Huan Zhao Zhuangzi: A New Interpretation of "Zhuangzi's Journey to the Farthest Reach" and "The Doctrine of the Mean"

Author: Shen Shanzeng / Country: Mainland China
Publisher:
Publishing Date: 2002-04-01
Features: The catalog marked with an asterisk (), where "Fenghe Dao" is above and "Chi" is below, used to read some commentaries on Buddhist scriptures, which often began with an explanation of the title and then elaborated extensively from general to specific, word by word, making it very cumbersome. One title could be made into a doctoral dissertation. Therefore, when I noted "The Joy of Freedom" (Xiaoyou You), there was no title explanation. But when I actually noted it, I found that directly diving into the text was not necessarily effective. Ancient scholars explained scriptures starting from the title, and there was a reason for this. Especially this time, when I changed my approach and adopted a serious tone to comment on the Zhuangzi, after careful consideration, I still chose this old path, which was the most direct way to success. Because starting from the title explanation, at least there are three benefits. First, it can be seen that the Zhuangzi is a book carefully written by the author, not compiled by later scholars. According to the Records of the Han Dynasty·Bibliography, the Zhuangzi originally had fifty-two chapters. By the time of Sima Biao's commentary in the Jin Dynasty, there were seven inner chapters, twenty-eight outer chapters, fourteen miscellaneous chapters, and three commentaries, totaling fifty-two chapters. The earliest surviving commentary—the Guo Xiang edition—only has seven inner chapters, fifteen outer chapters, eleven miscellaneous chapters, and three commentaries, totaling thirty-three chapters. The nineteen missing chapters were not because Guo Xiang did not see them but because he deemed them not written by Zhuangzi and harmful to the image of the great Zhuangzi, so he removed them. During the Jin Dynasty, opinions differed widely on which of the fifty-two chapters were written by Zhuangzi, which were compiled by later scholars, and which were forged by unscrupulous people in Zhuangzi's name. However, there was one thing they all agreed on: the seven inner chapters were definitely written by Zhuangzi himself, meticulously crafted word by word, not compiled from his recorded speeches. The reason for this consensus is that the titles of the seven chapters are all three characters long, and these three characters were clearly summarized based on the central idea of each chapter; unlike the outer and miscellaneous chapters, which took two or three characters from the beginning of the chapter as titles. The title method of the outer and miscellaneous chapters completely followed the style of the Analects. The Analects was compiled by later scholars, so various scholars suspected that some or even all of the outer and miscellaneous chapters were also compiled by later scholars. But no matter what, it can be proven that the inner chapters were written by Zhuangzi himself. However, even in modern times, some people still questioned this. Qi Sihe said in the "Preface" to The Zhuangzi Index: "As for the seven inner chapters, all scholars have believed them to be written by Zhuangzi himself, with few doubts. Cheng Xuanying's preface states: 'The inner chapters are profound, so separate titles were established outside the chapters. The outer chapters took two or three characters from the beginning as titles. Therefore, Chen Jingyuan said: "The titles of the seven inner chapters were determined by Zhuangzi." Now, whether the titles of the seven inner chapters were set by Zhuangzi himself is difficult to say, but their writing style is clearly different from the outer and miscellaneous chapters. Even Liang Ren Gong, who was fond of debating ancient texts, said: 'The inner chapters were written by Zhuangzi himself, without any doubt.' However, I noticed in the On the Equality of Things that it mentions: 'Zhaowen played the drum, Shi Kuang wielded the staff, Hui Shi leaned on the wu tree, the three of them were almost wise. Therefore, they are recorded in the later years.' Zhuangzi was a friend of Hui Shi. If this chapter was indeed written by Zhuangzi, how could he list Hui Shi among the ancient sages? Moreover, the Joy of Freedom, On the Equality of Things, De Chong Fu, and other chapters all append anecdotes about Zhuangzi at the end, which does not seem like something Zhuangzi would write himself. Furthermore, from the perspective of writing style, there were no private writings before the Warring States period, as Zhang Xuecheng pointed out. The earliest private writings, such as the Analects and the Mencius, used the Q&A format, likely recorded by his disciples and later scholars. Later scholars often divided them into chapters for study, naming them with two or three characters from the beginning. If one first sets a title and then writes an argument, like the Xunzi, the Lüshi Chunqiu, and the Han Feizi, that was something that happened in the late Warring States period. Therefore, the seven inner chapters were likely written by later scholars, not necessarily by Zhuangzi himself?" I quote Qi Sihe's remarks here because I feel they typify a certain scholarly habit: making doubt the goal. This habit often points out that passages that do not align with their views were forged by later scholars, and even a few clues are enough to declare the entire book a forgery. I often encounter this when reading commentaries on the Zhuangzi and other pre-Qin philosophers. At first, I was quite awed by such scholars because their authoritative tone made it seem as if you couldn't disagree with them. Reading their arguments, I often felt fortunate that without their sharp eyes, I might have been deceived by a "fake Zhuangzi" and sold out unknowingly, which would have been dangerous. Later, following their guidance, I found Zhuangzi's words becoming increasingly confusing, and I realized something was wrong. After much effort, I decided to ignore these authorities and seek another path to understand the Zhuangzi. Only when I finally emerged from their complex web of arguments did I approach the true Zhuangzi, and I realized that these authoritative opinions, apart from deliberate distortion, were mostly based on their limited perspectives and self-righteous pronouncements. Taking Qi Sihe's three reasons for doubting that the inner chapters were written by Zhuangzi, none of them hold much weight. First, Zhuangzi and Hui Shi were friends, so how could he list Hui Shi among the "ancient sages"? From the Zhuangzi, it is clear that they were indeed friends, but in the Xu Wugui chapter, Zhuangzi visits Hui Shi's tomb and expresses heartfelt sorrow. Therefore, in the On the Equality of Things, Zhuangzi calls Hui Shi, Zhaowen, and Shi Kuang "all at their peak, so they are recorded in the later years." This is entirely possible. Why couldn't Zhuangzi start writing after Hui Shi's death? Moreover, after Hui Shi's death, Zhuangzi lost his debating partner and turned his passion for seeking the Dao into waves of ink. This is also logical. As for saying Zhuangzi "listed Hui Shi among the ancient sages," that is Qi Sihe's misunderstanding. According to the various commentaries on the Zhuangzi I have read, none have understood why Zhuangzi listed Zhaowen, Shi Kuang, and Hui Shi together in this passage. Qi Sihe assumes their common point is "sage," but in fact, it has nothing to do with "sage." The actual common point is something I will explain in detail when I come to it. Additionally, it should be noted that "sage" is a wild guess, let alone "ancient sage." Qi Sihe's question has fallen flat. In Zhuangzi's time, the theory of yin and yang and the five elements had just begun to emerge and had not yet developed into a complex theoretical system. Therefore, the six opinions that follow are clearly not Zhuangzi's "six qi." From Zhuangzi's brief mention of "six qi" without any explanation, this "six qi" should have been a popular concept at the time. Examining it, only Sima Biao's explanation is most plausible. This explanation is supported by the words of Yi He in the Zuo Zhuan·First Year of Zhao, which can be used as evidence. The Zhuangzi also mentions "six qi" in the On Self-Restraint: "Yun Jiang said: 'The qi of the heavens is not harmonious, the qi of the earth is stagnant, the six qi are not balanced, and the four seasons are not in rhythm. Now, I wish to combine the essence of the six qi to nourish all living things. How should I do it?" From this passage, it can be seen that "six qi" are not "heavenly qi" and "earthly qi," so Li Yi and Wang Yi's inclusion of "heavenly blue" and "earthly yellow" in the "six qi" is incorrect. However, with "heavenly qi" and "earthly qi" before and "four seasons" after, it is clear that "six qi" are also related to climate, so the visible astronomical and climatic changes like "yin, yang, wind, rain, darkness, and brightness" are also appropriate content for "six qi." From this passage, it can be seen that ancient people had several different classification methods for astronomical and climatic phenomena. "Heavenly qi" and "earthly qi" is one method, emphasizing the vastness of space and its nurturing of all things. "Four seasons" is another method, emphasizing periodic changes. "Six qi" is yet another classification, emphasizing the differences in phenomena. "Heaven and earth" emphasize fundamental aspects, "four seasons" emphasize periodicity, and "six qi" emphasize the characteristics of phenomena. "Heaven and earth" are the substance, "four seasons" are the constant (i.e., the necessary manifestation of the substance), and "six qi" are the application (the accidental manifestation of the substance, though behind the accident lies the inevitable, and the accidental is constrained by the inevitable, but it is not easily visible as a pattern, like a willful act). Therefore, after "riding the correctness of heaven and earth," it cannot be said that "riding the of the six qi," but only "riding the of the six qi." These two clauses, in Buddhist terms, "riding the correctness of heaven and earth" is, or "seeing the mind and nature," as the Chan sect says, or "womb of wisdom" and "lotus treasury" as the Esoteric sect says. "Riding the of the six qi" is, or "manifesting the Dharma to save all beings," as the Esoteric sect says, or "" and "." If one must add "four seasons," it can only be "passing through the changes of the four seasons." In the "six qi," "yin and yang" and "darkness and brightness" can transform each other, "wind and rain" complement each other but do not necessarily transform each other, and there is no necessary connection between "yin and yang," "wind and rain," and "darkness and brightness." Therefore, this "" can only be interpreted as "distinguishing," not "changing." Only by "riding the correctness of heaven and earth" can one "ride the of the six qi." The former is a necessary condition, and the latter is a possible result. And these two together constitute the necessary condition for "roaming the heavens." "Roaming the infinite" is Zhuangzi's goal, the ideal realm of enlightenment, and this is "freedom." Only those who achieve "freedom" can be called "the supreme person." The supreme person has proven the great Dao, has achieved great use, and has attained great freedom. How could someone like this be limited by any conditions? "What does he rely on?" "Rely" is also an important concept in Zhuangzi's lexical system. Shuowen Jiezi states: "Rely, to wait." Duan Yucai notes: "Today, people say 'wait.'" From the original meaning of "waiting," it extends to "rely on, depend on." Because "waiting" requires standing in one place and guarding, this foothold is also the stance. From the stance, it leads to reliance. The Book of Shangjun·Agriculture and Warfare states: "The state relies on agriculture and warfare to be at peace, and the ruler relies on agriculture and warfare to be respected." It further extends to "need, must" from the meaning of "rely on." Han Feizi·Five Vermin states: "Those in tattered robes cannot wait for embroidered robes." Zhuangzi uses "rely" and "must" in the sense of "stance" and "condition." When translated as "condition," it should be considered to contain the meaning of "stance," meaning that this "condition" refers to major conditions related to "stance" and "basis." "What does he rely on?" In Buddhist terms, this is: "What can he grasp?" Why is it said that one can "ride the correctness of heaven and earth and ride the of the six qi" and thus "be without reliance"? Because reaching this state, the individual becomes completely identical to the Dao, and their freedom is equal to the Dao, infinite. An infinite individual is also equivalent to the dissolution of the individual, hence it can be said to be "no self." And this "no self (small self)" is the true "self." Because the original meaning of "self" is "master," that is, free will. Only with infinite free will is it the true free will. Such free will has not the slightest bit of lack of freedom. It should be noted that Eastern philosophy, Buddhism, and Taoism have always clearly stated that this free will is not the "omniscient and omnipotent" of Western theology, doing as one pleases. As mentioned in the preface, I have already quoted the saying of Yuan Gui Zen Master about "Buddhism has three abilities and three inabilities." Here, Zhuangzi also established the logical relationship of "roaming the infinite," with "riding the correctness of heaven and earth" as the premise. Therefore, if one must use the binary opposition of "materialist" and "idealistic" to fit, then both Buddhism and Taoism can join the ranks of "materialism" to strengthen it. Because they both believe that there are objective laws independent of subjective consciousness, and that the awakened ones are those who can fully exhaust, adapt to, and master these laws. Of course, using the theoretical framework of "materialist" and "idealistic" to fit Buddhism and Taoism is meaningless, because Eastern and Western philosophies have very different stances, viewpoints, and methods. Simple analogies are unhelpful in understanding their true nature and only make things more confusing. Let us return to the original meaning of Zhuangzi. The above explains my annotations on these sentences of Zhuangzi. Now, let us see how Guo Xiang commented on them. "Heaven and earth are the general names of all things. Heaven and earth take all things as their substance, and all things must take nature as the standard. Nature is what is done without doing. Therefore, the ability of the great Peng to soar high, the ability of the small zhu to fly low, the ability of the pine tree to grow tall, and the ability of the morning fungus to be short—all of these are what nature can do, not what effort can do. Doing without effort is what is standard. Therefore, riding the correctness of heaven and earth is the same as following the nature of all things; riding the of the six qi is the same as roaming the path of change. If one proceeds in this way, where will there be limits? Wherever one encounters, one rides; then how can one rely on anything? This is the of the supreme person who has others. If there is any reliance, even though Liezi is light and refined, he cannot move without wind. Therefore, one must first obtain what one relies on to be, and what about the great Peng? Only by merging with all things and following the great changes can one be without reliance and always in harmony. Is this enough? Moreover, by following what has reliance and not losing what one relies on, if what one relies on is not lost, then one is the same as the great harmony. Therefore, reliance and non-reliance, I cannot compare; as for each being comfortable with their nature, the natural mechanism naturally unfolds, and one does not know it, then I cannot distinguish. Without reliance is still not enough to distinguish from reliance, let alone the vastness of reliance." Guo Xiang's commentary is particularly long, possibly the longest in all of Guo's commentaries. Guo's commentaries rarely have such long passages, showing that he put a lot of effort into it. "Effort is rewarded," so for thousands of years, no matter how people questioned him, Guo Xiang has always been considered an authority on Zhuangzi commentary.