Inquiry · “You Are Not Your Thoughts”
The Equality of Things (Qiwulun)
To loosen the grip of fixed, automatic judgments — right/wrong, good/bad, this/that — by seeing that each ‘this’ is someone else’s ‘that’, so the mind can rest at the still centre rather than being pulled into endless taking-of-sides.
In 5 lines: Catch the fixed verdict you’re gripping (“this is wrong / bad / them”). Stand in the other position and find their “this.” See that the labels are relative to a chosen measure, not carved into reality. Stop needing to win; rest at the still axis where this and that stop fighting. Then act from clear seeing, holding your view as a view.
What it is
A perspective-shifting inquiry from Zhuangzi’s pivotal second chapter. We move through the world stamping things “right” and “wrong,” “this” (acceptable, mine, near) and “that” (other, wrong, far) — and then suffer as if those labels were carved into reality.
Zhuangzi’s insight: every “this” is somebody’s “that,” and every “that” is somebody else’s “this.” Right and wrong, beauty and ugliness, big and small are relative to a standpoint, not properties baked into the event.
Seeing this does not make you stupid or indifferent; it lets you step off the endless seesaw of taking sides and rest at what he calls the axis of the Dao — the still hub of a turning wheel, from which all the rim-positions can be seen without being grabbed by any one of them.
As a practice it is cognitive de-fusion: prying your mind loose from its sticky verdicts.
The Method
Zhuangzi argues by example and paradox; rendered as a workable inquiry:
- Catch the verdict. Notice a fixed judgment you are holding — “this is bad / wrong / unfair / they are the problem.” Name it plainly. This is the “this” you are clinging to.
- Find the other standpoint. Zhuangzi: each thing is both “that” and “this” depending on where you stand. Deliberately occupy the other position: from their angle, what looks right? What is their “this”? Hold both as real standpoints, not to decide who wins, but to feel the verdict loosen.
- See the pair as relative, not absolute. “Viewed from the standpoint of the Dao, a beam and a pillar are identical; so are ugliness and beauty, greatness and wickedness.” Notice that big/small, good/bad, success/failure only exist against a chosen measure. Change the measure and the label flips.
- Stop trying to win the argument. Zhuangzi mocks the endless dispute of the logicians: if you and I argue and you win, are you therefore right? A third person can’t settle it without their own bias. The aim is not to prove your “this”; it is to stop being run by the need to.
- Find the axis (道樞). Let go of clinging to either side and rest at the hub: “When ‘this’ and ‘that’ no longer find their opposites, that is the axis of the Dao.” From the still centre you can respond to each situation freshly, “letting it rest in the light of what is,” instead of forcing it into a pre-set verdict.
- Re-enter and act, lightly. You still choose, still discern, still act — but now the action comes from clear seeing rather than from reflexive side-taking, and you hold your own view as a view, not the truth. (Sourcing note: quoted phrases follow Giles’ public-domain translation; this is a faithful description, not a reproduction of the chapter.)
Source & Lineage
Zhuangzi (Zhuang Zhou, c. 369–286 BCE) is, with Laozi, a founder of philosophical Daoism. Chapter 2, Qiwulun (“On the Equality / Sorting Out of Things”), is his most philosophically dense — a sustained dismantling of fixed distinctions and of the disputing “schools” of his day (notably the logicians around Huizi, his friend and sparring partner).
The chapter’s perspectivism fed Chan/Zen’s distrust of conceptual labels and the nondual “neither this nor that” current.
The Traditions' versions
The same move — un-stick the mind from its automatic verdicts; hold judgments as standpoints, not facts — recurs widely: - Liezi: equanimity toward change — meeting events without the reflexive good/bad verdict.
- Byron Katie’s The Work — questioning the stressful thought (“is it true? can you absolutely know?”) and turning it around to its opposite.,
- W.Q. Judge: calmness and impersonality — refusing to be dragged into reactive partisanship.
- Only Love Is Real — meaning is assigned, not found; events are neutral — the truth this practice operationalises.
Common refinements
Sliding into nihilism. “It’s all relative” can become “nothing matters.” Zhuangzi’s point is freedom from compulsive judging, not the abandonment of values, ethics, or discernment.
- Using it to win. Deploying “that’s just your perspective” as a debating weapon re-grips the very side-taking the practice dissolves. The turn is inward.
- Faking the other view. Genuinely inhabit the opposing standpoint; a contemptuous, strawman version doesn’t loosen anything.
- Bypassing real harm. Some “thats” are genuinely unjust. De-fusing from a reactive verdict is to act more clearly, not to excuse abuse or skip protective action.
- Mistaking the axis for indifference. The still centre is alive and responsive, not numb; you still choose — just without being yanked.