your turn #1 (updated with today's class)

art by kajahl benes

welcome to my class.

this is going to be your first post for comment.

here are some of what we've talked in class:

1- master/slave dialectic in the case of the syncretism in hinduism. i made the point that hinduism is a pottage of tendencies and practices.

2- getting our metaphors right when talking about big things. we need to know what we're talking about, there are real things, and there are metaphors to recontextualize these things. for example, "soul" for me is not real, but metaphoric. it doesn't matter, i still talk about it and make use of it, but you know what i mean. 

3- so far these categories in hinduism:

kharma, universal cause effect. you reap what you sow.
samsara, a cosmic principle. not easy to grasp. it means the same and the different at once.
dukkha, i made the point in class that suffering is essential for hinduism. without suffering there is no spiritual growth. this is the redemptive aspect of hinduism to the idea of suffering.
atman/brahman, a difficult concept. we'll be grappling with it throughout the semester.  is it one? is it two? it's both.
yajna, sacrifice. you give of yourself in exchange for something or someone, that's the first idea of yajna, then comes the second more powerful idea: sacrifice for its own sake. we're not there yet, we need to read from the bhagavad gita.

i've linked these to wikipedia articles (which i think are quite good). in your 150-word comment you can take any tangent you want, while keeping focused on one of these themes. try to make your comment informed, and interesting. you can take a look at these previous comment boxes made by my last phi 2070 class, here and here.

update: today we added maya, bhakti and ineffability.

go ahead!

to make a comment 

click at the bottom of this post where it says "post a comment." you will get a box, after you are done with your comment sign it at the bottom of your comment (even if you have a google alias). click "anonymous" (unless you have a google account with your alias). i advise you to write your comment first on word and copy and paste it to the comment box in case it gets lost (this has happened to students whom lost the whole comment). click i'm not a robot and click "publish your comment." by the way, you can preview your comment before you publish it.

if you have any questions, let me know via email (atriff@mdc.edu) or call me. good luck.

four upanishadian themes

Samsara: the idea that after we die our soul will be reborn again in another body. Perhaps in an animal, perhaps as a human, perhaps as a god, but always in a regular cycle of deaths and resurrections.

Karma: means “action”, the idea that all actions have consequences, good or bad. Karma determines the conditions of the next life, just like our life is conditioned by our previous karma. There is no judgement or forgiveness, simply an impersonal, natural and eternal law operating in the universe. Those who do good will be reborn in better conditions while those who are evil will be reborn in worse conditions.

 Dharma: means “right behaviour” or “duty”, the idea that we all have a social obligation. Each member of a specific caste has a particular set of responsibilities, a dharma. For example, among the Kshatriyas (the warrior caste), it was considered a sin to die in bed; dying in the battlefield was the highest honour they could aim for. In other words, dharma encouraged people of different social groups to perform their duties the best they could.

 Moksha: means “liberation” or release. The eternal cycle of deaths and resurrection can be seen as a pointless repetition with no ultimate goal attached to it. Seeking permanent peace or freedom from suffering seems impossible, for sooner or later we will be reborn in worse circumstances. Moksha is the liberation from this never ending cycle of reincarnation, a way to escape this repetition. But what would it mean to escape from this cycle? What is it that awaits the soul that manages to be released from samsara? To answer this question we need to look into the concept of atman and Brahman.

Notes on Hinduism

 

Hinduism is a potage of philosophies. It's simultaneously a religion, a developed cultural tradition and a social structure. So, it grows in all directions. 

Hinduism has an amazing capacity for holding together a variety of spiritual cultural and social traditions. The best way to study Hinduism as a process, i.e., a tradition in constant development. 

There are three important changes 

1- the arrival of the Aryan peoples (around 2000 B.C.), 

2- the rise of the sectarian religions of Vaishnavism and Shaivism 

3- the development of Hinduism during the 19th Century, when Western influences poured into India. 

The early period results from the interaction of the Aryan and non-Aryan tradition (Jainism), which are the two basic components of Hinduism. The non-Aryans represent the primordial traditions of India. In fact one can see Hinduism as the Indianization of these traditions (i.e. non-Aryans gradually modified the Aryan elements. One can see a similarity in the interpenetration of Hellenistic and Christian traditions in the West).

Non-Aryan component

In Hinduism there is a world-negative aspect that seems opposed to the influence of the Aryan conqueror. One perceives this attitude opposing delight in life, which is found in the Vedic Hymns that can be very difficult to understand if one doesn't see the phenomenon from a historic perspective. 

This devaluation of the world as non-being, as confinement, as meaningless, as a source of confusion or duhkha (suffering) is the most significant aspect of the entire spiritual development of India. These are also felt in Buddhism, but more so in Jainism which is really non-Aryan. So, in a sense one can say that the Hindu achievement consists in interpreting and transforming their historic situation into an existential compass of the human condition.

Nowhere in the civilization of the Eurasian world was the objective world seen as more oppressive and alienating. We are affected not only by the afflictions of the external world, but even more by the inner limitations of our own being (this worldview was ultimately accepted by the Aryans).

(Read more here)

right use of metaphors

metaphor is an important tool of worldmaking. a metaphor is an analogy. the Greek (μεταφορά) metaphorá means "transfer," to "carry over." a metaphor is more forceful (active) than an analogy, because metaphor asserts two things are alike, whereas analogy implies a difference.

metaphor has powerful cognitive binding.

miracles? myths? all metaphors. if we see it that way, it helps see the world as a construction.

for instance, imagine thoughts as autonomous agents, with posture and dignity (i.e, they understand their place and time). they are produced by our brains, but they have a sort of independent existence.

was zero discovered or invented?

by our constant reevaluations, given newer contexts, metaphorization helps enhancing our world.

why is this helpful? imagine a new violin. the sound of a new violin is pretty dull. it needs playing. the playing "cures" the wood. after years of playing, the inside (resonance box) becomes aware!

back to eastern philosophy: in the taittiriya upanishad the body is presented as the first of many layers that surround the human personality, each less physical than the one before. like an onion. as one peels layers upon layers, one gets more subtle, more independent and more dependent. more particular and yet, more general.

the core is the atman. the ONE.

w'll be looking at this metaphor for some time.

environing nature with a little help from poetry

brahman is nature,

nature is everything there is

man is nature and brahman.

but man destroys nature

so, man  destroys himself

did man learned from brahman?

for IT being nature destroys nature and man

thus, brahman destroys itself

what's the riddle?

we cannot lie to ourselves pretending that we live in this safety tiny isle outside the relationship of the oneness of nature.

nature is everything there is. everything.

a more honest relationship between human & nature means recognizing that we are also nature.

what nature? do we even know how to look around? do we really see nature or do we see ourselves outside?

i propose environing as learning to weave one-with-another. let's begin with understanding what's difficult.

the so called unpleasant & unsightly in nature. the different, the awkward, unattractive, the queer. people are definitely afraid of the ugly duck.

or the frightful (the putrid smell of the marshes, abandoned animal carcasses in the countryside, sulfide vapors coming up from the earth's bowels. and death?

lord byron (who is not afraid of death) has this to say:

The world was void,

The populous and the powerful was a lump,

Seasonless, herbless, treeless, manless, lifeless,

A lump of death, a chaos of hard clay.

The rivers, lakes, and ocean stood still,

And nothing stirred within their silent depths;

Ships sailorless lay rotting on the sea,

And their masts fell down piecemeal; as they dropp'd

They slept on the abyss without a surge

The waves were dead; the tides were in their grave,

The moon their mistress had expired before;

The winds were withered in the stagnant air,

And the clouds perish'd; Darkness had no need

Of aid from them. She was the universe.

or baudelaire, in fleurs du mal:

Je veux dormir! dormir plutôt que vivre!
Dans un sommeil aussi doux que la mort,
J'étalerai mes baisers sans remords
Sur ton beau corps poli comme le cuivre.

I wish to sleep! to sleep rather than live!
In a slumber doubtful as death,
I shall remorselessly cover with my kisses
Your copper-like polished body.

how about insects (our misunderstood enemies?). let's begin with ants, perhaps one of the smartest and most sociable insect. roaches? we each have our own critter-phobias.

why this insistence of looking at the ugly?  if we want to comprehend nature we must learn how really to look at the whole of it. 

suggested homework for all of us: on our way home let's embrace and kiss a tree! 

feel its trunk, passive ebullient energy. now think of sending a good karma throughout the universe. not to your friend, sister, pet, remembrance. go fly high.  

to the universe!      

PHI 2070 Eastern Philosophy Syllabus (in process)

illustration by RLon

Alfredo Triff, Ph.D.
Room 3604-37
Tel. 305.237.7554
E-mail: atriff@mdc.edu
Office Hours: Posted
Text: My own handouts + Upanishads, Baghavadgita, Dhamapada, Analects, Lao-Tzu, I Ching, etc.

Introduction

Phi 2070, or Eastern Philosophy consists of a survey of the different philosophical systems from India & China, plus the development of Zen Buddhism in the Far East.

In the East, philosophy is a way of life. This does not mean that our Western ideas of truth, reason and logic are not pursued in the East. Perhaps the most important characteristic of eastern philosophy is the awareness of the unity and mutual interrelation of all things and events, the experience of all phenomena in the universe as manifestations of a basic oneness.

Goals

To become familiar with historical and contemporary trends in the philosophies of the East. We take a look at the cosmogony, epistemology, metaphysics and ethics of these systems. The perennial question: Can we become better by absorbing these teachings?

Evaluation

1. Grades: A, B and C stand for outstanding, good and average respectively. D is below average. F means not enough work to justify credit for the course.
2. Testing: There are 3 tests, which count for about 70% of the final grade. I will let you know the material to be tested a week in advance. Tests are simple: fill-in the blanks kind of questions.
3. Posting: weekly 150-word-comments to different weekly posts on this blog (for a 20% of the final grade). These comments are important. They allow us to ponder the issues more specifically and expanding beyond the class time. Your comments are discussed in the following class and so on.
4. Participation: The remaining 10% is for class participation (this breakdown reflects a qualitative approximation).
5. Attendance: Two unexcused absences are permitted. Each unexcused absence thereafter will lower the participation grade by half a letter. Missing quizzes must be justified by a doctor's note or the equivalent. Please, send me an email if you have a problem, suggestion, etc.

Policies

1. We expect a minimum of class demeanor. Courtesy and respect are important. 2. In Philosophy discussions are essential. Be ready to share your point of view without any fear. As long as you are respectful and empathetic you can say what you want. After you talk, listen.

CALENDAR

GREAT PHILOSOPHIES OF INDIA

Weeks 1-3: Hinduism 

Weeks 4-5: Jainism 

Weeks 6-7: Yoga

Weeks 8-9: Buddhism 

Mid-term on philosophies of India.

GREAT PHILOSOPHIES OF CHINA & JAPAN

Weeks 10-11: Confucianism 

Weeks 12-13:Taoism 

Week 13: The Yin-yang School

Weeks 14-16: Zen 

Final Exam

Final Exam Topics

Buddhism:

The Four Noble Truths: 1- The truth of misery, 2- the truth that misery originates from the craving for pleasure, 3- the truth that this craving for pleasure can be eliminated (controlled), 4- the truth that this elimination is the result of a method that must be followed:

Eightfold Path: 1- The right views, 2- right aspirations, 3- right speech, 4- right conduct, 5- right livelihood, 6- right effort, 7- right mindfulness, and 8- right meditational attainment.

Dharma: cosmic law, duty, also the teaching of Buddha.  

Karma: The principle of causality,

Nirvana: same as moksha: liberation.

Confucianism

1- T’ien (or heaven) is purposive, the master of all things. T'ien is immanent: “Heaven sees through the eyes of the people, Heavens listens through the ears of the people.” Not necessarily anthropomorphic but anthropogenic, T'ien is embodied in the people and exemplified by the people. Heaven is a principle and that relates to human as that of part/whole relationship. 

2- Jen (also pronounced as “ren” means indistinctly, altruism, humanity and fairness and appears more than 100 times in the Analects. Jen requires compassion. 

Zhong-Yong: the Doctrine of the Mean = centrality = not to be “one-sided.” It doesn't mean just being in the middle regardless of context. The idea is to stay between two vices, not between excellence and vice. “Excess is as bad as deficiency.” (A, 20:1). Confucius defines it as: “Do not impose to others what you don't want,” the negative form of the Golden Rule. “If you want to establish yourself, establish others. If you want to promote yourself, promote others.” To be able to apply the golden rule one has to follow Shu. 

4- Shu, means to be empathetic, i.e., to be able to understand the circumstances. Shu needs... 

5- Xue or learning. It means a stronger sense of affecting oneself by improving one’s sensitivity, understanding or ability. With xue one appropriates what’s learned, a process of becoming transforming.

6- Si, means reflecting. “Learning without Si, one will be perplexed, thinking (Si) without learning, one will be in peril.” (A, 2:15). 

7- Li which is the idea of ritual. Li can be seen as the embodiment of refinement that rules one’s life. If jen is the internal quality that makes a person an authentic person, then li is the body of external behavior that allows jen to be manifested and applied publicly. When li is properly performed, it becomes "yi,” a word that can be translated as righteousness. Li provides the fabric of social order. It’s the proper social behavior of a person embedded in a community of equals. Li is also a vital constituent of education: Humans are like raw materials, they need to be carved, chiseled, grounded and polished to become authentic individuals. By doing li one learns and instills oneself in the practice of li. 

Taoism

1- Tao (the Way) is the ONE. Natural, eternal, spontaneous, nameless and indescribable. 

Lao Tzu assumes the YING YANG principle. Yang is the cosmic energy of Heaven, male, aggression, firmness and brightness. Ying is the cosmic energy of earth, a female element that is receptive, yielding and dark. Harmony in nature is achieved through these two cosmic energies. They are both equally important. 

2- Being/Non-being, meaning the dialectic aspect of the universe. It's duck-rabbit. The second part of the dichotomy is referred to as Wuji (limitless, infinite). It's the ultimate nothingness. 

Know whiteness, Maintain blackness, and be a model for all under heaven. By being a model for all under heaven, Eternal integrity will not err. If eternal integrity does not err, You will return to infinity. 

3- Cycles: Tao moves in cycles. But the life cycle is an unchanging truth. While everything in nature and all sentient beings follow their respective cycles, so do worldly events. The main lesson here is that there is no rule by which one can foresee the future. Beware of Black Swans!

4- If a person shows Tao, he/she has applied Te (virtue). The ideal life for the individual and the ideal order for society and government are based on and guided by it. Te = harmony with your milieu, thus the universe.   

One who understand the the dominating character of the male yet keeps to the passive nature of the female, behaves properly. 

Te "produces but does not possess, cares but does not control; it leads but does not subjugate." 

5- Tao has a 5-point method: 

a- Simplicity: "less is more"
"less" here is not deficient, or lacking, or reduced. It's the best possible less: the just less that makes it happen.   

b- Spontaneity or tzu-yan: "blaze the trail not often followed" 
Even at the verge of erring, err honestly.  

c- Tranquility: "moon illumines the crystal blue water" 
The quiet horizon amidst the noise. Levelheadedness in crisis.  

d- Flexibility: "be a blade of grass" 
Dare let the weather lead.  

e- Non-action or wu-wei: Because of its importance, I intend to explain wu-wei in more detail in my next post.

Zen

1- Talking silence (Dogen):

"Avoid unnecessary words.
Speak with your mind.
Read people’s minds."

2- Being a fool (Master Ikkyu):

"How to reach out?"
Listen… ask.
"How can I obtain wisdom?"
Be a fool.
....

"What is Zen?
Nothing special."

A monk asked Ummon: "What is Buddha?" Ummon answered him: "Dried shit."
....
3- Gentle Face (Shin-Hiu)

"Gentle face means a happy spirit,
Let people know it.
Let people see it.
What if they resent it?
Since they need it, they will come to love it."

4- Compelling mind (Ryokan)

"The compelling mind is peaceful."
....

"How can I feel my mind?
Look at the mountain…"
.....

"Read minds and look at the mountains.".....

"Beathe with your mind and think with your heart!"

5- Cultivate Poetry (the koan as a device for enlightenment)*

Language is evoked by the present occasion itself; it is not merely a mapping of the present in terms of learned structures. thus, language has more of a poetic than a discursive dimension. poetry proper is never merely a higher mode of everyday language. it's rather the reverse: everyday language is a forgotten and therefore used-up poem, from which there hardly resounds a call any longer.

6- Doing Nothing

"Before enlightenment; chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment; chop wood, carry water."

"When you seek it, you cannot find it."

"After enlightenment, the laundry."

Bodhidharma and the great hall of mirrors

Illustration by Clay Hickson, via Juxtapoz

MANY roads lead to the Path, but basically there are only two: reason and practice.

To enter by reason means to realize the essence through instruction and to believe that all living things share the same true nature, which isn’t apparent because it’s shrouded by sensation and delusion. Those who turn from delusion back to reality, who meditate on walls,’ the absence of self and other, the oneness of mortal and sage, and who remain unmoved even by scriptures are in complete and unspoken agreement with reason.

Without moving, without effort, they (we all) enter, we say, by reason.

To enter by practice refers to four practices:

Suffering injustice,

adapting to conditions,

seeking nothing, and

practicing the Dharma.

First, suffering injustice. When those who search for the Path encounter adversity, they should think to themselves: "In Countless ages gone by, I’ve turned from the essential to the trivial and wandered through all manner of existence, often angry without cause and guilty of numberless transgressions.

Second, adapting to conditions. I say, be a blade of grass.

Third, seeking nothing. People of this world are deluded. They’re always longing for something-always, in a word, seeking. The wise wake up. They choose reason over custom. They fix their minds on the sublime and let their bodies change with the seasons. All phenomena are empty. They contain nothing worth desiring. Calamity forever alternates with Prosperity!

To dwell in the three realms is to dwell in a burning house. To have a body is to suffer. Does anyone with a body has peace? The more reason to have it! Those who understand this detach themselves from all they have and stop imagining or seeking. The sutras say, To seek is to suffer.

The Way:

The Way is wordless. Words are illusions. They’re no different from things that appear in your dreams at night, be they palaces or carriages, forested parks or lakeside ‘lions. Don’t conceive any delight for such things. Don’t cling to appearances, and you’ll break through all barriers.

Your real body is pure and impervious. But you’re unaware of it. And because of this you suffer karma in vain. Wherever you find delight, you find bondage. Feel it. But once you awaken to your original body and mind," you’re no longer bound by attachments.

Using the mind to look for reality is delusion. Not using the mind to took for reality is awareness.

Freeing oneself from words is liberation. No appearance of the mind is the other shore.

Aware:

When you’re deluded, this shore exists. When you wake tip, it doesn’t exist. Mortals stay on this shore. But those who discover the greatest of all vehicles stay on neither this shore nor the other shore. They’re able to leave both shores.

Delusion means mortality. Awareness means Buddhahood. They’re not the same. And they’re not different.

When we’re deluded there’s a world to escape. When we’re aware, there’s nothing to escape.

Limit of paradox:

If you use your mind to study reality, you won’t understand either your mind or reality.

If you study reality without using your mind, you’ll understand both.

Those who don’t understand don’t understand understanding. And those who understand, understand not understanding.

People capable of true vision know that the mind is empty. They transcend both understanding and not understanding. The absence of both understanding and not understanding is true understanding

When you don’t understand, your wrong. When you understand, you re not wrong. This is because the nature of wrong is empty. When you don’t understand right seems wrong. When you understand, wrong isn’t wrong, because wrong doesn’t exist.

The sutras say, Nothing has a nature of its own.

Act. 

Don’t question. When you question, you’re wrong. Wrong is the result of questioning.

zen action = zen person: questioning = response

How does one think about not-thinking? The Master replied, "Without thinking."

without-thinking?

what this means is that context determines character. part of that context is the questioner's state of mind.

the master replies to the student's question rather than the student's question.

if a student reveals a nihilistic attitude, the master might say there is an essence to the person. if the student is bound to categories, the master might say there is no essence to the person. in this way, the master can more powerfully enter into the self-constituting of the student's own experiential flow (we always carry our baggage). by seeing the student's perspective (empathy), the master can modify that perspective as needed. thus, zen strives to return to the point at which experience, including thought, initially occurs. this emphasis on without-thinking is what is distinctive in the zen understanding of the person. 

zen follows the nay of thought.

heidegger helps here:  Das Fragen ist die Frömmigkeit des Denkens.

the zen context of a person is mu or "nothingness." 

through mu the student achieves personal-meaning. at the most basic, it means (hishiryô) without-thinking. at first, it may seem odd to regard hishiryô as a relationship.

in zen situations, however, personhood is grounded in without-thinking rather than thinking. so there is necessarily a gap between the zen buddhist's own without-thinking experience of relationships and an outside observer's objectified, thinking characterization of them. this is the essence of anatman.

in a sense the zen buddhist does not have a different meaning in each situation. it's like mr. X with different roles during the day: father, driver, student, cook, etc. 

a person doesn't have meaning or relationships; rather, a person achieves meaning through relationships. 

in the words of taoist zhuangtzi:

If you talk in a worthy manner, you can talk all day long and it will pertain to the Way. But if you talk in an unworthy manner, you can talk all day long and it will pertain to mere things. Tao and things—neither words nor silence are worthy of expressing it. Not to talk & not to be silent—this is the highest form of debate.

let's go tao with tao

kusta saksi, via juxtapoz

sorry, kids, this is a little bit late, but still in time for comments by next tuesday??

from our last discussion, there were different points brought up by pedro's intense but honest exploration of truth. i tried to respond to some of his points straight from the tao te ching. 

wu-wei: to yield is to come back again. 

this is deep: what lao-tzu suggests is that if "acting" means a voluntaristic approach to life, we'll be up for a stringent surprise. simply put: not all our plans bring fruit, the more reasons to yield. perplexity reigns! the process doesn't disappear: it comes back again and again multifariously! 

wu-wei also implies the ability not to "give up," but to "give forth," a mental flexibility. it means as cristopher once said "to be in tune" with tao. 

what is tao? nature doesn't have to insist.

i know, too poetic. too abstract. but nature IS poetic. the tao te ching communicates this through and through. 

being in tune with tao yields te:

te: with things, plans, projects? be a parent not a possessor, attendant, not master.

cycles: How can a man's life keeps its course if he will not let it flow?

as per pedro's suggestion: do you want to address our discussion of Bushido? 

go ahead!

sun tzu's the art of war

one of the most important treatises on war happens to be influenced by taoist principles. how come?

Lao Tzu

Lao-tzu was a native of Ch'ü-jen, a village in the state of Ch'u, which corresponds to the modern Lu-yi in the eastern part of Honan Province. 
He was appointed to the office of shih at the royal court of the Chou dynasty (c. 1111-255 BC). Though shih means "historian," in ancient China the shih were scholars specializing in matters such as astrology and divination and in charge of sacred books.

Next the historian proceeds to relate a celebrated but questionable meeting of old Tzu with a younger Confucius (551-479 BC). The story has been much discussed by the scholars; it is mentioned elsewhere, but the sources are so inconsistent and contradictory that the meeting seems a mere legend. During the supposed interview, Lao-tzu blamed Confucius for his pride and ambition, and Confucius was so impressed with Lao-tzu that he compared him to a dragon that rises to the sky, riding on the winds and clouds. 

in this painting, confucius presents prince gautama (buddha) to lao tzu 

No less legendary is a voyage of Lao-tzu to the west. Realizing that the Chou dynasty was on the decline, the philosopher departed and came to the Hsien-ku pass, which was the entrance to the state of Ch'in. 

did lao tzu really leave for the west in a water buffalo?

Yin Hsi, the legendary guardian of the pass (kuan-ling), begged him to write a book for him. Thereupon, Lao-tzu wrote a book in two sections of 5,000 characters, in which he set down his ideas about the Tao (the Supreme Principle) and te (virtue): the Tao-te Ching. 

The question of whether there was a historical Lao-tzu has been raised by many scholars, but it is rather an idle one. The Tao-te Ching, as we have it, cannot be the work of a single man; some of its sayings may date from the time of Confucius; others are certainly later; and the book as a whole dates from about 300 BC. Perhaps the name Lao-tzu seems to represent a certain type of sage rather than an individual.

some of you need to retake the midterm. don't leave it for the last minute!

shu, li, zhong yong and the battle now!

early, late earth?

i'd like to stress the importance of li in relation with shu & try to problematize the quadrant of prudence (yan ren) with decisiveness (ming). the answer is zhong-yong. the right balance that best reflects t'ien. as it turns, the only way to achieve zhong-yong is practicing it.

this reflects the chun-tzu. one can read zhong-yong with aristotle glasses: 

in everything that is continuous and divisible it is possible to take more, less, or anequal amount, and that either in terms of the thing itself or relatively to us; and theequal is an intermediate between excess and defect (ethica eudemia, 1106, a 2629)

intermediate between excess and defect, which is why zhu xi, the neo-confucianist master would advise,

"a friend should neither be too close or too remote." (a deep thought)

this middle is zhong-yong. one more thing. zhong-yong has two sides: xing is the internal (thought-driven), while li is external, (behavior-oriented). the problem of unifying the li and xing is exactly the problem of combining and unifying the internal and the external. zhong-yong can be seen as a balance between internal(self)/external(others)-axis intersecting a consensus/community axis. according to confucius, this is how we become political & social individuals. there is no possibility ofjen (virtue) without a community.     
what we learn from confucianism concerning li is that as society, we face a disorientation. rituals have become fetishized. there's a fresh, redeeming possibility for genuine exchange, but it takes to turn the present value of the ritual upside down. 

perhaps in the face of fetishized and stereotyped rituals we have the imperative to create our own lifrom scratch. decisiveness is critical to find transcultural lost symbols, re-inscribing them into new contexts. there is always room for transformation and novelty. our generation is in need of material and spiritual actions-and-reactions. we could help replenish our community with a renewed sense of purpose. in the end this yajna, only a bit different. an offering to our possible best selves. 

we have speculated in class whether we still have time to change things in the world. what if that vision needs to be revised? look at the astronomy and geology of things. the process at work, the flow that moves through things. the history of the world is a history of ghosts: people, traces, remnants scattered, dispersed into geological & historical time. the world is in constant flow. why fighting that? is a doomed planet in the distant future that unpalatable? 

oh, but that's far away.

our task is the present. our deeds belong in this instant, our future is NOW, this dharma in our defective but always perfectible world.

our battle is in this generation!

i am closing this post next wednesday 11pm.

xunzi: justice? revenge?

as per our discussion of the issue of death penalty (and anton's characterization as a form of revenge). take my brief response here to a complex issue as only hinting at the danger or trivializing "pro" or "con" arguments with quick, lapidary statements.   

it all begins with xunzi's advice for government:

If a man comes forward in good faith, treat him according to ritual; if he comes forward in bad faith, meet him with punishment. In this way the two categories will be clearly distinguished, worthy and unworthy men will not be thrown together, and right and wrong will not be confused.

anton asked if xunzi's philosophy authorizes the state to kill as a form of punishment. i said "yes," but it was a tentative assertion that needs justification. this is a legal & political issue. death penalty is as old as the existence of the state. the analysis of right and wrong the political/legal realm is a bit different from the ethical/moral realm. the latter concerns selves and their actions, the former comprises institutions & rules (legislations).

¿what sort of punishment will apply in the case of a murderer who killed his wife and child? (a typical, everyday, murder case).

anton's maximum allowed penalty for the criminal's transgression is life in prison without the possibility of parole.  let's call it abolitionist lemma:

no matter the degree of the murder, the state cannot kill the murderer.

let's set aside the political aspect: if this was a rule, the state would adopt it as an enactment of consensus? (see the diagram above).

of course, there is the much debated issue of "deterrence." granted, capital punishment may not stop capital crimes. but xunzi is not going for a consequentialist argument here. he would be arguing in favor of Zhong-Yong (proper balance, measure).

 the abolitionist's lemma transgresses the very limit it purports defends.

if life was sacrosant, the criminal shouldn't be spared the limit he already trespassed twice.

xunzi would defend justice in the sense of balance or proportionality. there are degrees of severity of punishment for different degrees in mens rea. for example, the 8th amendment proportionality principle, i.e., a minor who commits murder cannot be killed by the state. why? if the deterrent value of capital punishment rests on the assumption that "we are rational beings who think before we act, and then base our actions on a careful calculation of the gains and losses involved," then a teenage offender is unlikely to make this kind of cost-benefit analysis.

adults are a different story and so, the charge of "revenge" comes in.

what's revenge? the infliction of punishment "in return", retaliation. the retaliation part of revenge may seem akin to that of justice, but there is a big difference. it's clear that not all forms of retaliation are fair.

3- revenge cannot possibly cast away these two: spite and vindictiveness & justice cannot be fair and vindictive, it cannot administer fairness our of spite. what makes for the difference is proper measure.

Xunzi's political program

Xunzi is one of the most sophisticated and influential philosophers of China's Warring States period (479–221 B.C.E.). He considered himself a follower of Confucius and was one of the central early figures in the consolidation of what came to be thought of as the Confucian tradition. Xunzi's significance has often been underestimated, with most prominent Confucians since the Song dynasty aligning themselves with his rival Mencius. His writings address topics ranging from economic and military policy, through the justification of traditional authority and institutions, to action theory and the philosophy of language.

Xunzi strong point is his idea of social and political order, he refers to this tradition as li-yi, “rituals and duties.” Traditional rituals and other artificial social forms help transform natural human behavior, so that people refrain from desires that lead to disorder, conforming instead to the Way.

Not unlike Plato's Republic, Xunzi's social system as a whole is overseen by the chun-tzu, guided by a class of erudites that Xunzi referred to as ru. These would be men whose education and social position gave them the perspective and virtue to oversee the myriad particular activities that Xunzi considered necessary for an orderly state. Much of Xunzi's philosophy is based upon a distinction between what is natural or spontaneous and what is a product of human effort.

Xunzi conceives nature as the unchanging context for human action and organization. Human endeavors succeed or fail depending how they respond to this fixed context—not because of any natural advantages or disadvantages. The stability of a society depends on its ability to respond to natural human desires vs. available resources. The key is to strengthen and enrich the state, by providing social and political structures to regulate people's attempts to satisfy their desires and transforming people's characters (see that this is not precisely our libertarian ideal).