• Als Spam markieren
• Beitrag melden

• 
  Diese Gruppe Alles

• Archiv
• RSS-Feeds

• Kontakt
• Hilfe
• Impressum
• Datenschutz

Re: Chuang Tzu

On Jul 1, 9:16�am, "{:-])))" <...@...> wrote:
> chi po wrote:
> > {:-]))) wrote:
> >> chi po wondered:
> >> > And people really think they understand this stuff?
>
> >> Sure.
> >> Some more than others.
> >"But suppose there is one who chariots on the normality of the
> >universe, rides on the transformation of the six elements, and thus
> >makes excursion into the infinite, what has he to depend upon?"
>
> >That's suppose to be happy?
>
> Fung writes, in another book,
> how there are levels of happiness.
>
> When Lieh Tzu could ride the wind,
> that was a great thing, but he depended
> on something, the wind. How much better
> would it have been to depend on nothing.
>
> If happiness and unhappiness go hand in hand,
> this presupposes another realm wherein the two
> are not separate but go together in a unified way.
> Understanding how this situation arises can be
> a key toward transcending limited happiness.
> It can be an excursion into something beyond,
> something eternal, in a manner of speaking.
>
> >Does that make sense to Taoists?
>
> I don't know about all Taoists
> but it makes perfect sense to me.
>
> > Do fish fly in Taoist philosophy?
>
> There's a tale in which they swim,
> darting to and fro without a care.
> Zz was said to have said
> that's what fish really enjoy.
>
> repeating:
>
> >> > And people really think they understand this stuff?
>
> Here's a couple bytes more of Fung.
>
> "Fung has, 'There is another line of Taoist
> thought, however, which emphasizes the relativity
> of the nature of things and the identification of
> man with the universe. To achieve this
> identification, man needs knowledge and
> understanding of still a higher level, and the
> happiness resulting from this identification is
> really absolute happiness, as expounded
> in Chuang Tzu's chapter on "The Happy Excursion."
> ...'
>
> Speaking again of chapter two of the CT, 'This
> passage in the Ch'i Wu Lun, however is immediately
> followed by another statement: "Since all things
> are one, what room is there for speech? But since
> I have already spoken of the one, is this not
> already speech? ... ... ...the Ch'i Wu Lun
> goes a step further than Hui Shih, and begins to
> discuss a higher kind of knowledge. This higher
> knowledge is "knowledge which is not knowledge."'
>
> Fung goes on, ...'Chuang Tzu reached a final
> resolution of the original problem of the early
> Taoists. That problem is how to preserve life and
> avoid harm and danger. But, to the real sage, it
> ceases to be a problem. As is said in the
> _Chuang-tzu_: "The universe is the unity of all
> things. If we attain this unity and identify
> ourselves with it, then the members of our body
> are but so much dust and dirt, while life and
> death, end and beginning, are but as the
> separation of day and night, which cannot disturb
> our inner peace. How much less shall we be
> troubled by worldly gain and loss, good-luck and
> bad-luck!" (Ch 20.) Thus Chuang Tzu solved the
> original problem of the early Taoists simply by
> abolishing it. This is really the philosophical
> way of solving problems.'
> [quotes taken from _A Short History ..._] "
>
> -hth

So, in simple words, what the  does that mean?  Early Taoists?    Oh,
so the early Taoists wanted to avoid danger and prolong life.  So
internally ingesting tonics and such, like in TCM, was given over to a
philosophical solution?   So do philosophical Taoists not care about
body, mind, and spirit?  Or do they believe that mind/spirit is over
body.  Is mind/spirit the teacher and body the follower?   That too
seems like TCM.  I'm confused.

I searched for a few other translations of that particular paragraph
and this is what I found.

"As for the man who rides a true course between heaven and earth, with
the changes of the six energies for his chariot, to travel into the
infinite, is there anthing that he depends on?  As the saying goes,
The utmost man is selfless, the daemonic man takes no credit for his
deeds, the sage is nameless."

Graham

"If he had only mounted the truth of Heaven and Earth, ridden the
changes of the six breaths, and thus wandered through the boundless,
then what would he have had to depend on?

Therefore I say, the perfect man has no self; the holy man has no
merit; the sage has no fame."

Watson

Antworten