Who wants to talk about Robber Chih?!

[ChiDragon]

That doesn't paint a very pretty picture of Robber Chih. Hehehe.

 

oh...that was Robber Cheh's older brother.

 

Robber Cheh was only legendary as indicated by the native source below.

Ref: http://baike.baidu.com/subview/158083/9609094.htm?fromtitle=%E6%9F%B3%E4%B8%8B%E8%B7%96&fromid=917798&type=search

Edited November 16, 2014 by ChiDragon

[Brian]

MH.....

Yes, you are right. I did not do my homework. Btw I just have glance at Chapter 19, Robber Cheh was no Robin Hood but a tyrant.

 

 

Edited to add:

 

 

Okay, I had gone through Chapter 19. At the end, Robber Cheh had kicked Confucius out of his camp and he was not the image Robin Hood later became.

For what it's worth, Robin of Locksley was not really the stuff of legend, either. Such romantic legends often bear little resemblance to reality.

[ChiDragon]

For what it's worth, Robin of Locksley was not really the stuff of legend, either. Such romantic legends often bear little resemblance to reality.

 

Anyway, thanks for your response. My real concern, here, wasn't to determine the Robin Hood image for Robber Chih as others did. I am very sure that he was not what Zhuang Zi portrayed him as such. The guys won't give up to say that he was Robin Hood like, then I cant help it.

Edited November 16, 2014 by ChiDragon

[Marblehead]

 

oh...that was Robber Cheh's older brother.

 

Robber Cheh was only legendary as indicated by the native source below.

Ref: http://baike.baidu.com/subview/158083/9609094.htm?fromtitle=%E6%9F%B3%E4%B8%8B%E8%B7%96&fromid=917798&type=search

Thanks. Hehehe. I will learn to read Chinese next week.

[Marblehead]

 

Anyway, thanks for your response. My real concern, here, wasn't to determine the Robin Hood image for Robber Chih as others did. I am very sure that he was not what Zhuang Zi portrayed him as such. The guys won't give up to say he was Robin Hood like, then I can help it.

I am sure I will be more in agreement with you once I have some info on Yang Zhe and find out if he was really the model for Chuang Tzu's Robber Chih.

[Marblehead]

For what it's worth, Robin of Locksley was not really the stuff of legend, either. Such romantic legends often bear little resemblance to reality.

Stop messing with my illusions and delusions!

[ChiDragon]

I have a name if you want to see what you can find: Yang Zhe

 

What Chapter is he in......??? How about a little hint.....??? It's better in Chinese characters for me.

[Marblehead]

What Chapter is he in......??? How about a little hint.....??? It's better in Chinese characters for me.

I errored. The person is "Yang Zhu".

 

To my knowledge Yang Zhu is not mentioned in "The Chuang Tzu".

 

Yang lived after Lao Tzu and before Chuang Tzu and was very anti-Confucian. Referred to as an "Egoist".

[Marblehead]

Anyhow, while we consider the above I will present the other paragraph where Robber Chih is mentioned in Chapter Eight:

 

 

He who applies his nature to benevolence and righteousness may go as far with it as Tseng and Shih, but I would not call him an expert. He who applies his nature to the five flavors may go as far with it as Yu Erh, but I would not call him an expert. He who applies his nature to the five notes may go as far with it as Music Master K'uang, but I would not call this good hearing. He who applies his nature to the five colors may go as far with it as Li Chu, but I would not call this good eyesight. My definition of expertness has nothing to do with benevolence and righteousness; it means being expert in regard to your Virtue, that is all. My definition of expertness has nothing to do with benevolence or righteousness; it means following the true form of your inborn nature, that is all. When I speak of good hearing, I do not mean listening to others; I mean simply listening to yourself. When I speak of good eyesight, I do not mean looking at others; I mean simply looking at yourself. He who does not look at himself but looks at others, who does not get hold of himself but gets hold of others, is getting what other men have got and failing to get what he himself has got. He finds joy in what brings joy to other men, but finds no joy in what would bring joy to himself. And if he finds joy in what brings joy to other men, but finds no joy in what would bring joy to himself, then whether he is a Robber Chih or a Po Yi he is equally deluded and perverse. I have a sense of shame before the Way and its Virtue, and for that reason I do not venture to raise myself up in deeds of benevolence and righteousness, or to lower myself in deluded and perverse practices.

[Rara]

 

Anyway, thanks for your response. My real concern, here, wasn't to determine the Robin Hood image for Robber Chih as others did. I am very sure that he was not what Zhuang Zi portrayed him as such. The guys won't give up to say that he was Robin Hood like, then I cant help it.

Nono...that's why I opened the discussion. Us in the west seem to have read translations that implied Robber Chih had more virtue, and in regard to Chapter 29, that Confucious was the real joke. But if we can find otherwise, it would be good to know!

 

Like you say, my interpretation is only an interpretation. Any more info that proves my view to be wrong, I welcome.

 

I wish you took part in my thread in General Discussion "Objective vs Subjective". You could have been on my team haha.

[Marblehead]

So, in that last section above I see Chuang Tzu telling us that we should live more for ourselves rather than living for others. This, in a way, is egoism.

[Rara]

For what it's worth, Robin of Locksley was not really the stuff of legend, either. Such romantic legends often bear little resemblance to reality.

 

Ooh, where can I find out more?

[Rara]

Anyhow, while we consider the above I will present the other paragraph where Robber Chih is mentioned in Chapter Eight:

 

 

He who applies his nature to benevolence and righteousness may go as far with it as Tseng and Shih, but I would not call him an expert. He who applies his nature to the five flavors may go as far with it as Yu Erh, but I would not call him an expert. He who applies his nature to the five notes may go as far with it as Music Master K'uang, but I would not call this good hearing. He who applies his nature to the five colors may go as far with it as Li Chu, but I would not call this good eyesight. My definition of expertness has nothing to do with benevolence and righteousness; it means being expert in regard to your Virtue, that is all. My definition of expertness has nothing to do with benevolence or righteousness; it means following the true form of your inborn nature, that is all. When I speak of good hearing, I do not mean listening to others; I mean simply listening to yourself. When I speak of good eyesight, I do not mean looking at others; I mean simply looking at yourself. He who does not look at himself but looks at others, who does not get hold of himself but gets hold of others, is getting what other men have got and failing to get what he himself has got. He finds joy in what brings joy to other men, but finds no joy in what would bring joy to himself. And if he finds joy in what brings joy to other men, but finds no joy in what would bring joy to himself, then whether he is a Robber Chih or a Po Yi he is equally deluded and perverse. I have a sense of shame before the Way and its Virtue, and for that reason I do not venture to raise myself up in deeds of benevolence and righteousness, or to lower myself in deluded and perverse practices.

 

Ok cool, so this mention is reiterating that Robber Chih does "deluded and perverse practices"...

 

So, in that last section above I see Chuang Tzu telling us that we should live more for ourselves rather than living for others. This, in a way, is egoism.

 

For the most part, yes. But this can get confusing, and this is what I'm struggling with. Egoism, maybe. Selfishness, maybe. Couldn't we argue that Robber Chih therefore had these attributes? The writer (seeing "I" written so much, I want to say Chuang Tzu...but for contextual ease, I'll say the writer) talks about joy, and looking inside at this inner nature. But what is this inner nature? What if this is Robber Chih's inner nature? What did Chuang Tzu and his followers do differently to other men that gave them the edge over the characters they talk down about?

 

As entertained as I was by the book, some of it did seem like it was coming from a poor person that didn't get on with what we now call the capatalist world, and just decided to walk around outside, having a song and dance, sticking his fingers up at officials

 

EDIT: I know that you refer to Chuang Tzu as an anarchist...this is clear. Well-mannered enough not to steal though, which is nice. I know of modern anarchists that steal a lot.

Edited November 17, 2014 by Rara

[Marblehead]

Ok cool, so this mention is reiterating that Robber Chih does "deluded and perverse practices"...

Yes, I think we can say that Chuang Tzu considered both Robber Chih and Po Yi to be deluded.

 

For the most part, yes. But this can get confusing, and this is what I'm struggling with. Egoism, maybe. Selfishness, maybe. Couldn't we argue that Robber Chih therefore had these attributes? The writer (seeing "I" written so much, I want to say Chuang Tzu...but for contextual ease, I'll say the writer) talks about joy, and looking inside at this inner nature. But what is this inner nature? What if this is Robber Chih's inner nature? What did Chuang Tzu and his followers do differently to other men that gave them the edge over the characters they talk down about?

I'm not going to try to answer these questions of yours here. Hehehe. Given a little time I am sure you are going to find your own answers.

 

As entertained as I was by the book, some of it did seem like it was coming from a poor person that didn't get on with what we now call the capatalist world, and just decided to walk around outside, having a song and dance, sticking his fingers up at officials

Not too far off the mark, I think.

 

EDIT: I know that you refer to Chuang Tzu as an anarchist...this is clear. Well-mannered enough not to steal though, which is nice. I know of modern anarchists that steal a lot.

Yes, to associate today's anarchists with the anarchy of Chuang Tzu would be an error, I think.

[Brian]

 

Ooh, where can I find out more?

The world will never know but here's a fun starting point:

http://www.boldoutlaw.com/

http://www.boldoutlaw.com/realrob/realrob2.html

[ChiDragon]

I errored. The person is "Yang Zhu".

 

To my knowledge Yang Zhu is not mentioned in "The Chuang Tzu".

 

Yang lived after Lao Tzu and before Chuang Tzu and was very anti-Confucian. Referred to as an "Egoist".

According to the native source, Yang Zhu(楊朱) had met Lao Zi once and his thinking was influenced be Lao Zi.

 

Why do you think he was classified as an "Egoist"? In a philosophical sense, what do you think "Egoist" was meant, here?

Edited November 17, 2014 by ChiDragon

[Rara]

According to the native source, Yang Zhu(楊朱) had met Lao Zi once and his thinking was influenced be Lao Zi.

 

Why do you think he was classified as an "Egoist"? In a philosophical sense, what do you think "Egoist" was meant, here?

Is this the same Yang Zhu?

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yang_Zhu

[ChiDragon]

Is this the same Yang Zhu?

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yang_Zhu

Yes, Rara, It is the same person.

[Rara]

The world will never know but here's a fun starting point:

http://www.boldoutlaw.com/

http://www.boldoutlaw.com/realrob/realrob2.html

Cool, thanks.

 

Wow, many traces to Yorkshire

 

Looks likely that any "positive" Robin Hood stories are the biased and written by supporters. Any negative would obviously come from the victims. Interestimg how yet again, this is a matter of perspective.

 

I bet even Santa Clause has his darkside.

Edited November 17, 2014 by Rara

[Rara]

I am sure I will be more in agreement with you once I have some info on Yang Zhe and find out if he was really the model for Chuang Tzu's Robber Chih.

This could be hard work...what makes you think he could be? Other than his perhaps selfish nature. My lazy wiki research so far implies that he wouldn't go as far as to steal (harm people)

 

In the meantime, shall we check out the next chapter in the list?

[Marblehead]

My lazy wiki research so far implies that he wouldn't go as far as to steal (harm people)

I'm sure you will be right but at least now I have something to watch for as we continue.

 

In the meantime, shall we check out the next chapter in the list?

Sure. Coming right up.

[Marblehead]

And now the entire section from Chapter 10 regarding him:

 

 

One of Robber Chih's followers once asked Chih, "Does the thief too have a Way?"

Chih replied, "How could he get anywhere if he didn't have a Way? Making shrewd guesses as to how much booty is stashed away in the room is sageliness; being the first one in is bravery; being the last one out is righteousness; knowing whether the job can be pulled off or not is wisdom; dividing up the loot fairly is benevolence. No one in the world ever succeeded in becoming a great thief if he didn't have all five!"

From this we can see that the good man must acquire the Way of the sage before he can distinguish himself, and Robber Chih must acquire the Way of the sage before he can practice his profession. But good men in the world are few and bad men many, so in fact the sage brings little benefit to the world, but much harm. Thus it is said, "When the lips are gone, the teeth are cold; when the wine of Lu is thin, Han-tan is besieged." And when the sage is born, the great thief appears.

Cudgel and cane the sages and let the thieves and bandits go their way; then the world will at last be well ordered! If the stream dries up, the valley will be empty; if the hills wash away, the deep pools will be filled up. And if the sage is dead and gone, then no more great thieves will arise. The world will then be peaceful and free of fuss.

But until the sage is dead, great thieves will never cease to appear, and if you pile on more sages in hopes of bringing the world to order, you will only be piling up more profit for Robber Chih. Fashion pecks and bushels for people to measure by and they will steal by peck and bushel. Fashion scales and balances for people to weigh by and they will steal by scale and balance. Fashion tallies and seals to insure trustworthiness and people will steal with tallies and seals. Fashion benevolence and righteousness to reform people and they will steal with benevolence and righteousness. How do I know this is so? He who steals a belt buckle pays with his life; he who steals a state gets to be a feudal lord-and we all know that benevolence and righteousness are to be found at the gates of the feudal lords. Is this not a case of stealing benevolence and righteousness and the wisdom of the sages? So men go racing in the footsteps of the great thieves, aiming for the rank of feudal lord, stealing benevolence and righteousness, and taking for themselves all the profits of peck and bushel, scale and balance, tally and seal. Though you try to lure them aside with rewards of official carriages and caps of state, you cannot move them; though you threaten them with the executioner's ax, you cannot deter them. This piling up of profits for Robber Chih to the point where nothing can deter him - this is all the fault of the sage!

[Rara]

And now the entire section from Chapter 10 regarding him:

 

 

One of Robber Chih's followers once asked Chih, "Does the thief too have a Way?"

 

Chih replied, "How could he get anywhere if he didn't have a Way? Making shrewd guesses as to how much booty is stashed away in the room is sageliness; being the first one in is bravery; being the last one out is righteousness; knowing whether the job can be pulled off or not is wisdom; dividing up the loot fairly is benevolence. No one in the world ever succeeded in becoming a great thief if he didn't have all five!"

 

From this we can see that the good man must acquire the Way of the sage before he can distinguish himself, and Robber Chih must acquire the Way of the sage before he can practice his profession. But good men in the world are few and bad men many, so in fact the sage brings little benefit to the world, but much harm. Thus it is said, "When the lips are gone, the teeth are cold; when the wine of Lu is thin, Han-tan is besieged." And when the sage is born, the great thief appears.

 

Cudgel and cane the sages and let the thieves and bandits go their way; then the world will at last be well ordered! If the stream dries up, the valley will be empty; if the hills wash away, the deep pools will be filled up. And if the sage is dead and gone, then no more great thieves will arise. The world will then be peaceful and free of fuss.

 

But until the sage is dead, great thieves will never cease to appear, and if you pile on more sages in hopes of bringing the world to order, you will only be piling up more profit for Robber Chih. Fashion pecks and bushels for people to measure by and they will steal by peck and bushel. Fashion scales and balances for people to weigh by and they will steal by scale and balance. Fashion tallies and seals to insure trustworthiness and people will steal with tallies and seals. Fashion benevolence and righteousness to reform people and they will steal with benevolence and righteousness. How do I know this is so? He who steals a belt buckle pays with his life; he who steals a state gets to be a feudal lord-and we all know that benevolence and righteousness are to be found at the gates of the feudal lords. Is this not a case of stealing benevolence and righteousness and the wisdom of the sages? So men go racing in the footsteps of the great thieves, aiming for the rank of feudal lord, stealing benevolence and righteousness, and taking for themselves all the profits of peck and bushel, scale and balance, tally and seal. Though you try to lure them aside with rewards of official carriages and caps of state, you cannot move them; though you threaten them with the executioner's ax, you cannot deter them. This piling up of profits for Robber Chih to the point where nothing can deter him - this is all the fault of the sage!

 

This case study is going very well for me. After the Chapter 8 discussion, and having now read this passage for the 3rd time (2nd time as Burton Watson's translation) things are now in context a little more for me.

 

It opens by saying that Robber Chih has the Way...of theives. Not to be confused with Lao Tzu's idea of having the Tao.

 

What's interesting is the use of the word "sage". Where Lao Tzu talks highly of sages, Chuang Tzu claims that gaining sageliness is not hard and a sage can still be bad...a thief even. You can have many bad people in the world...many bad sages.

 

So can we assume that sage and enlightened are separate things?

 

The last part sets up Chapter 29...summarising that a thief can steal what is perceived as small-scale, and a feudal lord will steal large-scale (but disguised as righteous) Therefore, there is no difference between the common thief and a king.

 

Is there another Chapter where Robber Chih is mentioned before 29?

Edited November 18, 2014 by Rara

[ChiDragon]

Here are some of the terms used by Zhuang Zi. The definitions are defined from my source as below:

• (67)至人：这里指道德修养最高尚的人。无己：清除外物与自我的界限，达到忘掉自己的境界。
• (68)神人：这里指精神世界完全能超脱于物外的人。无功：不建树功业。
• (69)圣人：这里指思想修养臻于完美的人。无名：不追求名誉地位。

1. 至人: A person who has been cultivated to the highest virtue of Tao. He is selfless, non-materialistic and altruistic.
2. 神人: A person who has a spiritual world which is out of the ordinary. He does not hold any title.
3. 圣人: A person who has been cultivated and reached perfection in his thinking. He is nameless and has no desire to strive for rich and famous.

圣人 has been translated as "sage" in many cases.

My source is a very good reference for the study of Zhuang Zi. It has the original text followed by the modern interpretation and the definitions of the ancient terms.

Ref: My source

Edited November 18, 2014 by ChiDragon

[ChiDragon]

This case study is going very well for me. After the Chapter 8 discussion, and having now read this passage for the 3rd time (2nd time as Burton Watson's translation) things are now in context a little more for me.

 

It opens by saying that Robber Chih has the Way...of theives. Not to be confused with Lao Tzu's idea of having the Tao.

 

What's interesting is the use of the word "sage". Where Lao Tzu talks highly of sages, Chuang Tzu claims that gaining sageliness is not hard and a sage can still be bad...a thief even. You can have many bad people in the world...many bad sages.

 

So can we assume that sage and enlightened are separate things?

 

 

 

Rara, I think you are getting close. However, there is something missing in your thinking. I think if you can get the definitions straight, then you'll be home free. There is a difference between a thief and robber. A thief steals without having contact with the victims as opposed to a robber.

 

The original question was: "Does robbers has any principles?" I had indicated in post #30. Robber Chih told his disciple that robbers has their own rules as principles.

 

1. Knowing what was stored in the room, it was intelligent(圣也).

2. Moves in first, it was brave(勇也).

3. Moved out last, it was an obligation of leadership.

4. Know when is time to take action, it was wise.

5. Dividing (the goods) equally, it was benevolent.

 

Chih had laid out these five rules as principle for a good leader of robbers. A good leader must know where the goods are stored in the victim's house. During the course of robbery, the leader must move in first, bravely, to lead everybody; and move out last to ensure that everyone was out and safe. Know when it is the best time to move in to the victim's house for the robbery. After the robbery, the leader will divide the goods equally to avoid conflict and misunderstanding among themselves.

 

This is called the tao of robbers. Call it the "Way of robbers" if you like.

 

By logic and common sense, there is no such thing as a bad sage. A sage is always good. It is because a sage is highly cultivated. How can a bad person was being a sage at the same time? What do you think about that?

Edited November 18, 2014 by ChiDragon