Disagreements on the Interpretations of the Zhuangzi - Essay Example

?Disagreements on the Interpretations of the Zhuangzi Introduction Various analyses on the content of the Book of Zhuangzi can be attributed to how the original Chinese verses were written, and interpretations of the text will depend on the readers’ experiences, beliefs, and backgrounds. These differences can be summed up in presenting two modern analyses and interpretations of some parts of the Zhuangzi, with emphasis on the governing forces that shape and control the universe. For writer Erica Brindley, she interprets the Zhuangzi as the driving force and endless source of power that moves the universe and is above even Heaven itself is the Dao ?, which is “an upright way”, “a method”, “a path”, or “a truth”.1 The Dao allows the proliferation of diversity, thus any kind of method is considered acceptable as long as it is in line with the truth, making it a cyclical or a circular concept. Meanwhile writer Michael J. Puett interprets Heaven or Tian ? as the apex in the universal hierarchy and governs laws initiating changes and transformations, similar to patriarchy as a social order.2 Because the two authors read and interpreted the Zhuangzi using two different terms with differing ideologies, there are disagreements between the two, wherein Brindley’s interpretation of the Zhuangzi shows that the universe has a cyclic nature accessible through transcendence, while Puett’s interpretation states that the universal hierarchy is linear with Heaven at the apex, and man must live in balance with it without having to enter transcendence. Comparisons of the Two Interpretations of the Zhuangzi Brindley’s interpretation of the Zhuangzi gives a greater emphasis on the Dao as the all-encompassing, dynamic, unbounded and limitless driving force that shapes the cosmos and initiates its constant transformations.3 This is due to how she explains some ideas in the Zhuangzi using the Dao as the major influence. For example, she interprets the Dao to be impersonal, thus when a person unites with it, the perception of the self ceases to exist and becomes indistinguishable through emptiness, Wu ?. Thus this person does not act of his own accord anymore, because the self is no more. A passage from Zhuangzi mentions the impersonality of the Dao: “The Way has its reality and its signs but is without action or form. You can hand it down but you cannot receive it; you can get it but you cannot see it (Zhuangzi 6.9).”4 The idea is similar to Descartes’ “I think, therefore I am”, but instead it becomes I no longer am, and thus my thoughts are not mine.5 This turns thoughts from something personal to something that is not from the person, thus being impersonal. On the other hand, Puett’s interpretations of the Zhuangzi gives more emphasis on Heaven to be the one governing all changes that happen in the universe, and that humans must strive not to work against it, but rather follow its patterns.6 This is because resisting or controlling these changes makes people resentful, and will turn into an endless cycle of dissatisfaction, whereas allowing changes to happen as fate brings one pleasure and peace. This can be further explained using a passage from Zhuangzi: “Such things from time to time may happen to come your way. When they come, you cannot keep them from arriving, but when they depart you cannot stop them from going (Zhuangzi 16.5).”7 By allowing things to happen according to the patterns of Heaven and forgoing all, man can easily live in peace. Another disagreement between Brindley’s and Puett’s interpretations of the Zhuangzi is on how normalcy or humanity is defined. For Brindley, what the universe creates that man does not see normal are the products of how the Dao allows diversity to exist in the cosmos, while for Puett anything that exists in nature, regardless of whether humans consider it normal or not are still the products of the will of Heaven and are thus “heavenly”. The two texts both mentioned the following passage from Zhuangzi about what is normal and what is not: When Kung-wen Hsuan saw the Commander of the Right, he was startled and said ‘What kind of man is this? How did he come to be footless? Was it Heaven? Or was it man?’ ‘It was Heaven, not man,’ said the commander. ‘When Heaven gave me life, it saw to it that I would be one-footed. Men’s looks are given to them. So I know this was the work of Heaven and not of man (Zhuangzi 3.5).8 For Brindley, this is interpreted as how the Dao operates, by celebrating the uniqueness of each person as individual products of heaven, created through the diverse nature of the Dao.9 Regardless of whether a person is normal or not in the eyes of other people, the most important thing to remember is that anyone or anything is created and allowed to exist by the Dao, and as such their only mission or goal in life is to bind their relationship with the Dao and accept this as something that is unique for everything and everyone in the universe. Thus, by celebrating the unique relationship of everything to the Dao, this also recognizes the relevance of diversity among things in the cosmos, thereby relieving the human definition of normalcy in general. Puett also recognizes the importance of normalcy existing outside the understanding of humans, however he describes it as something that is Heavenly in nature, and must be allowed to happen and be accepted wholly because it already exists.10 As such, distortions or absurdities that currently exist in nature and the universe are all products of Heavenly will, and by accepting what is given by Heaven through fate and not confined by the earthly-ideals that humans have made, humans can become less-bound by things and be more in tune with how Heaven governs the universe. The last disagreement between Brindley’s and Puett’s analysis on the Zhuangzi is the part regarding how to live in harmony with the driving forces of the universe, wherein Brindley’s analysis focuses on the importance of transcendence in order to be more attuned with the Dao, while for Puett it is much more important to remain human and live in balance with the laws of Heaven instead of attaining transcendence. This can be explained by using their interpretations of the following passage from Zhuangzi regarding transcendence: “Listening stops with the ears, the mind stops with recognition, but the spirit is empty – and waits on all things. The Way gathers in emptiness alone. Emptiness is the fasting of the mind.”11 Brindley’s analysis states that it is important for humans to reach transcendence in order to overcome the self and the body and to gain a stronger spiritual and physical connection to the Dao.12 This is because it is important that people from all walks of life, regardless of their position in society or whether they are normal or not normal based on human definitions must cultivate their own selves in order to reach transcendence, be in one with the Dao and attain the main goal of impersonal dissolution into the Dao’s boundless powers, which can be attained by becoming unbound, open, and empty or Wu. Thus by letting go of the ties to worldly objects or needs and allowing the mind to become more open, this allows the person to enter and connect with the Dao and its cyclic nature. Meanwhile, Puett interprets the passage to be the ultimate goal in life: to become a spirit-man who lives in harmony with the will of Heaven. In order for this to happen there must be a balance between remaining human while losing the strong urge to control everything and everyone.13 There is no need to transcend from being a human to being a spirit in order to reach Heaven but it is enough that one recognizes the need to let go of totally controlling all things, and to allow things to happen in accordance to the will of Heaven. Also, man must not try to attain Heaven but rather remain in the hierarchy as himself, and rather he must continue this lineage from Heaven by attaining Heaven within himself within the timeframe that was given to him through self-cultivation. Thus by living in balance with being a human and maintaining his Heavenly lineage, man can achieve and fulfill the destiny of being a spirit-man. The implications of these disagreements can affect the overall importance of the Zhuangzi itself, and differentiate which analysis was better overall. Puett’s interpretation of a linear force in nature gives the idea that man can do nothing about things and must simply accept how things happen in the world, which is somewhat limiting and does not give man any chance to decide the result of anything. This kind of definition also seems to adhere to stereotypical beliefs about Ancient Chinese strictly adhering to principles of linearity and of hierarchy, which may not be entirely true. However, Brindley’s interpretation of a cyclic force in nature gives a greater importance of man’s will in becoming in one with the cosmos, and is much more empowering to readers. Also, her interpretation is much more attuned with various concepts that bear parallelisms to some Western ideas, which in a way gives comfort to readers that not all Chinese ideologies were trapped within the ancient country’s confines, as this gives the possibilities that ideas such as the importance of human free will can affect how he interacts with the universe and the importance of having an open mind were in a way principles that have multiple origins, in this case from Ancient China. Thus, in this case Bridley’s analysis has an edge over Puett’s by removing the Zhuangzi’s linearity and giving it a less stereotypical outlook on Chinese knowledge and ideology. Conclusion The Zhuangzi has been in existence for a very long time however this does not guarantee any similarities in most of the interpretations of its content. This is exemplified by the works of two different authors Erica Brindley and Michael J. Puett, wherein they gave different analyses on what governs the universe and its makings. For Brindley, it is the Dao ?, which is cyclic in nature and encompasses all things, places, worlds, and that even Heaven or Tian ? is under its control. However, it is also this cyclic nature that man is given a chance to become one with the Dao in order to be more open-minded with things because the Dao resides in them and allows them to become a part of the universe, in a way empowering the person through this oneness. Meanwhile Puett only recognizes Heaven or Tian ? as the apex of the hierarchal order of things, and with man belonging to an order below Heaven this means that his way of interpretation follows a linear pattern. This makes his interpretation of the Zhuangzi resemble orthodox beliefs of Ancient Chinese philosophers and peoples thinking alike due to the linear hierarchy that Heaven imposes and the need to accept fate throughout one’s life. To conclude, despite the differences between Bridley’s and Puett’s arguments on what controls the universe based on the Zhuangzi, the former’s analysis stands out better because it does not adhere to common belief systems associated with Ancient China, it is an empowering interpretation, and because it is able to connect with Western philosophers such as Descartes. Bibliography Brindley, Erica. "Decentralizing Control and Naturalizing Cosmic Agency: Bodily Conformism and Individualism." In Individualism in Early China: Human Agency and the Self in Thought and Politics, 54-76. University of Hawaii Press, 2012. Puett, Michael J. "Nothing Can Overcome Heaven." In The Notion of Spirit in the Zhuangzi”. In Scott Cook ed., Hiding the World in the World. Uneven Discourses on the Zhuangzi, by Scott Cook, 248-262. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2003. Roberts, Moss, trans. Dao De Jing: The Book of the Way. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2001. Watson, Burton. The Complete Works Of Chuang Tzu. n.d. http://terebess.hu/english/chuangtzu.html (accessed November 19, 2013). Read More