden'.

 

There's no nothing in the three questions indicating 'a woman on the way to her wedding'

[Marblehead]

 

There's no nothing in the three questions indicating 'a woman on the way to her wedding'

 

If I remember correctly Watson deals with that in some other section of The Chuang Tzu.

[ChiDragon]

The passage without the story looks like this in Burton Watson's translation:

 

"How do I know that loving life is not a delusion?

How do I know that in hating death I am not like a man who,

having left home in his youth, has forgotten the way back?

How do I know that the dead do not wonder why they ever longed for life?"

 

 

Three 'How do I know' questions about life and death.

The subject of the second is about a man, having left home in his youth,

which confirms the translation 'son of Ai the border warden'.

 

There's no nothing in the three questions indicating 'a woman on the way to her wedding'

 

Sorry that you have to rely on somebody's mistranslation. If you understand what it was said in the cartoon, then you wouldn't have such problem.

 

[Marblehead]

I saw the shadow of the shadow of an object. What an interesting concept!

[lienshan]

Sorry that you have to rely on somebody's mistranslation.

I used Burton Watson's translation to show, that the cartoon interpretation is wrong!

There's absolutely no connection between the three questions and a weeping bride

 

麗之姬 Ji of Li (Ji 姬 is the war spoil concubine Li Ji's son)

艾封人之子也 son of the border warden to Ai (Ai 艾 is a plant that'll say he had no real title)

晉國之始得之也 primary-made heir of the Jin state (he had three older halfbrothers)

涕泣沾襟 wept crocodile tears (that's how the term is used in other ancient texts)

及其至於王所 until his arrival at the royal court (Jin was ruled by Dukes and Marquises)

 

Did Li's fifteen years old son mourn (weep) for three years when Duke Xian of Jin died?

The young man was assassinated only one month later!

 

The traditional readings (and translations) of this Zhuangzi passage is either wrong

or the story is totally misplaced by the original editor.

[lienshan]

The lines just after the little story are:

 

予惡乎知夫死者不悔其始之蘄生乎

夢飲酒者 旦而哭泣

夢哭泣者 旦而田獵

 

How do I know that the dead doesn't regret his primary-made voluntarily life?

He who dreamt of drinking wine had mournful weeping in the morning.

He who dreamt of mournful weeping went off to hunt in the morning.

 

The first dreamer was Ji's son, who had a party instead of mourning the deceased Duke Xian of Jin.

So the mourning he had was the mourning of his own assassination in the morning.

The second dreamer was the lawful but exiled heir, who wanted to mourn his father.

Prince Yi Wu ascended later on the throne of Jin and became Duke Hui of Jin.

 

I've translated the term 其始之蘄生 as 'his primary-made voluntarily life'.

That's in my opinion the important subject of this passage: one's free will?

His mother had no choice, when she and her sister as war spoils were made concubines,

but did the fifteen years old young man have a choice?

 

If, then he choose to enjoy the good food and the concubines in the deceased rulers bed

[Marblehead]

That's in my opinion the important subject of this passage: one's free will?

 

I would agree baut also add that it is also about worrying ourself over something that will not be known until the proper time arrives.

[lienshan]

it is also about worrying ourself over something that will not be known until the proper time arrives.

Is Zhuangzi about what's ordinary common sense?

No, the subject is one's 'free will' expressed one's 'primary-made voluntarily life'!

 

I read Zhuangzi's pointe of view as a combination of the last two stories.

I read them in the same way as Laozi's formula: A is to B like C is to D :

 

The penumbra is to the umbra like Zhuang Zhou is to his dreams.

 

It's in the last line called: 物化 the transformation of contents

 

My own approach to the term 'the transformation of contents' is that of Niels Bohr's.

He claimed, that light was waves or particles depending on the measure method used.

Either or ... but never both at the same time due to the complementarity principle.

[lienshan]

Victor Mair:

Both Confucius and you are dreaming, and I too am dreaming when I say that you are dreaming .

This sort of language may be called enigmatic.

 

James Legge:

He and you are both dreaming. I who say that you are dreaming am dreaming myself.

These words seem very strange.

 

Burton Watson:

Confucius and you are both dreaming! And when I say you are dreaming, I am dreaming, too.

Words like these will be labeled the Supreme Swindle.

 

'A.C. Graham':

Qiu and you, you're just dreams, and my telling you that you're a dream is a dream too.

This teaching he told you about is called a conundrum.

 

丘也 與女皆夢也 予謂女夢 亦夢也

是其言也 其名為弔詭

 

All translators have problems with 弔詭 because they misread the socalled 'Ji Li story'

as one about a bride weeping on her way to her wedding. The term makes no problem to me

because I read the story as about a young man and heir weeping crocodile tears

when mourning the deceased Duke Xian.

 

The dictionary definitions of the two characters:

 

弔 condole, mourn, pity

詭 deceive, cheat, defraud

 

That'll say the end term of these two lines relates directly to the little story!

Edited November 17, 2011 by lienshan

[lienshan]

萬世之後而一遇大聖知其解者

是旦暮遇之也

 

Victor Mair:

but after myriad generations there may appear a great sage who will know how to explain it

and he will appear as though overnight.

 

James Legge:

but if after ten thousand ages we once meet with a great sage who knows how to explain them,

it will be as if we met him (unexpectedly) some morning or evening.

 

Burton Watson:

Yet, after ten thousand generations, a great sage may appear who will know their meaning,

and it will still be as though he appeared with astonishing speed.

 

'A.C. Graham':

If one sage in ten thousand generations understand it,

it's like encountering him in the space of a day.

 

My own translation:

You will once within ten thousand generations meet with the interpreter of the great holy knowledge,

when dawn will meet with sunset.

 

That'll say never!

The great holy knowledge can't be interpreted: Tao that can be told is not Tao.

Page 1 line 1 in Tao Teh Ching and Zhuangzi explains why, philosophically, in the following passage.

I've earlier in this thread written, that the following passage was misplaced by the editor,

but I was wrong.

[dust]

Just for kicks I wanted to translate the butterfly part in my own words. Because it's brilliant. And I want to talk about wuhua (the last part).

 

 

昔者莊周夢為胡蝶，栩栩然胡蝶也，自喻適志與，不知周也。

 

俄然覺則蘧蘧然周也，不知周之夢為胡蝶與胡蝶之夢為周與。

 

周與胡蝶則必有分矣。此之謂物化。

Once Zhuang Zhou dreamt he was a butterfly, a happy butterfly flitting and fluttering as he pleased, not aware that he was Zhuang Zhou.

When he suddenly awoke, surprised to find himself Zhuang Zhou, he wasn't sure if it was Zhuang Zhou dreaming he was a butterfly, or a butterfly dreaming it was Zhuang Zhou.

 

There must be a difference between Zhuang Zhou and a butterfly...

This is called the merging of things.

 

 

 

Not much different from other translations, except that Watson and Legge both translate 物化 as the Transformation of Things.

 

物化 as a structure appears a few times in the Outer Chapters. I realize that 化 is "correctly" translated as transformation, but that doesn't work for me.

 

What does it mean to you?

[Marblehead]

There must be a difference between Zhuang Zhou and a butterfly...

 

This is called the merging of things.

 

What does it mean to you?

Okay. You asked. To me:

 

The above first sentence is begging for a response. The question being asked is "What is the difference between Chaung Tzu and the butterfly?"

 

The response, either transformation or merging, does not speak to the difference.

 

The answer should be: "This is called the separation of things."

[dust]

Why?

[ChiDragon]

This is called the merging of things.

 

Not much different from other translations, except that Watson and Legge both translate 物化 as the Transformation of Things.

 

物化 as a structure appears a few times in the Outer Chapters. I realize that 化 is "correctly" translated as transformation, but that doesn't work for me.

 

What does it mean to you?

 

"Merging of things" seems to be a good translation which correlate to "万物融化为一(all things integrated as one or a whole)".

 

Zhuang Zi seems to be saying, metaphorically, that ZZ is the butterfly and the butterfly is ZZ. He wants to indicate that there is no separation between human and things.

 

这样，物化就是“物我界限消解，万物融化为一”。

It is like this. Merging of things seems to eliminate the distinction between human(oneself) and things. All things integrated as one.

 

Ref: 物化

Edited December 3, 2014 by ChiDragon

[Harmonious Emptiness]

I'd suggest to read 此之謂物化 more as "this speaks of the transformation of things" rather than "this is called transformation of things."

 

If Zhuangzi can dream of being a butterfly and not even know that he isn't, then it shows how the mind can be in any body and experience life. Zhuangzi's mind can experience life from the perspective of a butterfly. This points to the essence of mind, imo, which exists in all things, everywhere, and so enables "transformation" as all things have essence of mind in no matter what form. They can transform from this to that, but the essence of mind does not change, and this is why they can be the same yet transformed.

 

The water trigram (yang surrounded by yin) speaks of this, and perhaps was even being subtly referenced. Water can take any shape without losing its essential nature. The internal yang line is solid, while the external yin lines are flexible.

[Taoist Texts]

 

This is called the merging of things.

 

 

What does it mean to you?

depends on what you mean by merging of things.