Mair 6:9

[Marblehead]

"I'm making progress," said Yen Hui.

"What do you mean?" asked Confucius.

"I have forgotten rites and music."

"Not bad, but you still haven't got it."

Yen Hui saw Confucius again on another day and said, "I'm making progress."

"What do you mean?"

"I have forgotten humaneness and righteousness."

"Not bad, but you still haven't got it."

Yen Hui saw Confucius again on another day and said, "I'm making progress."

"What do you mean?"

"I sit and forget."

"What do you mean, 'sit and forget'?" Confucius asked with surprise.

"I slough off my limbs and trunk," said Yen Hui, "dim my intelligence, depart from my form, leave knowledge behind, and become identical with the Transformational Thoroughfare.  This is what I mean by 'sit and forget'"

"If you are identical," said Confucius, "then you have no preferences.  If you are transformed, then you have no more constants.  It's you who is really the worthy one!  Please permit me to follow after you."

[Marblehead]

Note how Confucius was used in this section.

[Stosh]

As a punching bag ?

[Marblehead]

As a punching bag ?

 

That sums it up well.

[Taoist Texts]

Confucianism and Taoism taken as a whole always recognized that Confucius was a disciple of Lao-zi. Hence his double role in ZZ, sometimes Confucius is an authority paying homage to Lao-zi's greatness, sometimes he is an inept student, who is trying but  not always getting a cigar. Either way there is no conflict between the two.

[Stosh]

Looks like ZZ is ripping him a 'new one' to me.  But it would be an interesting comparison to present what differences there are in the mens ideas which this....  is not explaining

 

Zuowang 坐忘 "sitting in oblivion," signifies a state of deep meditative absorption and mystical oneness, during which all sensory and conscious faculties are overcome and which is the base point for attaining Dao. I translate wang as "oblivion" and "oblivious" rather than "forgetting" or "forgetful" because the connotation of "forget" in English is that one should remember but doesn't do so, or – if used intentionally – that one actively and intentionally does something in the mind. None of these holds true for what ancient and medieval Daoists were about. This is borne out both by the language and the writings: the word wang in Chinese consists of the character xin for "mind-heart," usually associated with conscious and emotional reactions to reality and the word wang for "obliterate" or "perish." The implication is – as indeed described in the sources – that one lets go of all kinds of intentional and reactive patterns and comes to rest in oneness with spirit and is ready to merge completely with Dao. (Kohn 2010:1)  

 

 

Because if I wrote a book , which repeatedly shown you getting your ass handed to you , even by your own students , a third party might reasonably assume that theres potentially some serious differences in opinion underlying it. 

This sage stuff , is their bread and butter, its not a pastime , they live and breathe it, and they carry the rivalries which intellectuals host even today. So this is not just a harmless recollection of an event with students , this is an arrow for an intellectual enemy , even if they got along personally ,went to the same school, and shared scrolls. 

Edited May 5, 2017 by Stosh

[Taoist Texts]

 

This sage stuff , is there bread and butter, its not a pastime , they live and breathe it, and they carry the rivalries which intellectuals host even today. So this is not just a harmless recollection of an event with students , this is an arrow for an intellectual enemy , even if they got along personally ,went to the same school, and shared scrolls. 

Thats true, but to put the things into their native cultural prospective,for a classical chinese reader,  Lao and Confucius are equally towering  god-like figures , while ZZ, albeit certainly a sage, is a mere witty jester playing  with paradoxical barbs at their feet.

[Marblehead]

... while ZZ, albeit certainly a sage, is a mere witty jester playing  with paradoxical barbs at their feet.

 

Don't expect me to be thanking you for that bit of rather biased opinion.

Edited May 6, 2017 by Marblehead

[Stosh]

Thats true, but to put the things into their native cultural prospective,for a classical chinese reader,  Lao and Confucius are equally towering  god-like figures , while ZZ, albeit certainly a sage, is a mere witty jester playing  with paradoxical barbs at their feet.

If one draws a bell curve of reading comprehension scores , and color the top 10 percent blue , you will see that the average opinion is far from the most informed. In fact , its not much better than flipping a coin.

Here we see Zz handing out the spankings, and if we rely upon what we are reading, rather than solicit general opinion vis a vis 'family feud' we will see the native cultural perspective has been led by the nose to support the view of the politically empowered , and so its worthless to consider. 

[dawei]

Note how Confucius was used in this section.

 

He is a mouth piece foil of daoism...

[dawei]

Confucianism and Taoism taken as a whole always recognized that Confucius was a disciple of Lao-zi. Hence his double role in ZZ, sometimes Confucius is an authority paying homage to Lao-zi's greatness, sometimes he is an inept student, who is trying but  not always getting a cigar. Either way there is no conflict between the two.

 

I think I might accept the final comment but not sure I would say that Confucius was a disciple of LZ...  As mentioned above, he is a bit of a foil and convenient mouth piece.   I will admit to not deeply breathing all of ZZ to state such stuff with certainty but more a gut reaction.   

 

So I agree there is no conflict but there is a great gulf that resolves as one body of water that brings together two sides.

[Stosh]

He is being used as a Tool,  to show where peoples ideas go or get things wrong.

So when his student begins ,

Confucius doesn't recognize that the student is on the right path, he acts arrogant and superior  , the student progresses,  and finally says -- essentially the same thing-  but in a more complete manner , Confucius finally recognizes that the student has done what He cannot , but that which Confucius wishes more than anything to know. 

Zz knows Confucius is smart and can talk the talk , he just cant walk the walk , mainly because he is not humble enough to start at the beginning, or hasn't even gotten the basics clear. 

Either way , its the progression which leads to the final end zone , Confucius doesn't recognize the path to the end is the means of getting there. 

This isn't being a mouthpiece , this is being used as a negative object lesson ,'Don't let this happen to you.'

Edited May 5, 2017 by Stosh

[dawei]

He is being used as a Tool

 

Or maybe trying to say how to truly use this tool (?)

[cold]

With advance apology to Marblehead, (as I couldn't help my lyrical side).

 

The Fool on the Hill

 

Day after day alone on the hill,

The man with the foolish grin is keeping perfectly still,

But nobody wants to know him,

[Stosh]

Or maybe trying to say how to truly use this tool (?)

Do you mean that Conf. is so humble that he can grovel at the feet of his own student? Dont forget, this dude is the professor at the start,  making little of Yen's progress. Its not like its a story about being young himself , or going to a immortal or something for guidance. He has been teaching about stuff he hasn't achieved and doesn't recognize the path to get there! 

Edited May 5, 2017 by Stosh

[dawei]

Do you mean that Conf. is so humble that he can grovel at the feet of his own student? Dont forget, this dude is the professor at the start,  making little of Yen's progress. Its not like its a story about being young himself , or going to a immortal or something for guidance. He has been teaching about stuff he hasn't achieved and doesn't recognize the path to get there! 

 

Which is made to look stupid in the end, Yen Hui or Confucius?   

[Stosh]

Confucius, the deciever is guilty of that, the gullible is guilty of that, would you blame the gullible to protect the deceiver? Besides, though the messenger couldnt decode the way, Yen read it anyway.

Edited May 6, 2017 by Stosh

[Taoist Texts]

I think I might accept the final comment but not sure I would say that Confucius was a disciple of LZ...   

Well, Dawei i am sure you are aware that their master-student relationship is documented in the hallowed 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Rites

 

in the chapter of 

《曾子問》 The Questions of Zeng-zi

http://chinesenotes.com/liji/liji007.html

[Taoist Texts]

Don't expect me to be thanking you for the bit of rather biased opinion.

No problem, this round of thanks is on the house. Thanks everybody!

[Stosh]

Well, Dawei i am sure you are aware that their master-student relationship is documented in the hallowed 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Rites

 

in the chapter of 

 

《曾子問》 The Questions of Zeng-zi

http://chinesenotes.com/liji/liji007.html

While I am certainly not going to read all that, which is your thing, I do see that its an annotated text from several hundred years later, and has parts wrtten by Cfs grandkids.

Which means it was modified in a way which could be seen as favorable to Cfs lineage, and undermines the idea that this should be considered as unassailable testimony that Cfs was the student of revered Lao.

Looking to the content, it appears quite favorable to ideas of memorizing formalities associated with every aspect of life, which doesnt strike me as consistent with the theme of forgetting, and returning to the natural sincere core of ones humanity. Quite the opposite, I would say.

Considering if he was the student of Lao is really rather unimportant if they are not appearing to be supportive of a common ideology. , right? Different men with different ideologies.

Am I wrong in anything I am saying? Please correct me if I have erred or confirm what you feel is not wrong factually.

[Taoist Texts]

Looking to the content, it appears quite favorable to ideas of memorizing formalities associated with every aspect of life, which doesnt strike me as consistent with the theme of forgetting, and returning to the natural sincere core of ones humanity. Quite the opposite, I would say.

 

 

If you don't memorize first, what are you going to forget later? And as to returning to the natural, did Lao advocate  living in the trees and eating the raw prey?

 

Considering if he was the student of Lao is really rather unimportant if they are not appearing to be supportive of a common ideology. , right? Different men with different ideologies. Am I wrong in anything I am saying? Please correct me

 

In general, whether the things are common or different is in the eye of the beholder. But here is a pop quiz: 

 

A. "we blend them together and obtain The One."

B. "I seek The One"

C. When there is this non-action, good order is universal.

D. "The people may be made to follow a path of action, but they may not be made to understand it."

E. instruments for the profit of a state should not be shown to the people.

F. "I would prefer not speaking."

G. He who knows (the Dao) does not (care to) speak.

 

Who said what?

[Stosh]

We are socialized as children, and end up with many ideas we do not originate, nor remember the first lesson for. For instance, the religion that folks have, is the legacy of their parents. Each kid doesnt reinvent that whole shebang for themselves. Another might be the directive, to always do your utmost, others like being fat is bad, may never even be verbalized.

That which kids absorb , may or may not be good to have learned blindly, and so one needs to shed their indoctrination, to grow a new nose.

Natural, is a word which folks may construe as meaning not human in origin IN modern English,but its wrong to imply that the english connotations are the connotations of Lao. Consider what it mean if you knew for a fact was a bad translation..

[Stosh]

To know who said what, like that, requires me to know every version of every translation ever written .

These are little meaningless snippets which do not outline or suggest any broader philosophical point.

For all I can tell, they could all be from the Matrix..

[Marblehead]

I don't even know where the Matrix is.

[Taoist Texts]

For all I can tell, they could all be from the Matrix..

 

I don't even know where the Matrix is.