Chuang Tzu Chapter 5, Section A

[Marblehead]

Do you think that the Confucius ideas mentioned by Zhuang Zi were really from the heart of Confucius....???

 

Hard telling. Personally, I believe Chuang Tzu was very sincere when he argued against the Confucian concepts of virtue and the importance of rites and rituals.

 

Of course, Confucius spoke of changing the nature of man into something he thought was better whereas Chuang Tzu felt that man should stay true to his original nature.

[konchog uma]

Hard telling. Personally, I believe Chuang Tzu was very sincere when he argued against the Confucian concepts of virtue and the importance of rites and rituals.

 

Of course, Confucius spoke of changing the nature of man into something he thought was better whereas Chuang Tzu felt that man should stay true to his original nature.

 

right Marblehead! That last bit says it nicely.

 

Confucius by all accounts was very smart but hadn't realized his natural virtue yet, all his virtue was the product of ritual and was more contrived. So it served it purpose with the people, creating a Chinese culture that they could grasp and share with each other, since at the time china was so huge it was like having 2 or 3 different countries. So Confucius gave them homogenous identity as a Chinese people, with the proper songs for each season and so forth, but unfortunately he did not seem to have realized the higher truths, such as the ones that interested master Lao and master Chuang.

 

To answer ChiDragon's question, I think it does reflect directly on Confucius himself, and while the daoists were obviously prejudiced and kinda grumpy about the influence Confucius had, they did know better than us about him. But everything I have read about Confucius says he was a real anal guy, kinda OCD and just set in his ways.

[ChiDragon]

To answer ChiDragon's question, I think it does reflect directly on Confucius himself, and while the daoists were obviously prejudiced and kinda grumpy about the influence Confucius had, they did know better than us about him. But everything I have read about Confucius says he was a real anal guy, kinda OCD and just set in his ways.

 

So, you don't think ZZ was putting words into Confucius' mouth for his own behave....???

[konchog uma]

well chidragon i think that the stories aren't to be taken as literal accounts... Chuang Tzu wasnt a stenographer he was a philosopher, so there is a degree of leeway that he is afforded as such. Leeway to create.

 

I am saying that i think Confucius deserved the treatment he got by all accounts i have read thats all.

 

I am also saying don't take these stories literally as history, they are metaphor.

[ChiDragon]

anamatva...

Yes, it seems ZhuangTze always put words in Confucius mouth by saying that ZhuangTze was a better teacher than Confucius. The metaphor was that Confucius should be bowing to and worship ZZ as his master...

Edited December 12, 2011 by ChiDragon

[The Observer]

In short, daoists have always flown in the face of convention and cultivated spontaneous non-doings, and in the opinion of many daoists in Chuang Tzu's time, confucianism represented convention itself, and contrived doings. hehehe Confucius was rumored to have counted out the number of grains of rice he would cook for dinner, and other such things, so maybe he was anal retentive or OCD, which annoyed the daoists to no end.

 

You can still see traces of the same thinking here and now, when buddhists start going on about this doctrine or that concept, and it bugs the traditional daoist types.

 

I don't think there is really any division between Confucianism and Daoism at the essence of things. In my view Chuang Tzu is not really picking on Confucius but using him in his stories to fill the role of the middle man (or rather teacher) between (of) unspoken wisdom and student.

Edited June 6, 2012 by The Observer

[ChiDragon]

I don't think there is really any division between Confucianism and Daoism at the essence of things. In my view Chuang Tzu is not really picking on Confucius but using him in his stories to fill the role of the middle man (or rather teacher) between (of) unspoken wisdom and student.

 

You are very generous. Sorry, Chuang Tzu didn't think of it that way. If one study their philosophies closely, one will distinguish that their philosophies are Yin and Yang which is 180 degree out of phase.

Edited June 7, 2012 by ChiDragon

[The Observer]

You are very generous. Sorry, Chuang Tzu didn't think of it that way. If one study their philosophies closely, one will distinguish that their philosophies are Yin and Yang which is 180 degree out of phase.

 

I think if you look deeper they both are coming from the same place just using different vehicles to convey certain principles. It seems to me that people often confuse the Legalist influenced Confucianism for a lot of Confucius's own words (or at least those directly attributed to him by his disciples). To me both philosophers have a lot of down to earth advice on how to live a better life.

 

I don't think this reply did enough justice to the conversation; later I will dig up examples and do a little more reading myself to see if I'm mistaken in my assumptions.

[Marblehead]

Just letting Y'all know I am watching the conversation. I have my opinions but they really don't matter, I just want to watch others support their opinions.

[The Observer]

Just letting Y'all know I am watching the conversation. I have my opinions but they really don't matter, I just want to watch others support their opinions.

 

Personally I would love to hear your thoughts! One of the main reasons I post here is to read others thoughts and see my own assumptions proven wrong.

[Marblehead]

Personally I would love to hear your thoughts! One of the main reasons I post here is to read others thoughts and see my own assumptions proven wrong.

Thanks for the invite.

 

Regarding Lao Tzu and Confucius, I would likely agree that there goal was the same. That is, they both wanted to see a China without war and the people living in peace while having enough for a good life.

 

However, I think they disagreed as to how this could be accomplished. Lao Tzu recommended leaving the people alone to find their own natural path to peace & contentment whereas Confucius recommended teaching the people how to behave in order to remove conflict.

 

So in my understanding Confucius would have wanted conformity whereas Lao Tzu would have wanted diversity.

[ChiDragon]

Just letting Y'all know I am watching the conversation. I have my opinions but they really don't matter, I just want to watch others support their opinions.

 

I would like to borrow these words, here, but it does matter this time.....

[Marblehead]

I would like to borrow these words, here, but it does matter this time.....

Sad that the discussion came to an end, I think.

 

You may borrow any of my words you care to borrow. None of them have been copywritten.

[Stosh]

Thanks for the invite.

 

Regarding Lao Tzu and Confucius, I would likely agree that there goal was the same. That is, they both wanted to see a China without war and the people living in peace while having enough for a good life.

 

However, I think they disagreed as to how this could be accomplished. Lao Tzu recommended leaving the people alone to find their own natural path to peace & contentment whereas Confucius recommended teaching the people how to behave in order to remove conflict.

 

So in my understanding Confucius would have wanted conformity whereas Lao Tzu would have wanted diversity.

 

My take wasnt so much that Lao wanted diversity,per se,

it seemed to me that he felt that there was a natural conformity common to people living naturally.. there would still be individual differences, but on a basic level he didnt seem to think those differences substantially divisive.

 

Like here in the US we can benefit from individual diversity ,

but there is a homogenaity natural to human aspirations.

In the east it seems like there was a more intentional aspiration for conformity.

 

Until just a short while ago I hadnt realized

that I had been posting in a manner to test folks ideas actively.

It is a western style approach to logic-learning.

(If you can punch a hole in an idea then it isnt reliable)

Im working on an alternative.

Stosh

[Marblehead]

Fair analysis.

 

I don't mind being tested. (Shit! I don't even mind failure.)

[Stosh]

Fair analysis.

 

I don't mind being tested. (Shit! I don't even mind failure.)

 

Well to me , somebody said ,

"you can catch more flies with honey than you can with vinegar"

And I said , "I am not trying to catch any flies.(figuratively or otherwise"

Pause... I considered to myself ,, Then why am I using vinegar either?

 

Truth is , maybe like yourself, I am just not seeing anything legitimately NEW

in any of the posts. They may shift my emphasis a tad here and there,

or remind me of stuff I had let slide, but it just aint anything fitting the title,

' NEW things I actually need to know'

 

I read winnie the pooh last night , It has been many moons.

I still love the illustrations.,,and I see some stuff I never understood to be in it.

But its not NEW.

Maybe we do learn all the really important stuff we ever will

by the age of six or so (and then start forgetting it)

I was a very quiet, serious, and honorable kid, with too many concerns.

 

Anyway if you want to be tested you are going about it in the wrong way,

you need to piss folks off more ,

like Tsun tsu said , if you wish to move your enemy,

offer him something he wont refuse.

( or was that the Godfather??)

or

Toss up a thread on something you want to be challenged ,

and be a bit defiant about it.

( or you can just ask me )

Thing is ,you cant gather a good head of steam in sound byte format

and still stick to the other point of the thread .

 

Just my opinion.

Stosh

[samwardell]

Interesting thread. I wanted to add a couple of stray thoughts.

 

(i) Regarding Confucius in the Inner Chapters.

 

It always seemed to me that Chuang-tzu, has some sneaking respect for Confucius (else why would the man feature so prominently). However for him Confucius is one who is "mutilated by heaven" (See later in Ch 5 Choptoes' comment to Lao Tan "When its heaven that does the punishing [ref to Confucius obsession with "having his name bandied about"] how can they [fetters and handcuffs] be shaken off?") In this sense the comparison of Confucius to those whose bodies are mutilated is meant to be funny. Figures like Wang T'ai and Choptoes who are bodily mutilated (by man) are still "fuller in Te" than Confucius who is mentally mutilated (by heaven).

 

(As a side note; Eno (in Kjellberg/Ivanhoe 1996) proposes that Chuang-tzu is largely on the side of Confucius...)

 

(ii) Regarding the mirror analogy:

 

The association of the mirror with hsin (heart/mind) is one I find especially interesting and is often repeated elsewhere in the Chuang-tzu. I was wondering what people make of it?

 

One thought does immediately occur to me, that is a mirror still involves the dichotomy of the 'reflected' and the 'reflector'. In this sense it can't be seen as a mystical union (as later Buddhist interpretations might have it)...

Edited August 28, 2012 by samwardell

[Marblehead]

I don't know Samwardell. I think it would take a lot of string pulling in order to support the thought that Chuang Tzu sided with Confucius.

 

But then, if we rely on just the "Conversations" one might be able to pull it off. However, it is very doubtful that Chuang Tzu had anything to do with writing them.

[samwardell]

Marblehead:

 

Eno's suggestion is that what Chuang-tzu objected too was an 'analytical trend' in Chinese thinking. Eno points out that early Confucianism (exemplified in the analects) was more a 'tao practice' (in particular the practice of the tao of the early Chou - ie virtues and ritual). However by Chuang-tzu's period the Mohists had begun to dispute Confucianism by attacking it on analytical grounds by stating that all actions had to be justified in terms of 'usefulness' (a kind of proto-utilitarianism). The Confucians responded, most famously in the writings of Mencius, by trying to justify the Confucian tao by basing it on 'nature'; ie that Humans naturally are Confucians if they correctly culitivate their heart/mind.

 

It is against this background that Eno interprets the Chuang-tzu's in the inner chapters. He argues that Chuang-tzu is advocating "tao-learning" - ie the kind of "knowing how" displayed by butcher Ting in Ch 3 - and damning the analytic disputation found in the works of Mohist and later Confucians. However the original Confucianism is itself a "tao-learning" focusing on ritual rather than argument. It is in this sense that Eno thinks Chuang-tzu is on Confucius' side.

 

There are some strengths to this view; firstly it explains why Confucius, in the inner chapters, is so often a mouthpiece for Taoist ideas (see Chps 4, 5 and 6). It also explains why the main complaint against Confucius is that he seeks fame (see Ch5 as well as the outer Chps stories of Confucius meeting Lao Tan) not his message. It also explains why Chuang-tzu reserves his most withering attacks (found in Ch 2) for the "disputation" of the Mohists and Sophists.

 

However, as with any interpretation it has its weaknesses too; The madman of Chu's diatribe against Confucius does seem to be about his theory - ie taking the past as a model, and this theme crops up elsewhere. Also it relies upon a fairly radical interpretation of Chuang-tzu advocating "tao-practice" of any kind (Yu in his archery, Hui-tzu in his arguments, Confucius in his ritual, Ting in his butchery, Pian in his wheel-making etc...) identified in the possession of shen rather than the more traditional view of Chuang-tsu as talking about a specific, unique Tao (as in the Tao of Lao-tzu and Taoism).

Edited August 28, 2012 by samwardell

[Marblehead]

Nice presentation Samwardell. Okay, you have me leaning toward your understanding now. Hehehe. I must confess my ignorance of Confucius and those who came after because it has been so long since I read any of that stuff.

 

Thanks for putting some life back into this sub-forum. I have even forgotten where I stopped. Perhaps I will look and consider continuing it.

[konchog uma]

thanks for a well thought out post samwardell

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Interesting additions to considering the Taoist-Confucian feud. What I see as the main criticism of Confucianism in The Chuang-Tzu, however, is that he focuses so much on academic types of knowledge that he misses the important stuff, and his academic knowledge is not tempered by his Dao-mind.

 

If you read "The Old Fisherman" chapter, Confucius meets a sage, possibly Lao Tzu, who explains the errors of scholars and then refuses to allow Confucius to follow him, saying that Confucius has not fully attained these fundamental virtues as yet.

 

So, I wouldn't so much say Confucius' teachings are aimed at, but the obsession with book-knowledge that his way results in instead.