The Dream of the Butterfly

[Rara]

Prostitutes? Be nice to them. They provide a service others are willing to pay for.

I never thought of it like this before. Bless you MH!

[Rara]

Well, just look at the last three of four posts in "The Father and the Son" thread. Chuang Tzu spoke a lot about death. But those who died never became butterflies.

 

Yeah, I like to consider myself organized but someone else viewing would likely see chaos.

 

Existence is a tricky word. I would likely separate physical (materialistic) existence from spiritual (and even mental) existence.

 

Chuang Tzu existed physically, his dream existed mentally. But physically he did not become a butterfly.

 

If reincarnation were a fact we wouldn't be so stupid when we are born.

Unless...forgetfulness.

 

Though, why the feck would ZZ talk about reincarnation? Back to that. I respect Tao sages based on the fact that they make no such bold claims about what is beyond what we can possibly know.

[Marblehead]

Unless...forgetfulness.

 

Though, why the feck would ZZ talk about reincarnation? Back to that. I respect Tao sages based on the fact that they make no such bold claims about what is beyond what we can possibly know.

Hehehe.  He wasn't talking about reincarnation.  He was talking about different realms of reality.  And you have already spoke to this.

 

Remember, his view of "reincarnation" was of a man becoming the wing of a rooster.

[Geof Nanto]

“One of the most important allegories of Daoism is the ‘Dream of the Butterfly’ in the Zhuangzi. Sometimes it is supposed to be a representation of all Daoist or even all Chinese philosophy in the West. This allegory encompasses fundamental Daoist notions, such as spontaneity, ‘free and easy wandering,’ non-action (wu wei), natural self-alternation (ziran), the zero-perspective of a sage and the understanding of correlation between life and death.”

 

Here is another Western interpretation from philosopher John Gray…..

 

Chuang-Tzu is as much a sceptic as a mystic. The sharp dichotomy between appearance and reality that is central in Buddhism is absent, and so is the attempt to transcend the illusions of everyday existence. Chuang-Tzu sees human life as a dream, but he does not seek to awaken from it. In a famous passage he writes of dreaming he was a butterfly, and not knowing on awakening whether he is a human being who has dreamt of being a butterfly, or a butterfly dreaming he is a human being.

 

Unlike the Buddha, A.C. Graham explains, Chuang-Tzu did not seek to awaken from the dream. He dreamt of dreaming more lucidly: 'Buddhists awaken out of dreaming; ChuangTzu wakes up to dreaming.' Awakening to the truth that life is a dream need not mean turning away from it. It may mean embracing it:

 

If 'Life is a dream' implies that no achievement is lasting, it also implies that life can be charged with the wonder of dreams, that we drift spontaneously through events that follow a logic different from that of everyday intelligence, that fears and regrets are as unreal as hopes and desires.

 

Chuang-Tzu admits no idea of salvation. There is no self and no awakening from the dream of self:

 

When we dream we do not know we are dreaming, and in the middle of a dream we interpret a dream within it; not until we wake do we know that we were dreaming. Only at the ultimate awakening shall we know that this is the ultimate dream.

 

We cannot be rid of illusions. Illusion is our natural condition. Why not accept it?

[Geof Nanto]

I like reading all these different interpretations; I don’t consider any of them as wrong. For me personally, the central message of the Butterfly allegory is wholeness.  My reference here is my observation of the natural environment. The animals that surround me - the bats, the wallabies, myriad birds etc etc – all these wild creatures are totally whole. None of them doubt.  And that gives them perfect de. They live totally focused on what they’re doing in the moment; spontaneous, certain.   To my mind, this is the way of being  Zhuang Zhou seeks to emulate. Classical Daoism doesn’t seek to further human consciousness by endless distinctions, disputation, doubt and worry,  rather it seeks to return to the root of nature.  But I suspect it’s fundamental to our human nature to enhance consciousness – hosting consciousness is our gift and burden. Hence, in that context, Classical Daoism provides a perfect counterpoint for when we go too far and start to fragment.  

[Marblehead]

Wow!  So many things could be said.

 

However,

 

I will speak to only this:

 

We cannot be rid of illusions. Illusion is our natural condition. Why not accept it?

 

I have on a couple occasions admitted that I have a few illusions and delusions here at home.  But whenever I leave my home I leave the illusions and delusions at home.

 

I will disagree that illusion is our natural condition.  A deer has no illusion of what the tiger is planning.  Nor the lamb of the lion.

 

Illusion, I suggest is an unnatural state.  We are taught most of the illusions we hold to or perhaps we create our own in order to justify reality or perhaps we have a chemical imbalance.

 

Reality is right there for us to see.  It never uses smoke or mirrors.

[Marblehead]

I like reading all these different interpretations; I don’t consider any of them as wrong. For me personally, the central message of the Butterfly allegory is wholeness.  My reference here is my observation of the natural environment. The animals that surround me - the bats, the wallabies, myriad birds etc etc – all these wild creatures are totally whole. None of them doubt.  And that gives them perfect de. They live totally focused on what they’re doing in the moment; spontaneous, certain.   To my mind, this is the way of being  Zhuang Zhou seeks to emulate. Classical Daoism doesn’t seek to further human consciousness by endless distinctions, disputation, doubt and worry,  rather it seeks to return to the root of nature.  But I suspect it’s fundamental to our human nature to enhance consciousness – hosting consciousness is our gift and burden. Hence, in that context, Classical Daoism provides a perfect counterpoint for when we go too far and start to fragment.  

Now this is a great post and I am in agreement with you.

[Marblehead]

 

Reality is right there for us to see.  It never uses smoke or mirrors.

Funny.  I actually forgot this a couple weeks ago and ended up in an uncomfortable situation.  Nothing serious but I really should have better control of my emotions.

[dust]

A deer is less susceptible to illusion, or perhaps susceptible to fewer types of illusion, because it can't be tricked by language..

 

..but you can spray deer piss on yourself and whistle a doe's mating call and a buck will be tricked into thinking he's about to get lucky (or so I've heard)

 

And dogs dream (though probably just of being dogs)

 

And we humans do have language, of course, which is how our conscious thought is constructed, and it tricks us daily without most of us ever realizing. And we are fooled constantly by our sight and hearing, and by the people around us and on the television, and by our plans for the future and by our memories...

 

No, in my opinion the human life is very much illusory. Not 'fake' or 'imaginary', but certainly not entirely what we see it as, either.

Edited May 25, 2015 by dustybeijing

[Geof Nanto]

Now this is a great post and I am in agreement with you.

 

I wrote at length on these themes here: http://thedaobums.com/topic/38123-animalwise-a-parable-for-wayfarers/

 

However, as no one commented on the substance of the thread, I was content to let it drift down the stream of forgotten topics. 

[Geof Nanto]

No, in my opinion the human life is very much illusory. Not 'fake' or 'imaginary', but certainly not entirely what we see it as, either.

 

Yes, I fully concur. There is much evidence for this. A particular example I have in front of me right now is a book of early paintings by Europeans of the Australian landscape. All the scenes have a European feel to them. The eucalyptus trees look like English oaks and the kangaroos look like some bizarre hybrid of a European animal. They experienced the landscape 'falsely' not because nature disguised itself, but their familiar categories and concepts blinded them to the 'reality' in front of them.

[Rara]

Hehehe. He wasn't talking about reincarnation. He was talking about different realms of reality. And you have already spoke to this.

 

Remember, his view of "reincarnation" was of a man becoming the wing of a rooster.

Yeah, I know I was arguing with myself out loud...convincing myself.

[Marblehead]

I wrote at length on these themes here: http://thedaobums.com/topic/38123-animalwise-a-parable-for-wayfarers/

 

However, as no one commented on the substance of the thread, I was content to let it drift down the stream of forgotten topics. 

I apparently missed this somehow.  Anyhow, I don't remember the thread.  I will read it later.

[Marblehead]

A particular example I have in front of me right now is a book of early paintings by Europeans of the Australian landscape. All the scenes have a European feel to them. The eucalyptus trees look like English oaks and the kangaroos look like some bizarre hybrid of a European animal. They experienced the landscape 'falsely' not because nature disguised itself, but their familiar categories and concepts blinded them to the 'reality' in front of them.

I just became aware of another example of this.  There is an animal of the Philippines called the Flying Lemur.  Thing is, it doesn't fly, it glides, and it's not a Lemur, but a species that split from the other primates.  But whoever named it made their best guess.

[Rara]

I don't know if this helps anyone?

 

Chuang Tzu in dream became a butterfly,

And the butterfly became Chuang Tzu at waking.

Which was the real—the butterfly or the man ?

Who can tell the end of the endless changes of things?

The water that flows into the depth of the distant sea

Returns anon to the shallows of a transparent stream.

The man, raising melons outside the green gate of the city,

Was once the Prince of the East Hill.

So must rank and riches vanish.

You know it, still you toil and toil,—what for?

 

by Li Po

 

Are people familiar with the drunken Taoist poet?

[Marblehead]

I am aware of Li Po but have read practically nothing of him..

 

To the question above:

 

Which was the real—the butterfly or the man ?

 

The real one is the one others relate with.  If they see a butterfly then Chuang Tzu is truly a butterfly, but, if they see Chuang Tzu pretending to be a butterfly they will see Chuang Tzu acting crazy.

[Rara]

I am aware of Li Po but have read practically nothing of him..

 

To the question above:

 

Which was the real—the butterfly or the man ?

 

The real one is the one others relate with. If they see a butterfly then Chuang Tzu is truly a butterfly, but, if they see Chuang Tzu pretending to be a butterfly they will see Chuang Tzu acting crazy.

Possibly, but rather than answering the questions,I actually thought it was more useful to just acknowledge the type of questions he is asking. They are rhetorical and also, he seems to have his answers.

 

I posted more with the intent to imply that he had a good idea about what the Chuang Tzu story was really getting at. Mr Li cannot be in this thread so I thought I would try and participate on his behalf

Edited May 26, 2015 by Rara

[Marblehead]

Possibly, but rather than answering the questions,I actually thought it was more useful to just acknowledge the type of questions he is asking. They are rhetorical and also, he seems to have his answers.

 

I posted more with the intent to imply that he had a good idea about what the Chuang Tzu story was really getting at. Mr Li cannot be in this thread so I thought I would try and participate on his behalf

Well, Okay.  Hehehe.  I thought I had something to say so I spoke.

 

Yes, it is a rhetorical question.  But I gave my answer anyhow.

[Rara]

Ok, so back to the hidden metaphor...the butterfly. And how the poem above appears to talk about the endless cycle of things.

 

Firstly, the butterfly - a symbol of non-death? There is the illusion in its previous state that it was the end, then it formed the butterfly. Perhaps I'm reading too much into it, but as Zhuangzi wakes, he is none the wiser and carries on anyway.

 

So we cycle, constantly. One thing to the next...and the butterfly being a symbol of transmutation.

 

I can see how this could imply an idea of reincarnation though...as if these cycles and transmutations are present in nature, why would after death be any different? And of course, we wouldn't remember anyway if we were reincarnated, if we are "forgetting" (in fact, the more I think about it, how much do I really remember of yesterday? Only the highlights)

 

So maybe Zhuangzi wasn't explicitally talking about reincarnation, as he wouldn't know for sure. But I doubt he would be ruling it out...

 

PS I know in this post I have stolen, in-part, some things said by others earlier on. Just taking it on board, agreeing and expanding on

Edited May 26, 2015 by Rara

[Marblehead]

Yes, I see you talking with your self there. 

 

And true, one could easily associate transmutation with reincarnation.  I don't.

 

I think the question is more at, "Is there more to this life than is normally observable?"

 

Chuang Tzu wondered about that.  I don't.

 

I prefer a life style where I don't have to use my imagination much.  My imagination really sucks.

[blue eyed snake]

yea well, as i said earlier, the ' reality' of the butterfly and the ' reality' of Zhuangzi  are about the same as 'reality' Even MH seemed to agree with that. So i like the remark of Rara who said:

 

 

<<Possibly, but rather than answering the questions,I actually thought it was more useful to just acknowledge the type of questions he is asking. They are rhetorical and also, he seems to have his answers.>>

 

then we seemingly have a drunken taoist poet named Li po  who gave us a verse about the end of the endless changes of things? 

 

<<Chuang Tzu in dream became a butterfly, 
And the butterfly became Chuang Tzu at waking. 
Which was the real—the butterfly or the man ? 
Who can tell the end of the endless changes of things? 
The water that flows into the depth of the distant sea 
Returns anon to the shallows of a transparent stream. 
The man, raising melons outside the green gate of the city, 
Was once the Prince of the East Hill. 
So must rank and riches vanish. 
You know it, still you toil and toil,—what for?>>

 

 

then i see the post of darkstar:

 

<<Laozi said, "I will now revert my spirit and return to Namelessness [Dao]. I will abandon separate personhood and end my existence;

 

Yin Xi went into the courtyard, prostrated himself and said, "Please, spirit being, appear one more time.

 

Yin Xi then looked up and saw Laozi's body

 

. Laozi then spoke, >>

But Taoist texts was not happy with the translation and gave us the following beautiful formulation: Now i will cut my connection to my physical body and extinguish my materiality"

 

By Taoist texts:

<<I was disappointed to see Komjaty to distort the bolded phrase. If LZ is not a separate person and does not exist anymore then who is addressed, who appears and who replies in the consequent dialogue?

 

In fact, LZ in the original says: "Now i will cut my connection to my physical body and extinguish my materiality"

 

絕身滅有

 

 nothing about abandoning separate personhood or ending existence here. Both continue in the immaterial realm.>>

 

 

 

so Lao zi cuts his connection to his physical body and extinguishes his materiality, but to me it seems it follows from the text that he is still being/ existing as ( a) something not on the material plane.

 

thereby giving substance to the story of the question whether the butterfly or zhuangzu is real, and the remark of the drunken poet who asks us whether there is an end to the endless change of things.

 

thereby i bring the topic back again tho the metaphysical realm....

 

(Maybe i should read the drunken poet, the 8 immortal always look happy and drunk on pictures, might be a style i need to adopt , just play and be happy  )

 

edit: fixed very strange layout 

Edited May 26, 2015 by blue eyed snake

[Rara]

I prefer a life style where I don't have to use my imagination much. My imagination really sucks.

Fair enough. I'm a natural daydreamer and create all sorts of weird fantasies in my head. Leave me to it....me, myself and I are very happy here hehe

[Rara]

(Maybe i should read the drunken poet, the 8 immortal always look happy and drunk on pictures, might be a style i need to adopt , just play and be happy )

 

Li Po has beautiful poems...a simple Google search will give you sites with most of them on

 

I have a pen friend that once new a medium (who died last year in his 50s) My friend told me about when he had sick family members, the medium would channel one of the 8 Immortals (when I remember which one, I will edit this post) In trance mode, the medium would ask this immortal to heal the family member. Apparently, before the immortal began work, he had to drink tonnes of Guinness.

 

Wtf?!

 

Well, my friend said it worked so maybe there's something in this drinking thing after all.

[Marblehead]

 

Well, my friend said it worked so maybe there's something in this drinking thing after all.

Yeah, well, way, way back in my teens and early 20s alcohol did allow me to be more imaginative.  But the hangovers were beyond acceptable.  Drinking gone, imagination gone.

[Stosh]

If you can fib or read Cz your imagination isnt gone.