I believe that Chuang Tzu is one of the broad foundation stones upon which the edifice of Zen stands. What joy it is to read his words, and then forget them, and understand. A mighty tree, indeed.
Great tangents regarding the views of modern society on the degree of philosophy. I was searching for this story of the useless tree because of Alan Watts but I didn't find it . Now thanks to you i know it now ⭐⭐⭐⭐.
Very nice commentary. I like the distinction you make between 用 and 為. You're right that once some has been 用 it is usually exhausted/destroyed in the service of achieving ulterior aim (utility), where as for something to 為 "serve as" or "serve in the capacity of," means that the intrinsic nature of that thing does not change. A tree as a temple guardian is still a tree, a tree as a shade-provider is still a tree, and a tree as bird-habitat is still a tree. And the tree could not really carry out any of those roles if its intrinsic value and material integrity were not maintained. Great job!
This video presents very thought-provoking ideas in an easily digestible format! Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts and research on this story. Indeed, "use" is relative to each individual. What seems useful to one person, may seem useless to another. What is really fascinating, though, is that sometimes, we have no idea about the use of something seemingly useless. The example of how the study of the arts and philosophy is usually deemed as useless, is a wonderful example of this. The thought pattern is that if an activity doesn't seem to serve any "practical benefits" to the economy, then it must be useless. But why is that? Are these seemingly useless things actually useless when you think about it? What about the inherent worth of the individual? Does that not matter? But what is the economy, if not something driven by people?
I heard this story elsewhere and it's really good for people who grew up in places like mining towns where whatever sense of intrinsic value that people may have tends to be criticized. On a side note, lately I've been appreciating old theater devices like soliloquies or how Anne Hall would go into surreal scenes where you barely notice the transition, but it admits that it's theater....and the part where the tree came to him in a dream could actually be a part of a one act play because what the tree says is scene worthy, and the entire story could make an excellent one act play.
Coming back to this almost a year later. First, still a great video. Second, I wonder if there is too stark a dichotomy drawn between utility to others versus utility to oneself? Or, in general, to the notion of utility itself (as after all, the tree is still useful to itself)?
20:19 my translation would be “"Be secretive (on this)! Don't talk about it! it just casually dwells itself in the shrine, and those who don't understand its true value have already criticize it (like you). were it not served as a sacred tree, I am afraid it has already been chopped down. What's more, the approach it took to conserve itself is mysterious, if you judge it with moral standards, it will be far from the point. " In our world with everyone objectifying and objectified, the tree is actually helpless. it is not sacred, it is just a survivor of human everlasting objectification of the world. to conserve your "vitality" and protect yourself from the utility, you have to employ an unusual approach, which goes far beyond the norms of society.
You make really good videos. I genuinely appreciate them and they are much higher quality than I would expect looking at the views. I wish there was a platform out there for content creators like you, since youtube has a smaller audience for these kinds of videos. Anyways one last question: are you Chinese? I would make such an assumption due to some of your chinese-related videos. Hope you do well in college (looking at these videos I would assume you are doing pretty well)!
Great video! as a devoted Chinese reader of Zhuangzi here are some thoughts:1. 13:53 "奈何哉其相物也”， means“why should we objectify each other” , we subconsciously seek the utility of others(and ourselves) when we objectify them(and also ourselves). 2. 13:53 散” literally means “scattered”， as a tree in scatter form has no big hunk and thus is useless 。“散木” may be paraphrased as “useless tree”， however “散人” is more a metaphor, and may be paraphrased as “a person without a well-developed mind or thought”. the person cannot enjoy longevity as the tree because he has some utility to the society(carpenter), which is proof of this stupidity. you can contact me if you have an interest related to Zhuangzi, I will be more than glad to discuss it. your perspective on Zhuangzi is very interesting.
There is a second story in the Zhuangzi on the same problem with the opposite conclusion: being useless with no redeeming qualities puts you first in line for the chopping board.
What a wonderful video!! 🤩🤩😍Thank you for sharing this. It is very interesting you focus on the concept of "scattered or diffused". However, I disagree to label Zhuangzi's view as relativism. I think it might be appropriate to label his view as perspectivism because, according to Zhuangzi, whether a tree or anything in that matter, depends on which perspective one is taking!! As you shown quite clearly in this video, whether one is useful to one's family or friends is from the points of view of the family or friends. Being useful to others might be harmful to oneself. A meaningful life is a balance act between being useful to one's family, friends, loved one, or society at large, and being healthy for oneself. I have made a video on perspectivism of Zhuangzi's view in a video. Here is the link for your reference: ua-cam.com/video/rBPJVbCFpmM/v-deo.html
I believe that Chuang Tzu is one of the broad foundation stones upon which the edifice of Zen stands.
What joy it is to read his words, and then forget them, and understand. A mighty tree, indeed.
truly great video in every way. analysis, scripting, delivery, its all great. youre doing this right. thanks.
Great tangents regarding the views of modern society on the degree of philosophy. I was searching for this story of the useless tree because of Alan Watts but I didn't find it . Now thanks to you i know it now ⭐⭐⭐⭐.
Nice! Been waiting for this one great work :)
Very nice commentary. I like the distinction you make between 用 and 為. You're right that once some has been 用 it is usually exhausted/destroyed in the service of achieving ulterior aim (utility), where as for something to 為 "serve as" or "serve in the capacity of," means that the intrinsic nature of that thing does not change. A tree as a temple guardian is still a tree, a tree as a shade-provider is still a tree, and a tree as bird-habitat is still a tree. And the tree could not really carry out any of those roles if its intrinsic value and material integrity were not maintained.
Great job!
Thank you for the eye opening video
I am a Chinese. This introduction is wonderful
So Zhuangzi was the first who made the "they can't use you if you're useless" meme.
Fantastic video as always :)
Awesome channel
Please keep doing what you're doing
i'll forward this to my mum the next time she calls me "冇用“
This video presents very thought-provoking ideas in an easily digestible format! Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts and research on this story.
Indeed, "use" is relative to each individual. What seems useful to one person, may seem useless to another. What is really fascinating, though, is that sometimes, we have no idea about the use of something seemingly useless. The example of how the study of the arts and philosophy is usually deemed as useless, is a wonderful example of this. The thought pattern is that if an activity doesn't seem to serve any "practical benefits" to the economy, then it must be useless. But why is that? Are these seemingly useless things actually useless when you think about it? What about the inherent worth of the individual? Does that not matter? But what is the economy, if not something driven by people?
Love your content. Can't wait to take you out on lunch and discuss, if ever in NYC, hmu.
I heard this story elsewhere and it's really good for people who grew up in places like mining towns where whatever sense of intrinsic value that people may have tends to be criticized. On a side note, lately I've been appreciating old theater devices like soliloquies or how Anne Hall would go into surreal scenes where you barely notice the transition, but it admits that it's theater....and the part where the tree came to him in a dream could actually be a part of a one act play because what the tree says is scene worthy, and the entire story could make an excellent one act play.
I thought, the tree is a metaphor for an enlightened being, or of the ‘absolute’ view, or of the enlightenment itself
Enjoyed the video, great work!
Coming back to this almost a year later. First, still a great video. Second, I wonder if there is too stark a dichotomy drawn between utility to others versus utility to oneself? Or, in general, to the notion of utility itself (as after all, the tree is still useful to itself)?
20:19 my translation would be “"Be secretive (on this)! Don't talk about it! it just casually dwells itself in the shrine, and those who don't understand its true value have already criticize it (like you). were it not served as a sacred tree, I am afraid it has already been chopped down. What's more, the approach it took to conserve itself is mysterious, if you judge it with moral standards, it will be far from the point. " In our world with everyone objectifying and objectified, the tree is actually helpless. it is not sacred, it is just a survivor of human everlasting objectification of the world. to conserve your "vitality" and protect yourself from the utility, you have to employ an unusual approach, which goes far beyond the norms of society.
You make really good videos. I genuinely appreciate them and they are much higher quality than I would expect looking at the views. I wish there was a platform out there for content creators like you, since youtube has a smaller audience for these kinds of videos. Anyways one last question: are you Chinese? I would make such an assumption due to some of your chinese-related videos. Hope you do well in college (looking at these videos I would assume you are doing pretty well)!
Thank you for the kind words! I am not Chinese. I just have a lot of interest in Chinese thought!
Thank you.
Time to get some face tattoos so I can get into heaven 😂
🙏💙☯️
so if you see a twisted and messy tree.. there is a kami living in it? 🤔neat
Great video! as a devoted Chinese reader of Zhuangzi here are some thoughts:1. 13:53 "奈何哉其相物也”， means“why should we objectify each other” , we subconsciously seek the utility of others(and ourselves) when we objectify them(and also ourselves). 2. 13:53 散” literally means “scattered”， as a tree in scatter form has no big hunk and thus is useless 。“散木” may be paraphrased as “useless tree”， however “散人” is more a metaphor, and may be paraphrased as “a person without a well-developed mind or thought”. the person cannot enjoy longevity as the tree because he has some utility to the society(carpenter), which is proof of this stupidity. you can contact me if you have an interest related to Zhuangzi, I will be more than glad to discuss it. your perspective on Zhuangzi is very interesting.
Does Zhuangzi discuss the fact that subjects (trees, people or otherwise) may have an inherent desire to be useful?
No. I am Chinese, i read this book many times and have never find such things.
@@ineverlickyoghurtlid3903 Thank you!
There is a second story in the Zhuangzi on the same problem with the opposite conclusion: being useless with no redeeming qualities puts you first in line for the chopping board.
Oh that's why there is a missing double quote. 11:32
far from being useless, the tree continues to increasingly provide what is needed more than what is desired, oxygen
Most of the oxygen comes from the ocean. From Plankton and from rocks.Trees uses most of the oxygen they produce in their lives.
What a wonderful video!! 🤩🤩😍Thank you for sharing this. It is very interesting you focus on the concept of "scattered or diffused". However, I disagree to label Zhuangzi's view as relativism. I think it might be appropriate to label his view as perspectivism because, according to Zhuangzi, whether a tree or anything in that matter, depends on which perspective one is taking!! As you shown quite clearly in this video, whether one is useful to one's family or friends is from the points of view of the family or friends. Being useful to others might be harmful to oneself. A meaningful life is a balance act between being useful to one's family, friends, loved one, or society at large, and being healthy for oneself. I have made a video on perspectivism of Zhuangzi's view in a video. Here is the link for your reference: ua-cam.com/video/rBPJVbCFpmM/v-deo.html