Chuang Tzu Chapter 3, Section B

[Marblehead]

Section B

 

When Gong-wen Xian saw the Master of the Left, he was startled, and said, 'What sort of man is this? How is it he has but one foot? Is it from Heaven? or from Man?' Then he added, 'It must be from Heaven, and not from Man. Heaven's making of this man caused him to have but one foot. In the person of man, each foot has its marrow. By this I know that his peculiarity is from Heaven, and not from Man.

 

A pheasant of the marshes has to take ten steps to pick up a mouthful of food, and thirty steps to get a drink, but it does not seek to be nourished in a coop. Though its spirit would (there) enjoy a royal abundance, it does not think (such confinement) good.'

 

When lio Tan died, Khin Shih went to condole (with his son), but after crying out three times, he came out. The disciples said to him, 'Were you not a friend of the Master?' 'I was,' he replied, and they said, 'Is it proper then to offer your condolences merely as you have done?' He said, 'It is. At first I thought he was the man of men, and now I do not think so. When I entered a little ago and expressed my condolences, there were the old men wailing as if they had lost a son, and the young men wailing as if they had lost their mother. In his attracting and uniting them to himself in such a way there must have been that which made them involuntarily express their words (of condolence), and involuntarily wail, as they were doing. And this was a hiding from himself of his Heaven (-nature), and an excessive indulgence of his (human) feelings; a forgetting of what he had received (in being born); what the ancients called the punishment due to neglecting the Heaven (-nature). When the Master came, it was at the proper time; when he went away, it was the simple sequence (of his coming). Quiet acquiescence in what happens at its proper time, and quietly submitting (to its ceasing) afford no occasion for grief or for joy. The ancients described (death) as the loosening of the cord on which God suspended (the life).

 

What we can point to are the faggots that have been consumed; but the fire is transmitted (elsewhere), and we know not that it is over and ended.

[konchog uma]

Victor Mair

"Wandering on the Way: Taoist Tales and Parables"

 

 

 

When His Honor Decorated Chariot saw the Right Instructor

he was startled and said, "Who is that man? Why is he so odd? Is

it due to nature or to man?"

Someone said, "Nature made him this way, not man . Nature's

engenderment causes things to be unique . Human appearances

are endowed. That's how I know it's due to nature, not

man.

 

 

The marsh pheasant has to take ten steps before it finds some-

thing to pick at and has to take a hundred steps before it gets a

drink. But the pheasant would prefer not to be raised in a cage

where, though you treat it like a king, its spirit would not thrive.

 

 

 

When Old Longears died, Idle Intruder went to mourn over

him. He wailed three times and left.

"Weren't you a friend of the master?" a disciple asked him.

"Yes."

"Well, is it proper to mourn him like this?"

"Yes. At first, I used to think of him as a man, but now I no

longer do. Just now when I went in to mourn him, there were old

people crying over him as though they were crying for one of

their own sons. There were youngsters crying over him as though

they were crying for their own mother. Among those whom he

had brought together, surely there were some who wished not to

speak but spoke anyway, who wished not to cry but cried anyway.

This is to flee from nature while redoubling human emotion,

thus forgetting what we have received from nature. This was what

the ancients called `the punishment of fleeing from nature.' By

chance the master's coming was timely, and by chance his going

was favorable. One who is situated in timeliness and who dwells

in favorableness cannot be affected by joy or sorrow. This is what

the ancients called 'the emancipation of the gods.' "

 

 

Resins may be consumed when they are used for fuel, but the fire

they transmit knows no end .

[XieJia]

The One-foot guy is not handicapped in anyway.

What does One-foot symbolized?

 

What is the confinement? How does this relates to Confucians or Mozist?

The Coop, the confinement that is.

 

References Khin Shih to Victor's translation of Idle Intruder.

And see why his action is so.

 

It all relates to the quote below.

 

Resins may be consumed when they are used for fuel, but the fire<br style="color: rgb(28, 40, 55); font-family: arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(250, 251, 252); ">they transmit knows no end .

Classics!

 

Have a nice weekend!

Edited November 6, 2011 by XieJia

[Marblehead]

The One-foot guy is not handicapped in anyway.

 

And we will see more stories similar to this.

 

This easily links back to the concept that we all are individuals, that we each are special in our own way, and that we each have our own set of capabilities and capacities. (And this is a result of the processes of Heaven (Nature), not man.)

[ChiDragon]

公文軒見右師而驚曰：「是何人也？惡乎介也？天與？其人與？」曰：「天也，非人也。天之生是使獨也，人之貌有與也。以是知其天也，非人也。」

 

When 公文軒 saw 右師, he was startled and said, "What kind of person is this? How come he only has one leg? Is this endowed? Or it was after birth due to the act of human?"

 

Translation:

公文軒 said, "Nature made him this way, not man. Nature's engenderment causes him to have one leg. Humans are born with two legs was by inherence. Now from the composed gesture of 右師, one will know that he knows it was due to nature, not man.

 

Metaphoric Interpretation:

This parable was suggesting us don't be surprised about things that we didn't know. There are things in Nature which are out of the ordinary that we may not even aware of.

 

 

澤雉十步一啄，百步一飲，不蘄畜乎樊中。神雖王，不善也。

 

Translation:

In the marsh, a pheasant has to take ten steps to find something to eat and has to take a hundred steps to fine water to drink; but the pheasant does not wish to live in a cage. It was because, that even, it was very comfortable and relaxed, but lack of freedom was not so good.

 

　　老聃死，秦失弔之，三號而出。弟子曰：「非夫子之友邪？」曰：「然。」「然則弔焉若此，可乎？」曰：「然。始也吾以為其人也，而今非也。向吾入而弔焉，有老者哭之，如哭其子﹔少者哭之，如哭其母。彼其所以會之，必有不蘄言而言，不蘄哭而哭者。是遁天倍情，忘其所受，古者謂之遁天之刑。適來，夫子時也﹔適去，夫子順也。安時而處順，哀樂不能入也，古者謂是帝之縣解。」

 

指窮於為薪，火傳也，不知其盡也。

 

When LaoTze died, 秦失 came to express his condolence and only wailed three times then left.

A disciple asked: "Are you a friend of our teacher?"

秦失 said: "Yes."

 

Disciple: "Then was it proper just for you to wail three times for your condolence?"

秦失 said: "Yes, at first I thought I came as one individual but not now anymore. At the instance as soon I stepped in, there were some people crying for him; it seems like they were crying for their own children. There were some young people crying seems like they were mourning for their own mothers. They came by to pay their last respect to the deceased and revealed many mixed emotions. Of course, there are things that they do not wish to speak of but said it anyway; things do not wish to cry about but cried. Thus this was evading the natural principles, infringing the truth, forgotten the acceptance of the innate essence. The death of LoaTze was incidental by following the sequence in time because he lived in peace and died in peace. Therefore, the mourn and joy cannot invade the internal heart. In the ancient, this was called the natural extrication, the release of all the suffering.

 

There is time for faggots to be burnt out. The usage of fire may be passed down from generation to generation but no one knows when it will be extinguished!

 

Notes:

These are proper nouns

1. 公文軒 and 右師

2. 秦失

Edited November 7, 2011 by ChiDragon

[dawei]

Metaphoric Interpretation:

This parable was suggesting us don't be surprised about things that we didn't know. There are things in Nature which are out of the ordinary that we may not even aware of.

If one turns it around, then one sees that everything is ordinary to nature since nature is without discrimination; but that is just creating the "this or that" construct. So the metaphysical interpretation may be to just not hold discrimination?

[dawei]

what the ancients called the punishment due to neglecting the Heaven (-nature).

. . .

The ancients described (death) as the loosening of the cord on which God suspended (the life).

Interesting that the ancients held such a karmic-like idea... but let me clarify I am not making any assumptions here, just a comment.

 

 

What we can point to are the faggots that have been consumed; but the fire is transmitted (elsewhere), and we know not that it is over and ended.

 

This last line is translated by Yutang as:

The fingers may not be able to supply all the fuel, but the fire is transmitted, and we know not when it will come to an end.

 

Because the first word 'Zhi' can be: finger / To point out, indicate, to show, demonstrate / to indicate or refer to / to depend on / to count on /

 

The second word 'Qiong' can be: poor / impoverished / destitute / to exhaust / to trace to the very source / distress / affliction / the extreme / the farthest / an end

 

Yet he turns around the idea as 'supplying'. To me, this misses the idea the sentence is creating: It seems to me that this is 'demonstrated' by a fire 'dying' down to soot and ashes ('exhausted' as to 'an end'); Yet the fire (or flame) transmits (or carries on) without knowing (or holding an idea of) its end.

 

Legge and Yutang (and others) make the ending as "We" don't know its end... I don't think that "we" are the focus; the fire itself (ie: nature) is the focus. It's not so much that nature doesn't know but as I think it means: doesn't hold any thought or idea about an end (or a beginning for that matter). It ties to what he just said the sequence of coming and going in its proper time.

Edited November 7, 2011 by dawei

[ChiDragon]

If one turns it around, then one sees that everything is ordinary to nature since nature is without discrimination; but that is just creating the "this or that" construct. So the metaphysical interpretation may be to just not hold discrimination?

 

Even "this and that" construct, ZZ had emphasized that there is no difference. A two legged person is a person; and an one legged person is still a person. Please don't get excited about that based on this statement:

 

"Now from the composed gesture of 右師, one will know that he knows it was due to nature, not man."

 

右師 was just figured out that Nature is always right....!!!

[dawei]

Even "this and that" construct, ZZ had emphasized that there is no difference. A two legged person is a person; and an one legged person is still a person. Please don't get excited about that based on this statement:

 

"Now from the composed gesture of 右師, one will know that he knows it was due to nature, not man."

 

右師 was just figured out that Nature is always right....!!!

Ok... don't get too excited with your reply. I gave no typing indication of excitement but you did (!!!). Maybe just calm down in your responses.

 

I have said All along that there is no difference... I pointed it out again here (ZZ wants one to drop 'this or that') and that was the question I posed to you. Maybe you just didn't understand what I was asking/suggesting. If you don't really understand then ask a question instead of getting all worked up over a reply.

 

But I see that nobody has answered XieJie's question of the meaning of 'one-leg'... so I am hoping to hear something more meaningful.

[XieJia]

question of the meaning of 'one-leg'.

 

 

This meatbag's views:

 

How does one stands on duality?

How does one stands on non-duality?

 

Such must be Heaven's; not Man's work.

 

 

P.S.

Hope the bone-setting goes well.

Take Care David.

Edited November 7, 2011 by XieJia

[Marblehead]

Interesting that the ancients held such a karmic-like idea... but let me clarify I am not making any assumptions here, just a comment.

 

Excellent post Dawei!

 

Yes, prior to Lao Tzu the shamanistic beliefs attached to what was to become Philosophical Taoism had gods and all the other para-religious concepts.

 

 

We must remember that Taoism didn't just "start" with Lao Tzu. It had a very long history prior to Lao Tzu. Chuang Tzu touches on some of its history.

[Marblehead]

But I see that nobody has answered XieJie's question of the meaning of 'one-leg'... so I am hoping to hear something more meaningful.

 

It wouldn't be fair for me to comment on this here because this is just the first of many stories that expound on the concept.

[ChiDragon]

Ok... don't get too excited with your reply. I gave no typing indication of excitement but you did (!!!). Maybe just calm down in your responses.

 

I have said All along that there is no difference... I pointed it out again here (ZZ wants one to drop 'this or that') and that was the question I posed to you. Maybe you just didn't understand what I was asking/suggesting. If you don't really understand then ask a question instead of getting all worked up over a reply.

 

But I see that nobody has answered XieJie's question of the meaning of 'one-leg'... so I am hoping to hear something more meaningful.

The One-foot guy is not handicapped in anyway.

What does One-foot symbolized?

 

The One-foot 'one-leg' does not symbolize anything. FYI The no response was my answer. Just to make it more clear, it was only used in comparison with the 'two-leg' person by ZZ in his illustration to point out that there is no difference. The significance in reading ZZ lays on the overall concept of his parables rather than looking at it piece by piece to exam the irrelevant characteristics of each individual minor item.

 

PS...

Sorry, I have to tell it like it's.....

 

****** Personal feeling filter ON *********

Edited November 7, 2011 by ChiDragon

[dawei]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion so I am not sure why you feel it necessary to state your sorry. There is nothing to be sorry about.

 

And I really don't get the now second use of ***** Personal feeling filter ON ********

 

Is this supposed to be something useful for the topics being discussed?

[XieJia]

Haha,

 

Maybe I should indeed stop asking these questions.

 

Two legs, one can walk somewhere.

One Leg, can one walk?

 

Be Well.

[Marblehead]

 

One Leg, can one walk?

 

Be Well.

 

With the aid of a crutch, yes. And we all have our crutches in life, don't we?

[XieJia]

Haha, with no leg; One could still use the wheel chair or prosthetics legs.

 

[lienshan]

But I see that nobody has answered XieJie's question of the meaning of 'one-leg'... so I am hoping to hear something more meaningful.

指窮於為薪火傳也 不知其盡也

 

A finger missing from making the flames of the firewood flare up is to not know its tip.

 

 

The ancient chinese jail-wardens had their ways of 'curing long fingeredness'

 

 

'one-leg' is thus from heaven while 'missing-leg' is from man

 

 

Lovely short chapter

[lienshan]

Oh ... there's too a sad sad story about Lao Dan's funeral

 

Lao Dan is known from his assistence to Cunfucius concerning funerals

 

I wonder who the condolent 秦失 Qin Shi was