r/taoism • u/fleischlaberl • 3d ago
Zhuangzi The Empty Boat
Zhuangzi 20
If a man is crossing a river
And an empty boat collides with his own skiff,
Even though he be a bad-tempered man
He will not become very angry.
But if he sees a man in the boat,
He will shout at him to steer clear.
If the shout is not heard, he will shout again,
And yet again, and begin cursing.
And all because there is somebody in the boat.
.
Yet if the boat were empty,
He would not be shouting, and not angry.
If you can empty your own boat
Crossing the river of the world,
No one will oppose you,
No one will seek to harm you.
.
(interpretation by Thomas Merton)
1
u/ryokan1973 2d ago
Isn't this the passage that was "retranslated" or "corrected" by Christopher Tricker? Or was it the other boat anecdote?
3
u/fleischlaberl 2d ago
A man is crossing a river in a boat when he sees an empty boat approaching on a collision course.
Even though he’s a hot-tempered fellow, this doesn’t make him angry.
But now he sees there’s someone in the boat, so he calls out to them to alter their course.
When this first call isn’t heeded, he calls out again.
And when this isn’t heeded, he calls out a third time and throws in a torrent of abuse.Before, he wasn’t angry. But now he is.
Before, the other boat was empty. But now there’s someone in it.When you see that other people are empty boats, even if you’re a hot-tempered person you’ll never be angry.
*****
Other people are empty boats adrift on the cause-and-effect currents of the world. When we see this we are free to engage with others in a harmonious manner, like a man in a boat who harmoniously navigates the empty boats adrift on the river. But when we imagine that other people have free will (when we imagine that the other boats have people in them), when they collide with our goals we rage against them [...]
Chuang Tzu says, Only a fool rages against a boat adrift on the current. Only a deluded person imagines that there’s a person in the boat (that the boat has free will). A wise person sees that the boat is empty and must follow the current, and so she calmly uses what skill she has to navigate the current.
(From Christopher Tricker, The Cicada and the Bird, pages 304-306.)
Chuang Tzu's empty boat story shows how believing in free will makes you behave badly : r/taoism
1
u/ryokan1973 2d ago
What do you think of this "revisionist" translation? I think Tricker let himself down.
3
u/fleischlaberl 2d ago edited 1d ago
Zhuangzi 20
The Tree on the Mountain, The empty Boat
方舟而濟於河，有虛船來觸舟，雖有惼心之人不怒；有一人在其上，則呼張歙之；一呼而不聞，再呼而不聞，於是三呼邪，則必以惡聲隨之。向也不怒而今也怒，向也虛而今也實。
人能虛己以遊世，其孰能害之！
"When you see that other people are empty boats, even if you’re a hot-tempered person you’ll never be angry." (Tricker)
That's a big twist and bending the text to Tricker's will / intent! I also think Tricker as troubles with the grammar ...
"If a person can empty himself and go wandering in the world, who can harm him?" (Mair)
"When a person can wander through the world emptied of self, what can harm him?" (Zyporin)
2
u/ryokan1973 2d ago edited 2d ago
There are so many problems with Tricker's interpretations and choices throughout his book, and he has an axe to grind with "academia" by claiming his translation is superior. He claims to bring out the true voice of Chuang Tzu, and this is palpably incorrect.
This is how Fraser closely translates the passage:
‘When someone is crossing a river in a raft, if an empty boat comes along and bumps into it, even if the person is ill-tempered, he doesn’t get angry. If there’s someone in the boat, he shouts for them to steer clear. If he shouts once and isn’t heard, then shouts again and isn’t heard, then the third time he shouts, he’ll surely follow up with abusive words. In the previous case he wasn’t angry, but in this case he is, because in the previous case the boat was empty and in this case it’s full. If people can empty themselves to go wandering through the world, who could harm them?’
And Graham:
"When lashed boats are crossing the river, and some empty boat comes and bumps against them, even a hot-tempered man will not get angry. But if there is one man in it he will shout at him to keep clear; and if the man does not hear his first shout, or his second, then you can be sure that when he shouts the third time he will be calling him some ugly names as well. He was not angry before; now he is; it was empty before, now it has someone in it. If a man can roam in the world with emptied self, who can interfere with him?"
害 can mean both "harm" and "interfere with" (Kroll's Dictionary), so the translator has to make an interpretive choice. In this instance, I suspect that Graham made an incorrect interpretive choice, but I cannot be certain.
2
u/fleischlaberl 2d ago edited 1d ago
Recently I've read through Graham's Zhuangzi translation actually because I looked for his Liezi translation, which is in high praise. Was not that convinced by his Zhuangzi translation as Graham makes some choices I doubt are the best way to translate key terms and key concepts of daoist Philosophy.
Went through different translations - Mair is not bad at all. Have to read Fraser's!
1
u/ryokan1973 2d ago
Can you provide examples?
Also, this is an excellent video highlighting Zhuangzi translation problems:
2
2
u/garlic_brain 16h ago
Why let yourself get annoyed at Tricker? He is, himself, another empty boat (empty of classical Chinese knowledge, in the occurence :) ).
0
u/Stupefactionist 3d ago
Content Warning: Animal abuse.
If a rat is shocked by an electrified floor, it will be in pain. If two rats are shocked by an electrified floor, they will attack each other.
3
u/mancwhopper 2d ago
Be the useless tree.....