Rites of Zhou 1-124 Managing Garments in Mid-Autumn

天官冢宰 124: 司裘：掌為大裘，以共王祀天之服。中秋獻良裘，王乃行羽物。季秋獻功裘，以待頒賜。王大射，則共虎侯、熊侯、豹侯，設其鵠；諸侯則共熊侯、豹侯，卿大夫則共麋侯，皆設其鵠。大喪，廞裘，飾皮車。凡邦之皮事，掌之。歲終則會，唯王之裘與其皮事不會。

Managing Garments: charged with the great garments, by means of gathering the emperor’s heavenly sacrificial attire. In mid-Autumn offer virtuous garments, (and) the emperor thus goes forward like a winged creature. In the autumn season offer meritorious garments, in accordance with receiving and bestowing gifts.

The king (made) a great issuance, accordingly gathering tiger targets, bear targets, leopard targets, he displayed these targets. The princes accordingly gathered tiger targets, bear targets, leopard targets, and the noble great men accordingly gathered deer targets, all displaying their targets. A great dismay, arranging the garments, decorating skins and carts. Every skin of the country employed, (being) held. The harvest finally thereby convening, only the king’s garments and his skins did not convene.

掌 hold in one’s hand, in charge of
為 in the interest of, for (in charge of + in the interest of = charged with)
獻 show, display
乃 thus
待頒 reading 待 (bringing, giving) as a contrasting partner to 頒 (receiving).
則 in accordance with a rule or method = “thereby” or “accordingly”
虎侯 Lord Hu or a tiger target 
熊侯 Lord Xiong or a bear target = bear marquis
豹侯 Lord Bao or a leopard target
諸侯 Vassal-state prince
麋侯 Lord Mi or a deer target

For a history of hunting rituals, rules, and target terminology, see this helpful article: “射礼”起源于借田猎来进行的军事训练_习射_射中_命中 (sohu.com)

Zhuangzi 1-1 Kun and Peng

Zhuangzi 1-1 Kun and Peng

 

北冥有魚，其名為鯤。鯤之大，不知其幾千里也。化而為鳥，其名為鵬。鵬之背，不知其幾千里也；怒而飛，其翼若垂天之雲。是鳥也，海運則將徙於南冥。南冥者，天池也。齊諧者，志怪者也。諧之言曰：「鵬之徙於南冥也，水擊三千里，摶扶搖而上者九萬里，去以六月息者也。」野馬也，塵埃也，生物之以息相吹也。天之蒼蒼，其正色邪？其遠而無所至極邪？其視下也亦若是，則已矣。且夫水之積也不厚，則負大舟也無力。覆杯水於坳堂之上，則芥為之舟，置杯焉則膠，水淺而舟大也。風之積也不厚，則其負大翼也無力。故九萬里則風斯在下矣，而後乃今培風；背負青天而莫之夭閼者，而後乃今將圖南。蜩與學鳩笑之曰：「我決起而飛，槍1榆、枋，時則不至而控於地而已矣，奚以之九萬里而南為？」適莽蒼者三湌而反，腹猶果然；適百里者宿舂糧；適千里者三月聚糧。之二蟲又何知！小知不及大知，小年不及大年。奚以知其然也？朝菌不知晦朔，蟪蛄不知春秋，此小年也。楚之南有冥靈者，以五百歲為春，五百歲為秋；上古有大椿者，以八千歲為春，八千歲為秋。而彭祖乃今以久特聞，眾人匹之，不亦悲乎！

In the northern darkness there is a fish, it is named Kun.
The greatness of Kun, it is not known how many thousands of li.
Changing and then becoming a bird, it is named Peng.
The breadth of Peng, it is not known how many thousands of li.
Flourishing and rising aloft, its wings like clouds suspended in the sky.
This bird, soon following the moving seas, moves to the southern darkness.
This southern darkness, (it) is the pool of Heaven.

 In the Qi Xie (Uniform/Blended Harmony), a recording of marvels. The words of Xie (Harmony/Humor) say: "Peng moves to the southern darkness, striking the water for 3000 li, rising in spiraling ascent for 90000 li, going six months before rest."

Like wild country horses, like ashes and dust, the birth of things by means of mutually blowing breath.
The azure of the sky - it is truly the color (of the sky)? (Or) is it the distant and illimitable extreme? [1]
If looking down (from above) it would again be like this - and nothing more.

 Moreover, if the accumulation of water is not deep, then it lacks the ability for holding great vessels. Tip over a cup of water above a small hollow, a tiny mustard petal can become a ship. Place the cup (in the hollow) and it sticks like glue. If the accumulation of the wind is not vast, then it lacks the ability to bear great wings. Therefore (rising to) 90,000 li with the wind underneath, and after only now (with) this embankment of wind; shouldering the blue sky and with no obstructions [2], only now charting a course to the south. The cicada and the fledgling turtledove laugh and say: we decide to rise up and fly, scurrying up the elm and sandalwood trees, and when we don't make it, we fall back to the ground - why take 90,000 to make to the south? One who goes to the open country, yet returns (for the) third meal, their stomach is just the same (as when they left); one who goes 100 li stops for the night to grind their food; one who goes 1000 li gathers three months of provisions.

These two small creatures, what can they understand? Small understanding cannot reach great understanding. A short life cannot reach great age. How do we understand it so? The morning mushroom does not understand (the time) from dusk to dawn. The short-lived cicada does not understand spring and fall. These are the short-lived. The south of Chu has one (called) "Dark Spirit," (who) takes 500 years as spring, and 500 years as fall; "high antiquity" has one (called) "Great Father," who takes 8000 years as spring and 8000 years as fall. But now Peng Zu alone renown for longevity, if the common people equal this, is it not a sorrow?

[1]其 as introducing a hypothetical (supposing).
[2] Note the inverting of the relationship - carrying the sky on its shoulders, reversing the sky carrying the bird.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

Zhuangzi 2.6 Heaven and Earth One Finger

以指喻指之非指，不若以非指喻指之非指也；以馬喻馬之非馬，不若以非馬喻馬之非馬也。天地，一指也；萬物，一馬也。可乎可，不可乎不可。道行之而成，物謂之而然。惡乎然？然於然。惡乎不然？不然於不然。物固有所然，物固有所可。無物不然，無物不可。故為是舉莛與楹，厲與西施，恢恑憰怪，道通為一。

Using a finger to illustrate the not-finger-of-the-finger is not as good as using the not-finger to describe the not-finger-of-the-finger. Using a horse to illustrate the not-horse-of-the-horse is not as good as using the not-horse to illustrate the not-horse-of-the-horse.

Heaven and earth, one finger; the ten-thousands things, one horse.

Approving comes from approving; disapproving comes from disapproving.

Walking a path makes it a path. A thing is called-so and it becomes like-so.

How are things made like-so? Like-so from (being called) like-so.

How comes not-like-so? Not-like-so comes from (being called) not-like-so.

All things have a place of "like so." All things have a place of "it may be."

There is no thing without "like so." There is no thing without "it may be."

Therefore by affirmation we can raise up stalks of grass alongside the columns of a hall, a leper alongside Xi Shi, the vast and the precarious, the crafty and the strange, Dao opens (and) makes all one.

喻 to describe something as; an analogy; a simile; a metaphor; an allegory;
可 to approve; can; may
莛 stems; stalks (of grass)
楹 principal columns (or pillars) of a hall
厲 strict, rigorous; stern, severe, grim; violent
西施 (c. 450 BCE) name of a famous beauty of the late Spring and Autumn Period
恢 extensive, vast; to restore
恑 change (precarious?)
憰 wily, time-serving ; to feign;
怪 strange, odd; queer
 

Notes:
喻 I use an active, transitive verb, “illustrate” to capture the process of analogical reasoning (of likening something to something else).

可encompasses both possibility and approval; here Zhuangzi’s point is that it is possible to “approve” or “affirm” anything by virtue of language; all things permit a point of view from which they may be affirmed or “made like so.”

厲 the commentary gives 厉 / 厲 = 病丑人 but contemporary dictionaries list 麻风病/麻風病 as leprosy.

憰 vs 怪 these two terms have additional connotations that resonate with themes in the text.  憰 means crafty or wily, but can also refer to someone who simply “serves-time,” a lazy public servant who simply resides in office serving no benefit to others. The theme of the minor official who only knows enough to execute one function is a recurring theme in Zhuangzi, and correlates with the text’s warnings about conduct “within the world of people.” If we consider this pair as a pair of socio-economic binaries, then 怪 evokes all the cripples, beggars, ex-criminals, and vagrants who exhibit the “sign of virtue complete.” These are more than strange or odd personages, these are social outcasts who flourish despite their status and individual conditions. It seems particularly noteworthy that even these extremes are connected by Dao, and

 

以指喻指之非指 part 1
The usual approach to this phrase is “using a finger to show a finger is not a finger...” In this translation I treat 指之非指 as a compound, “the not-finger-of-the-finger.” I do this to suggest the syntax and a philosophical point. The point in question is: that which is regarded as “something” and that which is “not-something” are mutually, simultaneously entailed by either’s identification. As described in a previous post, the use of any concept to identify or “carve out” an object from the whole of experience (or the Way) creates both “x” and “everything-that-is-not-x.” Ironically, both x and not-x are conceptually connected by trying to distinguish something apart from that which is being used to make the distinction! For further discussions on Daoist logic see Steve Coutinho’s An Introduction to Daoist Philosophies (2014).

以指喻指之非指 part 2
Ziporyn’s explanation of this passage is invaluable. For a full explanation see his extended footnote in his translation of this passage (Ziporyn p. 12, footnote). Here are two key points. First, as Ziporyn points out, Zhuangzi’s passage here is an allusion to Gongsun Long’s argument 無物非指，而指非指 “all things are capable of being pointed out, but pointing out can never be pointed out” (Ziporyn). Second (also from Ziporyn), Zhuangzi’s point here goes beyond Gongsun Long’s argument. Zhuangzi’s point is that “this” is also “that.” Zhuangzi makes this point earlier in the “birth of opposites,” that for every “this” there is a “that,” and for every “that” there is a “this.” As Ziporyn points out, we can see that “this” is also “that” by viewing “this” from the point of view of “that.” Ziporyn translates this as the “Illumination of the Obvious.”

Additional Reading
Coutinho, Steve. An Introduction to Daoist Philosophies. New York: Columbia University Press. 2014.  http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/862077821

Zhuangzi. The Essential Writings: With Selections from Traditional Commentaries. Translated by Brook Ziporyn. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company. 2009.

Zhuangzi 2.4 (Part 2) Speaking is not just blowing breath

夫言非吹也。言者有言，其所言者特未定也。果有言邪？其未嘗有言邪？其以為異於鷇音，亦有辯乎，其無辯乎？

道惡乎隱而有真偽？

言惡乎隱而有是非？

道惡乎往而不存？

言惡乎存而不可？

道隱於小成，言隱於榮華。

故有儒、墨之是非，以是其所非，而非其所是。欲是其所非而非其所是，則莫若以明。

Speaking is not just blowing breath. One who speaks has speech, but that which is spoken is especially unfixed. Is the result having speech? Or has one not yet tasted having words? [1] They regard (it) as different from the chirping of little birds, but is there a distinction, or is there no distinction?

Dao: how is it concealed but there is true and false?

Speaking: how is it concealed but there is affirmation and negation?

Dao: how does it go (forth) and not remain? [*]

Speaking: how can it remain and not be? [*]

Dao is obscured in small completions (小成).

Speech is obscured in flowery embellishment.

And so we have the affirmations and negations of the Confucians and the Mohists, affirming what the other negates, and negating what the other affirms. Desiring to affirm what is negated and to negate what is affirmed, this method is not like using clarity.

[1] 存 is associated with depositing and storing up; it can also refer to holding office. This could suggest a pun: “notice how Dao goes out and does not hoard riches like officials holding office.”

[2] 可 is associated with permissibility but usually accompanies a verb. For example《論語：學而》三年無改於父之道，可謂孝矣 “Three years without changing from the path of the father, may be called filial!” In this translation I follow the text and omit a verb. I play 可 against 存 in the same line and the idea of meaning being lost in flowery embellishment: “We keep building up words, but there is nothing here!”

[3] This could be “has yet to experience having speech,” but “has yet to taste words” is too savory to pass up.

特 tè special, unique

嘗cháng taste, try; experience; ever, once

異 yì different; other, another

鷇 kòu fledgling birds

 

隱 yǐn hide, conceal; hidden, secret

真 zhēn real, actual, true, genuine

偽 wěi artificial; deceitful; false, fake

是 shì affirmation

非 fēi negation

往 wǎng go; towards

存 cún exist, live; store up; remain

 

榮 róng glorify, luxuriate; flourishing; honor, glory

華 huá magnificent; splendid; flowery

榮華 rónghuá [plants] blooming, flourishing; glorious, splendid      

 

儒 Rú Confucianism

墨 Mò Mohism

Zhuangzi 2.5 This and That

Original

物無非彼，物無非是。

自彼則不見，自知則知之。

故曰：彼出於是，是亦因彼。

彼是，方生之說也。

 

雖然，方生方死，方死方生；

方可方不可，方不可方可；

因是因非，因非因是。

是以聖人不由，而照之于天，亦因是也。

 

是亦彼也，彼亦是也。

彼亦一是非，此亦一是非。

果且有彼是乎哉？

果且無彼是乎哉？

 

彼是莫得其偶，謂之道樞。

樞始得其環中，以應無窮。

是亦一無窮，非亦一無窮也。

故曰「莫若以明」。

 

Translation

There is nothing without “that,” there is nothing without “this.

From the method of “that” (it) is not seen; (only) from the method of knowing (awareness) it is known.

Therefore it is said: “that” emerges from “this,” and “this” depends on “that” (*)

“That” and “this,” it is said they are born together.

 

Even though: together born and passing away, together passing away and being born;

Together admissible and inadmissible, together inadmissible and admissible;

(There is still) “because (this is) right and because (that is) wrong,” or "because (that is) wrong and because (this is) right."

Therefore the sagely person does not use this method, but rather illuminates things together in Heaven, which is also "because of this."

 

“This” is also “that,” and “that” is also “this.”

“That” is merely one “right and wrong,” and “this” is merely one “right and wrong.”

Does (this) result in having “this” and “that?”

Does (this) result in not having “this” and “that?”

 

“That” and “this” have not reached their coincidence, (which) is called the Pivot (Hinge) of Dao.

The hinge is found in the center of circumstances, taking affirmation without exhaustion.

Affirmation without exhaustion, negation without exhaustion.

Thus it is said, (there is) nothing like using clarity!

 

There is Nothing without That/This

As noted recently by one colleague, “the linguistic contradictions of the Qi Wu Lun either delight someone’s heart or give them chills.” I suspect he had this passage in mind. You are free to guess how I feel (which should not be difficult). The key to the passage is that any linguistic distinction (whether this-or-that or this-and-not-this) is an act of conceptual abstraction. Or, any conceptual abstraction is also a linguistic distinction. For Zhuangzi, linguistic distinctions occur within the world, and thus can never fully encapsulate or capture the world.

 

Consider the problem from the earlier question: “how is the way obscured by language?” In Zhuangzi’s view, the world is irreducibly complex. The Way is the totality of complex interdependent relationships that drives all transformation and the experience of change. For Zhuangzi, any attempt to reduce the world to language will be insufficient and partializing. The problem is a problem of demarcation, abstraction, conceptualization, and oversimplification. Every act of linguistic demarcation (this-or-that, (is-the-case, is-not-the-case) is an incomplete abstract conceptualization that creates the possibility of opposition. By virtue of stating “this” we create a “that.” By virtue of identifying anything as “this” we raise the possibility of “not this” or “opposite to this.” This is the “birth of opposites.” The problem is a problem of language, and it is a problem for all language.

 

The Hinges of Dao

The name of this blog and the center of all affirmation and negation. Zhuangzi’s broader point is that disputation reduces discourse to arguments based on limited perspectives and partisan distinctions. When forced to give advice the sage keeps their own views hidden and provides discourse that provides possibilities of transformation. Instead of trying to emerge victorious in disputations about what is or is not, or what should or should not be, the sage provides insights related to what is possible and what could be possible. This moves the goal of the argument from proving-right-versus-wrong to establishing models of possible action that integrate the concerns of all parties involved. Or at least those parties wise enough to listen to sage.

 

Notes

Legge, Watson, and Ziporyn all utilize quotation marks to highlight the role of linguistic denotation in discourse and disputation. I follow their practice here. I think this is warranted due to the frequent use of shi/fei in both content and grammar (structure). The terms are frequently used to preface or mark statements the speaker thinks should be affirmed or negated.