Nurturing life: Skilfulness in the Chuang-tzu:

[samwardell]

Not entirely sure if this will be of any interest to anyone... My hope is that, for those interested in the Chuang-tzu it may provide a starting point for discussion. If not I hope you at least enjoy!

 

Throughout the Chuang-tzu we are confronted by “skill stories”. The most famous of these is found in the inner chapters (from the sadly mutilated Ch 3 – 'the secret of nurturing life') in the figure of Butcher Ting. [For those unfamiliar with the text Marblehead has provided a nice translation of his own here: http://thetaobums.co...er-3-section-a/.] However there are many other such stories, mostly from the outer chapters, here are some of the more obvious examples (list taken from Graham 1981 p.135-142):

 

Engraver Ch'ing (ch 19)

Chi Hsing-tzu the cock-trainer (ch 19)

The 'waterfall swimmer' (ch 19)

The 'good swimmer' (ch 19)

The cicada catcher of Chu (ch 19)

The buckle forger (ch 22)

Pien the wheelwright (ch 13)

The old fisherman (ch 21)

The ugly concubine (ch 20)

The 'emptied man' (ch 32)

 

As the story of Butcher Ting is probably the earliest (and most likely, on traditional interpretations, to be the work of Chuang-tzu himself) I will primarily refer to that. For the most part the other skill stories are similarly themed – though they do show some differences (eg the two 'swimmer' stories use the metaphor of water to make a deep metaphysical point which is not apparent in the inner chapters). It has always struck me that these stories are key to understanding the species of mysticism (and it seem to me that Chuang-tzu was a mystic) which is being advocated.

 

The first thing to notice is that all of these characters are all 'lowly' figures, in fact “butcher Ting” could be translated as “kitchen hand” (those, like me, who have worked as a k.p. know just how lowly a job it is!). In this sense the Lord Wen-Hui's final statement: “from listening to the kitchen hand I have learnt how to nurture life” is quite extraordinary. This theme is at its most explicit in the “wheelwright Pien” story where Duke Huan ends up preferring the advice of an illiterate craftsman to the writings of a sage. In the world-view of Chuang-tzu, then, the skilful craftsman has a far better grasp of the important than powerful dukes or well-read sages.

 

The second thing to notice is that butcher Ting is not all that interested in a 'theory' or 'knowing about' butchery but instead has a tao 'way' that is inexpressible. He says that “what I care about is tao, I have left chi behind me.” The word chi can be translated as 'art' (or even, confusingly, 'skill' – see Graham); my gloss is 'theory'. That what butcher Ting is saying is that his 'knack' (his tao of butchery) exceeds any theoretical description (a chi of butchery). This 'knack' is, instead, acquired through years of practice. This seems to me to make good sense; imagine two people learning to play snooker; the first reads lots of books about it, the second does lots of practice. Which will be the better player?

 

So how does Butcher Ting go about his work? He says “I do not look with the eye” but instead is has a “spirit-like encounter”, and follows “spirit-like impulses”. In both those phrases the word translated as “spirit” is shen; in many ways “spirit” is a terrible translation as it implies all kind of metaphysical baggage which, while present in later uses of the word is not obviously so in the Chuang-tzu (Yearley in Kjellberg/Invanhoe 1996 p182 note 21). However some light may be thrown on it by something else Ting says: “I follow the natural pattern (tian li)”of the oxen and so go by “what is inherently so (gua jan)”. It seems to me that shen should be understood then not in a spiritual sense at all, but instead in a level of skilfulness which exceeds theoretical description an intuative understanding of the 'natural patterns' of things and an ability to 'go with what is inherently so' rather than relying on theory or rules. Just like our well practised snooker player; she does not spend time calculating the angles but instead as an intuitive feel for how she should play (ie she displays shen). Perhaps it is best shown by example, I'm a fan, so here is a link to a clip of Ronnie O'Sullivan at his most skilful:

 

On my reading then Chuang-tzu's ideal of skilfulness is not 'spiritual' or 'metaphysical'. Instead, it seems to me, that he is encouraging the development of an intuitive adaptability (yin shih) in the face of a universe in constant flux (hua). The “secret of nurturing life” that Lord Wen-Hui learns of is nothing really to do with a metaphysical Tao or some great secret hidden behind/beyond/prior/separate from reality but instead a flexible approach to reality as it presents itself.

 

One last example from my own experience. When I started to drive I was pretty nervous. I learnt rules which I always followed: 'mirror – signal – mirror – manoeuvre', 'two hands on the wheel except when changing gear', 'when at rest put the hand-break on' etc... Now after a decade or so of driving I no longer think of rules. I no longer think about driving at all, I just 'go with it'. About six months ago I was driving along, listening to a Seasick Steve album, singing along and tapping my wheel in time to the music. Suddenly a man stepped into the road from behind a parked van only a few meters in front of me. I braked hard, lowered the clutch, turned the wheel and stopped. My conscious mind was still focused on singing along to the music. I avoided tragedy not through theory or artfulness (chi) but through an intuitive skilfulness (shen), an awareness of things and an ability to adapt with the fluidity of butcher Ting's blade...

 

If my reading is correct, then Chaung-tzu's mysticism is a strange brand indeed. It is not the mysticism of the West (found in Christianity, Islam etc...) of awareness of a holy other; nor is it the south Asian mysticism (Buddhism, Hinduism) of loss of self & resulting unity with the cosmos; nor even the mysticism of other Taoist thinkers (Lao-tzu, Shen Tao) of a 'return' to some mysterious Tao. Instead it seems that Chuang-tzu is proposing that the 'secret to nurturing life' is found in an adaptive skilfulness; a mystical experience of flowing with an ever changing reality.

Edited August 29, 2012 by samwardell

[Marblehead]

Excellent presentation!!! Thanks for sharing.

[cheya]

[Harmonious Emptiness]

So true. This "flow" is also incredibly good for a person's health and longevity. I think it allows the body to operate at a more optimum level and trains the mind to listen to the body. This reduces stress from over-thinking and hesitation, creates fluidity of motion and response with more ease. All the more reason to teach kids "arts" in school.

 

The downside being that most people live in a world built up around a different mindset. Perhaps our art now is to feel the flow of this and traverse from the Shen level. The Yi Jing serves as a sort of "instruction manual" for this art .

[deci belle]

a mystical experience of flowing with an ever changing reality

 

What is so secret about what is completely natural is there is really nothing to know.

 

"Secret" is just a device. Some want to pick this out and protest; others just know there is nothing to it and smile.

 

The fact of the matter is, some people simply cannot smile naturally.

 

Though it is pitiful, who can help them?

[rene]

samwardell, hi

 

Regarding:

 

If my reading is correct, then Chaung-tzu's mysticism is a strange brand indeed. It is not the mysticism of the West (found in Christianity, Islam etc...) of awareness of a holy other; nor is it the south Asian mysticism (Buddhism, Hinduism) of loss of self & resulting unity with the cosmos; nor even the mysticism of other Taoist thinkers (Lao-tzu, Shen Tao) of a 'return' to some mysterious Tao. Instead it seems that Chuang-tzu is proposing that the 'secret to nurturing life' is found in an adaptive skilfulness; a mystical experience of flowing with an ever changing reality.

 

It might be worth noting, though I am light-years less versed in these things than you, that the contents of The Laozi is a very small part of Religious Taoism and their Shen Tao. The 'return' aspect in Li Ehr's words is more speaking to the reverting nature of Tao itself, rather than one's 'return' to it. Energetic, Alchemical and Religious Taoists would disagree with me; finding in the text what they seek. To me, the essense of 'adaptive skillfulness and the experience of flowing with the ever changing reality' is palpable in The Laozi; thus it's singular appeal, for mine is the path of Wu Dao (無道) the path of no fixed path.

 

Also, in my totally unqualified opinion, this:

" The second thing to notice is that butcher Ting is not all that interested in a 'theory' or 'knowing about' butchery but instead has a tao 'way' that is inexpressible. He says that “what I care about is tao, I have left chi behind me.” The word chi can be translated as 'art' (or even, confusingly, 'skill' – see Graham); my gloss is 'theory'. "

- is bang on and supports your idea that Chuang-tzu's mysticism leaves even Taoist mysticism behind, which seems to rely heavily on Chi interaction.

 

Wonderful post, Sam, and that video is superb; not often does one get to see self-aligning perfection. Thanks for sharing it, and your ideas. I hope you don't mind my comments amongst the well deserved applause. (-:

 

warm regards

[samwardell]

To me, the essense of 'adaptive skillfulness and the experience of flowing with the ever changing reality' is palpable in The Laozi; thus it's singular appeal, for mine is the path of Wu Dao (無道) the path of no fixed path.

 

This idea is of particular interest to me. There is an argument to be made in the Chaung-tzu inner chapters that we should not translate tao as "The Way" but merely "a way". In this sense Chuang-tzu may not be a traditional Taoist at all, but rather an advocate of "tao-practice". There are hints in Ch2 that Chuang-tzu is suspicious of any kind of simple "unity" (ie a Tao rather than tao):

 

"...the myriad things and I are one." Now that we are one, can I still say something? Already have called us one, did I succeed in not saying something? One and the saying makes two, two and one makes three. Proceeding from here even an expert calculator cannot get to the end of it ... if we take the step from nothing to something we arrive at three ... ! Take no step at all... (trans. Graham 1981)

 

Chuang-tzu seems to be saying we shouldn't even try and talk of a single Tao; but instead "take no step at all". Or as you so succinctly put it wu tao !

Edited August 31, 2012 by samwardell

[deci belle]

the path of Wu Dao (無道) the path of no fixed path.

 

Yet there is following, and Ting's cleaving cannot be said.

 

Cleaves. Yet incipience is spontaneously opening in perpetuity whether or not there is Ting to apply the knack.

 

So complete human being is developed capacity adapting as the natural cleavage of any given situation pairs off.

 

There is no space here, so the accomplishment has "no step at all".

 

If such a way can be described as having an attribute and a location, Ting cleaves potential in its incipience by meeting it on its terms developing spontaneously in perpetuity.

 

Taoism is just a description we don't cling to. The mind(s) of the inner chapters aren't taoist~ just awake and functioning naturally as it is. I am not aware of this in any philosophical sense. What is lowest functions effectively; the noble employs this in terms of human being. Tao is not separate, nor is it human being. We belong; tao does not belong.

 

Ting's cleaving doesn't do. Non-doing isn't just spontaneous, it's spiritual. Spiritual is non-psychological. Your own mind.

 

Wu Dao… nice word.

 

Cleaving leaves no room; works where there is no room; enters where there is no room; finding space wherever it is.

 

Practice is perennially up against a wall with nowhere to go… and cleaving its incipient openness according to the time.

 

This is how.

 

How doesn't actually exist other than in terms of function~ just manages cleaving appearances in their incipience in perpetuity.

 

Who would dare to put down the cleaver?

[Harmonious Emptiness]

 

"...the myriad things and I are one." Now that we are one, can I still say something? Already have called us one, did I succeed in not saying something? One and the saying makes two, two and one makes three. Proceeding from here even an expert calculator cannot get to the end of it ... if we take the step from nothing to something we arrive at three ... ! Take no step at all... (trans. Graham 1981)

 

Chuang-tzu seems to be saying we shouldn't even try and talk of a single Tao; but instead "take no step at all". Or as you so succinctly put it wu tao !

 

Was recently working on re-translating chapters 6 and 10 of the Dao De Ching. I believe they also speak much to his idea.

See post #38 here for more on this idea.

[rene]

deci belle, nice post.

 

This: "If such a way can be described as having an attribute and a location, Ting cleaves potential in its incipience by meeting it on its terms developing spontaneously in perpetuity." - is the essence of what some may call the pathless path, and what I call wu dao 無道.

 

Well met.

[rene]

To me, the essense of 'adaptive skillfulness and the experience of flowing with the ever changing reality' is palpable in The Laozi; thus it's singular appeal, for mine is the path of Wu Dao (無道) the path of no fixed path.

 

This idea is of particular interest to me. There is an argument to be made in the Chaung-tzu inner chapters that we should not translate tao as "The Way" but merely "a way". In this sense Chuang-tzu may not be a traditional Taoist at all, but rather an advocate of "tao-practice". There are hints in Ch2 that Chuang-tzu is suspicious of any kind of simple "unity" (ie a Tao rather than tao) [...] Chuang-tzu seems to be saying we shouldn't even try and talk of a single Tao; but instead "take no step at all". Or as you so succinctly put it wu tao !

 

I take issue with this, especially if my ideas are mistaken to support it... but the Chuang-tzu subforum might be a better place to address specific differences between LZ and ZZ - and your scholastic input would be incredibly welcomed, if you're willing.

 

warm regards

[samwardell]

I take issue with this, especially if my ideas are mistaken to support it...

[...]

but the Chuang-tzu subforum might be a better place

 

My apologies; one of my many flaws is hearing my own ideas in other's words...

 

Will start a topic in the subforum

 

http://http://thetaobums.com/topic/24725-is-chaung-tzu-a-taoist/

Edited September 2, 2012 by samwardell