Mair 4:6

[Marblehead]

In the state of Sung, there is a place called Chingshih where catalpas, arborvitae, and mulberry trees thrive.  Those that are more than a hand's breadth or two around are chopped down by people who are looking for tether posts for their monkeys.  Those that are three or four spans in circumference are chopped down by people who are looking for lofty ridgepoles.  Those that are seven or eight spans in circumference are chopped down by the families of aristocrats or wealthy merchants who are looking for coffin planks.  Therefore, they do not live out the years allotted to them by heaven but die midway under the ax.  This is the trouble brought about by having worth.  Conversely, in carrying out an exorcistic sacrifice, one cannot present oxen with white foreheads, suckling pigs with upturned snouts, or people with hemorrhoids to the god of the river.  All of this is known by the magus-priests, who consider these creatures to be inauspicious.  For the same reasons, the spiritual person considers them to be greatly auspicious.

[Taoist Texts]

  Those that are more than a hand's breadth or two around are chopped down by people who are looking for tether posts for their monkeys.   

How many monkeys those people needed?

[Marblehead]

Seems that the monkey has been part of Chinese culture for at least 4,000 years.  For about 3.000 years they have been kept as pets.  Understandable that there would be those who breed and sell monkeys.

[Taoist Texts]

Conversely, in carrying out an exorcistic sacrifice, one cannot present oxen with white foreheads, suckling pigs with upturned snouts, or people with hemorrhoids to the god of the river.  All of this is known by the magus-priests, who consider these creatures to be inauspicious.  For the same reasons, the spiritual person considers them to be greatly auspicious.

 

 

This is strange. So the priests do not use these 3 types of victims in sacrifices, but the spirit-person does?

[Marblehead]

This is strange. So the priests do not use these 3 types of victims in sacrifices, but the spirit-person does?

 

Yes, strange indeed.  The first time I read it I immediately thought of human sacrifice.  I suppose the Chinese had that too as most cultures did.

 

But to the thought presented:  The ox, the pig, and the people who had deformities were not selected for sacrifice.  From the priest's point of view these animals were useless but from a spiritual (sagely) point of view their deformities were very useful because the deformities prevented them from being used for sacrifice.

 

Yep, we are still talking about useful/useless here.

 

It's great to be useless!!!

[Taoist Texts]

But to the thought presented:  The ox, the pig, and the people who had deformities were not selected for sacrifice.  From the priest's point of view these animals were useless but from a spiritual (sagely) point of view their deformities were very useful because the deformities prevented them from being used for sacrifice.

 

Was it just an idle thought of an un-involved observer, the spirit-man saying: 'hey that pig is useless, good for him! but what do i care?'

 

Because this is the same spirit-man as elsewhere in ZZ:

 

 'Far away on the hill of Gu Ye there dwelt a Spirit-like man whose flesh and skin were (smooth) as ice and (white) as snow; that his manner was elegant and delicate as that of a virgin; that he did not eat any of the five grains, but inhaled the wind and drank the dew; that he mounted on the clouds, drove along the flying dragons, rambling and enjoying himself beyond the four seas; that by the concentration of his spirit-like powers he could save men from disease and pestilence, and secure every year a plentiful harvest.'

 

 

 

And this story sounds like the spirit-man either preferred to sacrifice such inauspicious animals himself, or to receive such  sacrifices.

[Stosh]

To me , This rendering , doesn't seem to indicate that the spirit person did any sacrificing at all , he just shows a similar idea that there exists a polemic in his opinion that there is   auspicious vs inauspicious. I looked up the magnus priest thing, and dont see any indication of human sacrifices by them ,, but its a generic term.,, I did however discover a custom of -not burying a man until his body had been opened by a dog or vulture. 

[Marblehead]

Was it just an idle thought of an un-involved observer, the spirit-man saying: 'hey that pig is useless, good for him! but what do i care?'

 

Because this is the same spirit-man as elsewhere in ZZ:

 

 

And this story sounds like the spirit-man either preferred to sacrifice such inauspicious animals himself, or to receive such  sacrifices.

 

I view the spirit-man as a Taoist Sage.  He makes no sacrifices.  Doesn't even consider the act of any value. 

[Marblehead]

For Stosh:

 

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/06/photogalleries/100615-human-sacrifice-china-tombs-science-archaeology-pictures/

[Stosh]

For Stosh:

 

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/06/photogalleries/100615-human-sacrifice-china-tombs-science-archaeology-pictures/

Interesting, though I dont see how it plays into the claim of the post in this case. If I read it correct , the Magnus priests were Persians , and the sacrifices mentioned in the article were Chinese people fated to go with the Patriarch in death, their appropriateness was based on relationships , rather than if they had rhoids or not....... I figure .. I cant be sure on that..maybe .. too much rice... but anyway ,

What should one assume the religion of the people who had these things going on was? 

[Marblehead]

 

What should one assume the religion of the people who had these things going on was? 

I would expect that it was animistic and shamanistic.  China never did create a religion as such until Taoism.

[Stosh]

I would expect that it was animistic and shamanistic.  China never did create a religion as such until Taoism.

Ah, that explains how everyone would know who had the rectal issues

[Stosh]

Figured it out then? Auras.

[Stosh]

Dang,!  I didnt think.. Astral projection! 

 

ah, I guess I goof around too much, the serious dudes seem to drop out when I participate. 

Edited December 28, 2016 by Stosh

[Marblehead]

I have never denied you my time.  (But you're not getting my money.)

[Stosh]

I have never denied you my time.  (But you're not getting my money.)

I don't ever actually need more than I have... at least I tell myself that

Theres a decent chance I'll croak with cash still in the bank,, gaining no interest. 

Edited December 28, 2016 by Stosh

[dawei]

Was it just an idle thought of an un-involved observer, the spirit-man saying: 'hey that pig is useless, good for him! but what do i care?'

 

Because this is the same spirit-man as elsewhere in ZZ:

 

 

And this story sounds like the spirit-man either preferred to sacrifice such inauspicious animals himself, or to receive such  sacrifices.

 

I take it to mean that by inauspicious for a sacrifice, you would not be used as a sacrifice... ergo... you get to live.

 

This uselessness of not good enough for sacrifice has ironically saved that person or animal.

[Taoist Texts]

I take it to mean that by inauspicious for a sacrifice, you would not be used as a sacrifice... ergo... you get to live. This uselessness of not good enough for sacrifice has ironically saved that person or animal.

Of course. But what business is that of the spirit-man ? ZZ could have said all of the above without bringing in the spirit-man.

[dawei]

Of course. But what business is that of the spirit-man ? ZZ could have said all of the above without bringing in the spirit-man.

 

I think just to contrast the mindset of the so-called experts in sacrifice vs the spirit-man's... uselessness seems to be a repeated theme of having hidden benefits.  The kind of paradox LZ spoke of too.