#Zhunagzi

[weidaoduzun3]

Commenting on a Line and Commentary from the Yellow Emperors Hidden Agreement 黃帝陰符經 as Commented by Yu Yan 俞琰 (1258-1314)

In [human] nature there are skillfulness and clumsiness; they can be hidden and stored.

Commentary by Yu Yan:

Among people, there are those who have knowledge and those who are foolish. Therefore their nature differs in skillfulness or clumsiness. With regard to [the statements] "great knowledge seems to be foolish" and "great skill seems to be clumsy," (they mean that] one's nature is hidden and stored within and is not perceived by other people. There fore it says, "in [human] nature there are skillfulness and clumsiness; they can be hidden and stored."

Why would one hide their intelligence; their skill? This is not saying to be “fake” or to come across as ignorant or appearing to be “skillful” by hiding ones “clumsiness.” There is a few things that come to mind on why it’s best to “hide our skillfulness and clumsiness.”

[NOTE: this is not an explanation on *how* to hide these things. The *how* can only be transmitted from teacher —>student from my understanding. I am musing on this for my own understanding. I am in no way encouraging anyone, nor myself to starting “hiding.” This is just to explain and help myself understand why it is good to “hide”].

For when we display our intelligence or our clumsiness so blatantly, these create preferences. To have human based preferences is a big no no in the Zhuangzi (chapter 2) and Huainanzi (1.5). The Huainanzi has this to say about preferences and our perception of them:

"When perception comes into contact with things, preferences arise. When preferences take shape and perception is enticed by external things, our nature cannot return to the self, and the heavenly patterns are destroyed."

Zhunagzi chapter 2 齊物論 gives a long dialogue on why “this is” & “this isn’t” truly misses the mark of things:

[2.11.15] "In such a way the Sage brings about harmony by taking “it is” and “it is not” and let’s them rest on the potter’s wheel of Heaven."

[12.12.4] "The manifestation of “this is” and “this is not” is what diminished the Dao."

[2.14.14] "Everyone else distinguishes things in order to impose their views on each other. Therefore, I say that in such “distinction” there is a failure to recognize."

Thus when we overtly and blatantly display our intelligence and or clumsiness, we create artificial perceptions of “I am this” and “I am that” or “I am not this” and “I am not that”. Such an err. Heaven makes our distinctions for us; Heaven has divided the ten-thousand kind of entities, and the seasons into their proper and respective places. We should follow Heaven and accord ourselves with its spontaneity 自然; for our own ziran is the same of Heavens.

So to circle back to the Yinfu Jing — the “statements” Yu Yan refers to are from Laozi 45. What do they mean? I think this is a teaching that alludes to the last of the three treasures 三寶 as mentioned in Laozi 67: 不敢為天下先. Literally it means “dare not to be first.” When we “dare not to be first” or more Simply be modest, we comply with Heaven and it’s own natural and spontaneous distinctions. For by hiding our skill and clumsy natures, we encourage the One Hundred Families to not have preferences set towards us.

This is why indeed “great knowledge seems to be foolish” and “great skill seems to be clumsy”. For when great knowledge makes itself known, we fail at 不敢為天下先, Which destroys Heavenly patterns and bars our nature from returning to the self (Huainazi 1.5).

Furthermore, this is further confirmed by Heshang Gong and his commentary on the Laozi 45: "Great skill seems as though clumsy."

大巧若抽，大巧謂多寸術也。若拙者，亦不敢見其能。

Great skill means abundantly talented and skilled. Those who "seem as though clumsy" simply do not show their abilities.

This why those who “do not show their abilities” namely the things hidden and stored as mentioned in the Yinfu Jing, seem to be clumsy, but truly they are not. For people who hide have returned to the true essence of reality 無極 — Ultimate Nothingness.

So, in conclusion as I understand Laozi 45 and the things “hidden and stored” in the Yinfu Jing — this brings about a certain clarity and tranquility that brings all under Heaven into alignment. We should let go of our preferences, or rather we must know when to stop having so many of them. For biases and preferences are evolutionary built into us for survival purposes. This is something neither you nor I can get around. Ideally, when I and the reader gains a teacher in such profound mysteries — we can learn how to properly do this without harming ourselves.

[scribblesandsnaps]

who dreams?

Posted by whimsygizmo in Quadrille Greetings, intrepid poets! De Jackson here, aka WhimsyGizmo. It’s Quadrille Monday (my favorite!), when we write a poem of exactly 44 words, including a provided word. Today, I want us to DREAM together.   Butterfly dreams itself awake in human form walking and talking without wings no floating, just gravity pulled weighted bone and skin   lead boots anchored to…

[bruskous]

Il Neiye

È un testo cinese che si riferisce al Tao (equipollente ma non equivalente del nostro logos) e che ha molte similitudini con i tre classici (Laozi, Zhuangzi, Liezi). Generalmente la diatriba è: ridurre il taoismo a questi tre testi o estenderlo anche ad altri? Personalmente reputo il Laozi più che sufficiente, anzi, l'unico vero capolavoro del Taoismo. Zhunagzi è un percorso per iniziare comprendere il Laozi, benché abbia uno stile tutto suo, da conoscere a sua volta.

A mio avviso il Neiye ha molti punti in comune col taoismo, ma è infinitamente inferiore al Laozi.

La mia tesi è che nel Laozi c'è nascosta, ma nemmeno tanto nascosta, la chiave di lettura stessa, e il testo, una volta "svoltato", appare come una perfetta costruizione, minuziosamente studiata, pensata e ripensata, alla cui base c'è un Tao ma anche un Logos. Molti commentatori occidentali negano l'esistenza del Logos nel taoismo: non sono d'accordo.

Nel Neiye il concetto di Tao è ancora molto passivo. Siamo di fronte a un tentativo piuttosto fanciullesco di descrivere qualcosa di indescrivibile. Il Logos è inesistente, la struttura è fragile e incerta. Siamo di fronte alla celebrazione di una spontaneità passiva, di un'unità che supplica di essere vista e considerata, ma non ha altri mezzi se non la supplica e la promessa fondata su un misticismo traballante.

[volcanokids]

this was the opening statement to a philosophy article i’m reading and i’m laughing. schwitzgabel just came for Zhunagzi’s whole ass life huh

[thetacitdimension]

Was wir sehen, sind Formen und Farben, was wir hören sind Worte und Töne. Zu ihrem Unglück stellen sich die Menschen vor, dass sei mittels dieser Formen und Farben, dieser Worte und Töne die Wirklichkeit erfassen. Darin irren sie sich aber, denn wenn man wahrnimmt, spricht man nicht, und wenn man spricht, nimmt man nicht wahr. .

Zhunagzi, Kapitel 13 (13/e/66-68), Übersetzung Billeter in: Das Wirken in den Dingen (S. 24)

[weidaoduzun3]

Musing On The Story of Lord Wenhui & Cook Ding.

The more I read this book, the more I am able to recall the divinity within me, but at the same time, the more I read this, the more I forget myself and who I am.

To live life with spontaneity, to be unselfconscious in all my actions and not doing a thing because it’s “right” or it is “wrong” but to just do; to just act because it’s innate in me. Sure I can rationalize these things okay enough. To the point where I can apply these teaching every day? Maybe I will be able too, maybe I wont but putting this into practice every day takes EXTREME discipline.

One thing I’m sure of, words cannot articulate this Dao. What a fool I am to try to articulate what I’m experiencing. Zhunagzi says: “to pursue the limitless (The Dao), with the limited (the mind/senses), this is but danger.”[3.1.3]

Namely, because the Dao exceeds all intellect and conceptualizations that have limits; so to embark on The Dao using just my 5 senses would be a fool's errand. I’m drawing parallels between Iamblichus’ “irrational” ways of going about theurgy and other Hermetic & Platonic teachings. But sharing those will have to wait. I'm really impressed with the story of Cook Ding and Lord Wenhui (King Hui of Liang).

The King is ever impressed with Cook Ding's butchering skills on an ox. So impressed he says this: "Wow! Terrific! How could skill ever go so far as this?" [3.3]. Cook Ding responds by saying he has no skill, but he is good at The Dao. According to just a simple cook for the imperials, just after three years butchering oxen for a living, he no longer see's the oxen's with his eyes but confronts the animal with his spirit (神) [3.4.1-4]. After telling Lord Wenhui this, Cook Ding mentions: [3.4.5] "When the sense and knowledge stop, the divine is ready to act." Cook Ding goes on to say because he cuts without knowledge or skill and just inherently cuts because that is the Cook's nature, and because he has arcanely merged the principal or natural configuration of the Ox, he abides where inherent certainty leads him. Then Cook Ding says: [3.4.10-11] "It never happens that my plying encounters the joints, So how much the less likely am I to encounter a big bone!"

Next, Cook Ding demonstrates the difference between an ordinary cook's knife, a good cook's knife, and his knife. The ordinary cook must change his knife once a month because he hacks the meat. A good cook changes his knife every year because he cuts through the meat. Guo Xiang says this about the good cook: "He(the good cook) fails to hit the interstices in the natural configuration." Meaning the good cook does not approach his craft with his/her spirit (神). Now Cook Ding says his knife has lasted over 19 years, with thousands of oxen that he has cut and butchered. He also mentions how little he has to put his knife to sharpening, but when he does, he applies the least amount of effort to perfectly sharpen his knife. Knowing how effortless his craft and his nature is, Cook Ding soaks up each moment of caring for his knife, feeling satisfaction for what he has done so perfectly. [3.4.12-21]

Lord Wenhui is so impressed by Cook Ding's words the King now has learned how to nurture life from the Cook's words. If a man can hone his knife to such a degree, imagine what you or I could do with the very life we have been blessed with? At least, that's how Guo Xiang interprets the end of the story and Lord Wenhui's amazement at Cook Ding. [3.5]

Safe to say, I was just amazed at Cook Ding's words just as Lord Wenhui was. I really like this story because we have a common working man teaching someone of aristocratic background The Dao. Reminding me that one doesn't have to become a great invocator or sage or King to embark on this inarticulate Dao. In fact, we shouldn't add or subtract anything from our emotions/tendencies. Zhuangzi says this a little later in the chapter: [3.12.3] "Such people try to escape from nature and multiply the scope of their tendencies/emotions, which is to forget what they have been endowed with." Just as Cook Ding demonstrated for us, he perfected the allotted capacity given to him by Heaven. In his arcane fusion of Earth(Oxen) and Heaven (Cook Ding's natural allotted capacity that is given to him out of Fate), Cook Ding can radically live in the moment, nurturing each breath and stroke of the knife.

Master Zhuang admits this is quite difficult and Guo Xiang expands on why it is so difficult I think very beautifully that I’ll just provide the whole commentary and last words from Zhunagzi: