Chapter 1, Section 5 Concepts

[Marblehead]

Your the only one disagreeing here.

Hehehe. But he loves to disagree. That's his Tzujan.

Edited August 30, 2013 by Marblehead

[steve]

Daoist writings are full of stories of Immortals.

I am also of the mind that these are archetypes, myths, fables, and so forth.

Many believe them literally but I see no need.

They are just as instructive without resorting to belief.

 

Zhuangzi often deals with the clash between human qualities and the neutrality of nature - the empty boat comes to mind.

Most human problems are rooted in psychology, not biology or physiology. Hence Zhuangzi is often inviting us to recognize that the negative (and positive) emotions, hence the source of our troubles in inside of our heads, not in the natural world.

I also agree with dawei that the "Immortal" is something we can aspire to in this way. But I also get the sense that Zhuangzi is of the mind that it is not something we will ever fully achieve.

 

Compassion is a whole other issue. I have found, in general, that it is lacking to a large degree in both Zhuangzi and other Daoist classics. I'm hoping that you all with show me otherwise.

[Marblehead]

Daoist writings are full of stories of Immortals.

I am also of the mind that these are archetypes, myths, fables, and so forth.

Many believe them literally but I see no need.

They are just as instructive without resorting to belief.

Agree.

 

Zhuangzi often deals with the clash between human qualities and the neutrality of nature - the empty boat comes to mind.

Most human problems are rooted in psychology, not biology or physiology. Hence Zhuangzi is often inviting us to recognize that the negative (and positive) emotions, hence the source of our troubles in inside of our heads, not in the natural world.

I also agree with dawei that the "Immortal" is something we can aspire to in this way. But I also get the sense that Zhuangzi is of the mind that it is not something we will ever fully achieve.

Agree.

 

Compassion is a whole other issue. I have found, in general, that it is lacking to a large degree in both Zhuangzi and other Daoist classics. I'm hoping that you all with show me otherwise.

It is there in The Chuang Tzu but it is oftentime veiled or appears to be something else. And I'm sure we will have fun weeding the garden so we can see all the beautiful flowers.

[dawei]

But I also get the sense that Zhuangzi is of the mind that it is not something we will ever fully achieve.

 

I don't really disagree but it may be a matter it is not within his framework; maybe he simply puts it aside as not his point or the goal of the actor's in his stories.

 

it may not be achievable to ZZ because there is no such place/thing to achieve. He doesn't even hold a difference between life and death; He keeps one foot in life and one foot in death and focuses on the whole body, so [immortality] 'to never die' would not make sense. His belief in constant transformation shows his focus on the whole and not any part/phase.

 

What seems obvious is his lack of using Xian, the typical word for immortality. I think it only occurs in the Outer Chapters. Liezi who repeats the section just discussed uses the word Xian where Zhuangzi did not. Zhuangzi uses other words instead which shows a closer relationship to the real possibility of simultaneously having one foot in the physical and one foot in the spiritual [Dao].

[rene]

Zhuangzi uses other words instead which shows a closer relationship to the real possibility of simultaneously having one foot in the physical and one foot in the spiritual [Dao].

 

That sounds like "Both" to me. LOL

 

[maybe there is something to this Zz thing after all..hmm...]

[ChiDragon]

But those are fairy tales. Immortals don't really exist.

 

I've never agreed that "immortals" are existed. Are we only reading ZZ's parables and what they say, aren't we.....??? If we are applying modern logic to argue that his fairy tales are not true and some of the things don't even exist; and If you people do not know how to read metaphors, let's quit now.......!!!

Edited August 30, 2013 by ChiDragon

[Marblehead]

 

I've never agreed "immortals" are existed. Are we only reading ZZ's parables and what they say, aren't we.....??? If we are applying modern logic to argue that his fairy tales are not true and some of the things don't even exist; and If you people do not know how to read metaphors, let's quit now.......!!!

I already spoke to this. They are fairy tales. But lessons lie within. We have to read the stories in order to find the lessons. Don't worry. I will never say that you don't exist.

[dawei]

That sounds like "Both" to me. LOL

 

[maybe there is something to this Zz thing after all..hmm...]

 

I thought you would. And I don't think they are that far off but their point of view is simply different about the same idea.

 

it is almost like, at times LZ has a camera and explains the still frame; ZZ has a video and emphasizes the entire picture as a flowing whole.

[rene]

 

it is almost like, at times LZ has a camera and explains the still frame; ZZ has a video and emphasizes the entire picture as a flowing whole.

 

 

They say a picture can speak a thousand words. LZ's picture says little and tells everything. (-:

 

ZZ's video is too distracting, overly complex, extraneous, encumbered and misguiding. It's a wonder anyone could even find their own nose after being led around that way.

 

And yes, I am also now seeing the differences in their points of view. Thanks for your insights on these things, dawei, most appreciated.

 

warm regards

 

 

edit to add: MH & all, it's disingenuous for me to continue to contribute anti-ZZ sentiment in this study, while at the same time disliking the same thing in the LZ threads. Apologies for doing so, and best wishes on your continued explorations.

Edited August 30, 2013 by rene

[ChiDragon]

I read it from the angle that people suffer due to their biased illusions rather than see him suggesting that one bias can be consistently maintained successfully.

The acceptance of ALL rather than a WIN.

But acceptance of all, is not saying there is nothing bogus. It is accepting that which is not illusion as such, and trying to overcome that which is -so as not to suffer "at our own hands"

 

Stosh......

Nicely said, my eloquent scholar...........

Edited August 30, 2013 by ChiDragon

[Stosh]

They say a picture can speak a thousand words. LZ's picture says little and tells everything. (-: ZZ's video is too distracting, overly complex, extraneous, encumbered and misguiding. It's a wonder anyone could even find their own nose after being led around that way. And yes, I am also now seeing the differences in their points of view. Thanks for your insights on these things, dawei, most appreciated. warm regards edit to add: MH & all, it's disingenuous for me to continue to contribute anti-ZZ sentiment in this study, while at the same time disliking the same thing in the LZ threads. Apologies for doing so, and best wishes on your continued explorations.

I always felt there was more goofing around in that competetive view than any thing else..a good lawyer could prosecute the same case he defends for with equal dispatch. ,, just look at Cd for instance !

[ChiDragon]

 

....................... I believe in the original section it did state that a person(?) flies in the air still depends on the draft of the wind. The metaphor says, even though one can fly but still relies on the draft of the wind. This still leads to my bias interpretation on the "Free Wanderer": If one has to be depended on the draft of the wind to fly, then one is still one level behind to be a "Free Wanderer". It was simple because one still has to depend on an attachment which does not give one the freedom to fly independently.

 

Sorry, I have to quote myself on this one.....

 

To Lao Tze: one depends on the draft of the wind to fly was considered as Ziren. However, ZZ went one step beyond Lao Tze's thinking; ZZ wants to fly without depending on the draft to fulfill his requirement as a "Free Wanderer". This is what was suggesting within the metaphor; even though it didn't say so. .

Edited August 31, 2013 by ChiDragon

[Stosh]

So you Cd , think Zz wants to literally fly ,

not as birds and balloons do , but defying the laws of physics .

To rise up off the ground because his physical body

Is no longer subject to the force of gravity.

No hang glider , no leap off of a cliff......

Or perhaps you are speaking figuratively,,!

And he is not being portrayed as crazy delusional.

But merely by deleting his own motivations , his own ego-ID

He is going to float around feeding himself , writing prose,

Practicing archery in the countryside...happily desireless and accepting

Of the situation as it presents itself...making no attempt to hit the target.

 

Well I wouldn't walking in those woods with arrows flying at random.

Edited August 31, 2013 by Stosh

[Stosh]

The third option is that he won't require chance random

to dictate his behavior , won't be trained to fit pavlovian style.

That his own desires and whims , his own natural instincts and

Tendencies will propel him unconflicted to whatever results present.

He will fly by the seat of his pants.

Edited August 31, 2013 by Stosh

[Marblehead]

Sorry, I have to quote myself on this one.....

 

To Lao Tze: one depends on the draft of the wind to fly was considered as Ziren. However, ZZ went one step beyond Lao Tze's thinking; ZZ wants to fly without depending on the draft to fulfill his requirement as a "Free Wanderer". This is what was suggesting within the metaphor; even though it didn't say so. .

Hey Dragon! While I don't disagree with what you have said, it is also true that ZZ never does tell us if it is possible or not. He supposes many aspects of what reality is. But in the end he just drags his tail in the mud. He could not escape physical reality or Tzujan. And let's face it, he couldn't even decide if he was a butterfly or a man.

Edited August 31, 2013 by Marblehead

[ChiDragon]

Stosh and Marblehead....

Literal speaking, the point ZZ wants to make was his wishful thinking to be a "Free Wanderer". In order to be a "Free Wanderer", one must be free of all attachments even defying the law of physic. Again, to understand ZZ's philosophy, we must read within the scope of his parables and work only with the given parameters. If you are adding more to what was given to you, then you'll never know what he was trying to say besides reading lots of words.

The whole idea of this chapter was telling us that ZZ just want to a free man at all cost by all means. He will go beyond imagination or reality if he has to. Please keep in mind that we are here to pick his brain but not to find faults with contradiction of what he says. That is why his metaphoric writings are called parables. The worse part of it was written in classic which is very difficult to be interpreted by non-scholars with a scientific mind like us.

Edited August 31, 2013 by ChiDragon

[ChiDragon]

Hey Dragon! While I don't disagree with what you have said, it is also true that ZZ never does tell us if it is possible or not. He supposes many aspects of what reality is. But in the end he just drags his tail in the mud. He could not escape physical reality or Tzujan. And let's face it, he couldn't even decide if he was a butterfly or a man.

 

I think he had already told you by not telling it is not possible because you knew already. Do you think ZZ was expecting a fool to read his parables....

 

Again, do you think a metaphor will always tell you the whole story......??? I think not, it is always up to the confused readers to be sorted things out themselves . Btw This is another one of those annoying examples for interpreting the classic parables. Unfortunately, one mistake you are out to never-never-land; then you'll never know what he was saying.

Edited August 31, 2013 by ChiDragon

[dawei]

I think three-peats and four-peats mean it is time to move on... or past that time...

[Marblehead]

I think three-peats and four-peats mean it is time to move on... or past that time...

Tomorrow will be a good day for that. Thanks.

[ChiDragon]

Please take your time...!!!
ZZ is really a boring subject to get into. Sorry, I have to give my fullest opinion.......

Edited September 1, 2013 by ChiDragon

[Marblehead]

Please take your time...!!!

ZZ is really a boring subject to get into. Sorry, I have to give my fullest opinion.......

But, of course, your opinion in this case is pretty useless to me.

[ChiDragon]

At least the "useless" had drawn somebody's attention; and according ZZ it was "usefulness"......

Edited September 1, 2013 by ChiDragon