INTRODUCTION
This is the first post in the Zhuangzi series. I highly suggest reading at least two or three sources in the section below to make your own judgments—that’s kind of the whole point. The Zhuangzi is structured by authorship:
Inner Chapters (1-7): generally attributed to Zhuangzi.
Outer Chapters (8-22): likely written by his pupils.
Misc. Chapters (23-32): : likely written much later.
I’ll take excerpts from a blend of sources and annotate/trim/refine them. I’ll cover the below chapters in this post:
The Happy Excursion — 逍遥游
On the Equality of Things — 齐物论
The Cultivation of Life — 养生主
I will also include a “Ultra-Dense Summary” at the very bottom. You’re welcome!
.
.
.
RESOURCES
.
.
.
逍遥游: THE HAPPY EXCURSION
穷发之北，有冥海者，天池也。有鱼焉， 其广数千里，未有知其修者，其名为鲲。有鸟焉，其名为鹏， 背若泰山，翼若垂天之云，抟扶摇羊角而上者九万里，绝云气， 负青天，然后图南，且适南冥也。
In the barren north, there is a sea, the Celestial Lake. In it there is a fish, several thousand li in breadth . . . its name is the kun. There is also a bird, named the peng, with . . . wings like clouds across the sky. Upon a whirlwind it soars up to a height of ninety thousand li.
斥鴳笑之曰：“彼且奚适也？我腾跃而上，不过数仞而下，翱翔蓬蒿之间，此亦飞之至也，而彼且奚适也？” 此小大之辩也。
A quail laughs at it, saying: “Where is that bird going? I spring up with a bound, and when I have reached not more than a few yards I come down again . . . This is also the perfection of flying. Where is that bird going?” This is the difference between the great and the small.
…
尧让天下于许由，曰 ：“日月出矣，而爝火不息，其于光 也，不亦难乎！时雨降矣，而犹浸灌，其于泽也，不亦劳乎！ 夫子立而天下治，而我犹尸之，吾自视缺然。请致天下 。”
When Yao went to cede his empire to Xu You, he said, "To keep the torches burning in broad daylight [and to] continue watering one's garden during a heavy rainfall [is absurd].”
“If you, sir, so much as appear in the world, at once it is well ordered. And yet here I am, playing the host and master, acting like I control it all. I feel I am greatly deficient. Please accept the rulership of this world from me."
许由曰：“子治天下，天下既已治也，而我犹代子，吾将为名乎？名者，实之宾也，吾将为宾乎 ？
Xu You replied, "You are ruling the world, and thus is the world already ruled however you rule it. If I were nonetheless to take your place, would I be doing it for the name? But name is just a guest of the real. Shall I then play the role of the guest?”
[Xu You is discussing name (ming) and essence here: what good will come from transferring the title of ruler?]
鹪鹩巢于深林 ，不过一枝； 偃鼠饮河，不过满腹。归休乎君，予无所用天下为！庖人虽不治庖，尸祝不越樽俎而代之矣。”
“The tailorbird lives in the depths of a vast forest, but uses no more than a single branch to make his nest. When the beaver drinks from the river, he takes only enough to fill his belly.”
“Go home, my lord! I have no use for an empire. Though the cook may not keep the kitchen in order, that doesn't mean [the priest] needs to . . . replace him!”
…
惠子谓庄子曰：“吾有大树，人谓之樗。其大本臃肿而不中绳墨，其小枝卷曲而不中规矩。立之涂，匠者不顾。今子之言，大而无用，众所同去也。”
Huizi said to Zhuangzi, “I have a huge tree that people call the Stinktree. The trunk is swollen and gnarled . . . Even if it were growing right in the road, a carpenter would not give it so much as a second glance. And your words are similarly big but useless, which is why they are rejected by everyone who hears them."
庄子曰：“子独不见狸狌乎？ 卑身而伏，以候敖者；东西跳梁，不避高下；中于机辟，死于 罔罟。今夫嫠牛，其大若垂天之云。此能为大矣，而不能执鼠。 今子有大树，患其无用，何不树之于无何有之乡，广莫之野， 彷徨乎无为其侧，逍遥乎寝卧其下。不夭斤斧，物无害者，无所可用，安所困苦哉！
Zhuangzi said, “[Wildcats and weasels] crouch low to await any straggling prey, then pounce east or west in an elegantly arcing leap . . . But this is exactly what lands them in a trap, and they end up dying in the net. But take a yak . . . What it's good at is just being big—and of course it cannot catch so much as a single mouse.”
“You, on the other hand, have this big tree and you worry that it's useless. How you could loaf and wander, doing a whole lot of nothing there at its side! How far-flung and unfettered you'd be, dozing there beneath it! It will never be cut down by ax or saw. Nothing will harm it. Since it has nothing for which it can be used, what could entrap or afflict it?”
.
.
.
齐物论: ON THE EQUALITY OF THINGS
夫随其成心而师之，谁独且无师乎？奚必知代而自取者有 之？愚者与有焉！未成乎心而有是非，是今日适越而昔至也。 是以无有为有。无有为有,虽有神禹且不能知,吾独且奈何哉！
“If men are to be guided by opinions, who will not have such a guide? Not only do [the wise] have opinions; the fools have theirs too. The case in which there are no opinions, yet a distinction is made between right and wrong, is as inconceivable as that one goes to Yueh today, but arrived there yesterday . . .”
夫言非吹也，言者有言。其所言者特未定也。果有言邪？ 其未尝有言邪？其以为异于鷇音，亦有辩乎？其无辩乎？
“Speech is not just the blowing of air, it is intending to say something. But what it is intending to say is not absolutely fixed. Is there really such a thing as speech? Is there really no such thing as speech? Someone considers speech as different from the chirping of young birds. But is there any distinction between them, or is there no distinction?”
道恶乎隐而有真伪？言恶乎隐而有是非？道恶乎往而不存？言恶乎存而不可？
“How is dao obscured that there should be a distinction between true and false? How is speech obscured that there should be a distinction between right and wrong? Where is dao not present? Where is speech not appropriate?”
道隐于小成，言隐于荣华。故有儒墨之是非，以 是其所非而非其所是。欲是其所非而非其所是，则莫若以明。
“Dao is obscured by partiality. Speech is obscured by eloquence. The result is the affirmations and denials of the Confucianists and Mohists, the one regarding as right what the other regards as wrong, and regarding as wrong what the other regards as right. If we are to [show there is no distinction], there is nothing better than to use ming.”
[Fung translates ming as “light of reason” whereas Ziporyn calls it “illumination of obvious,” but both are a bit unsatisfying so I’ll keep the Chinese here.]
物无非彼，物无非是。自彼则不见，自知则知之。故曰： 彼出于是，是亦因彼。彼是方生之说也。
“Everything is ‘that’ [another thing’s other]; everything is ‘this’ [its own self]. Things do not know that they are another’s that; they only know that they are this. The that and the this produce each other.”
虽然，方生方死，方死方生；方可方不可，方不可方可；因是因非，因非因是。
“. . . When there is possibility, there is impossibility, and when there is impossibility, there is possibility. Because there is right, there is wrong. Because there is wrong, there is right.”
是以圣人不由而照之于天，亦因是也。是亦彼也，彼亦是也。彼 亦一是非，此亦一是非，果且有彼是乎哉？果且无彼是乎哉？彼是莫得其偶，谓之道枢。
“Thus the sages do not proceed from this or that, but see all things in the light of Heaven. The this is also that. The that is also this. The that is then itself already both this and not-this, both a right and a wrong. But this is also itself already both this and not-this, both a right and a wrong. So is there really a distinction between that and this? Or is there really no distinction? That the that and the this cease to be opposites is the very essence of dao.”
枢始得其环中，以应无穷。是亦一无穷，非亦一无穷也。故曰：莫若以明。
“When this axis finds its place in the center, it responds to all the endless things it confronts, thwarted by none. For it has an endless supply of ‘rights,’ and an endless supply of ‘wrongs.’ Therefore, there is nothing better than to use the light of ming.”
以指喻指之非指，不若以非指喻指之非指也；以马喻马之非马，不若以非马喻马之非马也。天地一指也，万物一马也。
“To take fingers in illustration of fingers as not being fingers is not as good as to take non-fingers in illustration of fingers as not being fingers. To take a horse in illustration of horses as not being horses is not as good as to take non-horses in illustration of horses as not being horses. The universe is a finger; all things are a horse.”
[To attack one system of right and wrong with another is not so good as to attack the whole system of rights and wrongs with the system of non-distinction between right and wrong.]
可乎可，不可乎不可。道行之而成， 物谓之而然。恶乎然？ 然于然。恶乎不然？不然于不然。物固有所然，物固有所可。 无物不然，无物不可。
“The possible is possible. The impossible is impossible. The dao makes things, they are what they are. What are they? They are what they are. What are they not? They are not what they are not. Everything is something and is good for something. There is nothing which is not something or is not good for something.”
故为是举莛与楹，厉与西施，恢诡谲怪， 道通为一。其分也，成也；其成也，毁也。凡物无成与毁，复通为一。
“Thus beams and pillars, ugliness and beauty, the peculiar and the extraordinary, through dao become one. To make a distinction is to make some construction. But construction is the same as destruction. For things as a whole there is neither construction nor destruction, but they turn to unity and become one.”
唯达者知通为一，为是不用而寓诸庸。庸也者，用也；用也者， 通也；通也者，得也。适得而几矣。因是已，已而不知其然谓之道 。
“Only the truly wise knows the oneness of things. They therefore do not make distinctions, but follow the ordinary and natural functions of all things, which express the common nature of the whole. Following the common nature of the whole, they are fulfilled. Being fulfilled, they are near perfection. Perfection is for them to stop. They stop, yet they do not know that they stop. This is dao.”
[Ziporyn distinguishes the last “Dao” from other “dao” since it is "the course that does not guide,” but I don’t see why there should be a "Great Dao” above all others. I also use “fulfilled” where Fung translates “happy” and Ziporyn writes “getting what you get.”]
劳神明为一而不知其同也 ，谓之“朝三 ”。何谓“朝三”？狙公赋芧，曰 ：“朝三而暮四 。”众狙皆怒 。曰 ：“然 则朝四而暮三。”众狙皆悦。名实未亏而喜怒为用，亦因是也。 是以圣人和之以是非而休乎天钧，是之谓两行。
“Wearing out one’s spirit to unify things without knowing that they are already in agreement is called ‘three in the morning.’ What is ‘three in the morning’? A monkey-keeper once ordered the monkeys’ rations such that each had three in the morning and four at night. This angered the monkeys. So the keeper said that they may have four in the morning, but three at night. The monkeys were pleased. The amount remained the same, but the monkeys’ attitude changed, so the keeper acted accordingly. Therefore, the sages harmonize the systems of right and wrong and rest in the evolution of nature. This is called following two roads at once.”
[Although the systems of right and wrong are but human judgments without validity from the “view of nature,” that people do pass these invalid judgments is a fact and as natural as anything else. So the sages do not dispute or interfere with them. They do not abolish the different opinions—they simply transcend them. This is called following two roads at once.]
古之人，其知有所至矣。恶乎至？有以为未始有物者，至矣，尽矣，不可以加矣！其次以为有物矣，而未始有封也。其次以为有封焉，而未始有是非也。是非之彰也，道之所以亏也。道之所以亏，爱之所以成。果且有成与亏乎哉？果且无成与亏乎哉？
“The knowledge of the ancients was perfect. How perfect? At first, they did not yet know that there were things. This is the most perfect knowledge; nothing can be added. Next, they knew that there were things, but did not yet make distinctions between them. Next, they made distinctions between them, but they did not yet pass judgments upon them. When judgments were passed, dao was destroyed. With dao’s destruction, individual preferences came into being. Are there really construction and destruction? Is there really no construction and no destruction?”
[The “ancients” simply take pure experience, the immediate presentation, “the that,” at face value—without confusing themselves with abstract and secondary conceptions that make the experience seem rationally possible. There is an unbroken flow of experience, but the experiencer does not know it. So in this state of experience there is nothing but the One.]
有成与亏，故昭氏之鼓琴也；无成与亏，故昭氏之不鼓 琴也。昭文之鼓琴也，师旷之枝策也，惠子之据梧也，三子之 知几乎皆其盛者也，故载之末年。唯其好之也以异于彼，其好 之也欲以明之。彼非所明而明之，故以坚白之昧终。而其子又 以文之纶终，终身无成。若是而可谓成乎，虽我亦成也；若是 而不可谓成乎，物与我无成也。是故滑疑之耀，圣人之所图也。 为是不用而寓诸庸，此之谓“以明”。
. . . Therefore, what the sages aim at is the light out of darkness. Therefore, they do not make distinctions and stop at the ordinary. This is called ming.
今且有言于此，不知其与是类乎？其与是不类乎？类与不类，相与为类，则与彼无以异矣。虽然，请尝言之：有始也者， 有未始有始也者，有未始有夫未始有始也者；有有也者，有无也者，有未始有无也者，有未始有夫未始有无也者。俄而有无 矣，而未知有无之果孰有孰无也。
“Let me try to say it: There is beginning. There is not-yet-beginning-to-be-a-beginning. There is not-yet-beginning-to-not-yet-begin-to-be-a-beginning. There is existence. There is nonexistence. There is not-yet-beginning-to-be-nonexistence. There is not-yet-beginning-to-not-yet-begin-to-be-nonexistence. Suddenly there is nonexistence. But I do not yet know whether "the existence of nonexistence" is ultimately existence or nonexistence. Now I have said something. But I do not yet know: has what I have said really said anything? Or has it not really said anything?”
[In pure experience, we have no intellectual knowledge of any kind. In connection with time, or with things in time, we have no intellectual knowledge of beginning, the fact that we have no intellectual knowledge of beginning, and so on into infinity.]
今我则已有有谓矣，而未知 吾所谓之其果有谓乎？其果无谓乎？ 夫天下莫大于秋豪之末，而太山为小；莫寿乎殇子，而彭祖为夭。天地与我并生，而万物与我为一。
“There is nothing larger than the point of a hair, yet Mount Tai is small. There is nothing older than a dead child, yet old Pengzu died an early death. Heaven and Earth and I came into existence together, and all things and I are one.”
既已为一矣，且得有言乎？既已谓之一矣，且得无言乎？一与言为二，二与一为 三。自此以往，巧历不能得，而况其凡乎！故自无适有，以至 于三，而况自有适有乎！无适焉，因是已！
“Since all things are one, what room is there for speech? But since I have already spoken of the one, is this not already speech? One plus speech makes two. Two plus one makes three. Going on from this, even the most skillful chronicler will not be able to reach the end, let alone ordinary people! If proceeding from nothing to something we can reach three, how much further shall we reach if we proceed from something to something! Let us not proceed. Let us stop here.”
夫道未始有封，言未始有常，为是而有畛也。请言其畛： 有左有右，有伦有义，有分有辩，有竞有争，此之谓八德。六合之外，圣人存而不论；六合之内，圣人论而不议；春秋经世 先王之志，圣人议而不辩。
“Dao has no distinctions. Speech cannot be applied to the eternal. Because of speech, there are demarcations. Let me explain what I mean by demarcations: There are the right and the left, discussions and judgments, divisions and arguments, competitions and struggles (And this is the kind of thing they call the Eight Virtues!). What is beyond this world, the sages do not discuss, although they do not deny its existence. What is within this world, the sages discuss, but do not pass judgments. As for historical events, he will give an opinion but not debate it.”
故分也者，有不分也；辩也者,有不辩也 。曰：“何也？” 圣人怀之 ，众人辩之以相示也 。故曰：辩也者，有不见也。 “夫大道不称，大辩不言，大仁不仁，大廉不谦，大勇不忮。 道昭而不道，言辩而不及，
“When there is division, there is something not divided. When there is argument, there is something which the argument does not reach. How is that? The sages embrace all things, while men in general argue about them in order to convince each other. Great dao does not admit of being spoken. Great argument does not require words. Great benevolence is not purposely charitable. Great purity is not purposely modest. Great courage is not purposely violent. Dao that is displayed is not dao. Speech that argues falls short of its aim.”
仁常而不成，廉清而不信，勇忮而不成。五者圆而几向方矣！故知止其所不知，至矣。孰知不言之辩，不道之道？若有能知，此之谓天府。注焉而不满，酌焉而不竭，而不知其所由来，此之谓葆光。
“Benevolence that is constant cannot be all-encompassing. Purity, if professed, meets incredulity. Courage that is purposeful must fail. These five round things tend to become square. Thus he who knows to stop at what he does not know is perfect. He who knows arguments requires no words and the dao that cannot be named is called the store of nature. The store, when things are put in it, is not full, and when things are taken out, it is not empty; yet he himself does not know why it is so. This is called the preservation of enlightenment.”
[I’m following Ziporyn to write “all-encompassing” instead of “succeed” based on manuscripts using “zhou” and not “cheng” in this sentence.]
…
瞿鹊子问乎长梧子曰 ：“吾闻诸夫子：圣人不从事于务， 不就利，不违害，不喜求，不缘道，无谓有谓，有谓无谓，而游乎尘垢之外。夫子以为孟浪之言，而我以为妙道之行也。吾子以为奚若？”
Qu Quezi asked Chang Wuzi, saying: “I heard from the Master, the sage does not occupy himself with the affairs of the world. He does not seek gain, avoid injury, seek pleasure, nor purposely adhere to dao. He says something by saying nothing, and says nothing by saying something. Thus he roams beyond the limits of this dusty world. The Master considered these rude and careless words, but I consider this as the ways of the mysterious dao. What do you think?”
长梧子曰 ：“是皇帝之所听荧也，而丘也何足以知之！且女亦大早计，见卵而求时夜，见弹而求鴞炙。予尝为女妄言之， 女以妄听之。奚旁日月，挟宇宙，为其吻合，置其滑涽，以隶相尊？众人役役，圣人愚钝，参万岁而一成纯。万物尽然，而 以是相蕴。
“This,” replied Chang Wuzi, “would have perplexed even the Yellow Emperor; how could Confucius understand them? Moreover, you are too hasty in forming your estimate. You see an egg and try to get it to crow at dawn (qiu it’s chirp); you see a crossbow pellet and try to roast it for your dinner (qiu a roast dove).”
“. . . The sage blends everything into a harmonious whole and rejects the confusion of distinctions. Most men bustle about and toil; the sage is primitive and without knowledge. He blends together ten thousand years, and stops at the one, the whole, and the simple. All things are what they are, and they pursue their natural courses.
[“Qiu” resembles expect/urge/wish/desire. Here, I lean towards you “urge” a roast dove.]
…
予恶乎知说生之非惑邪！予恶乎知恶死之非弱丧而不知归者邪！丽之姬，艾封人之子也。晋国之始得之也，涕泣沾襟。及其至于王所，与王同筐床，食刍豢，而后悔其泣也。予恶乎知 夫死者不悔其始之蕲生乎？
“How then do I know that delighting in life is not a delusion? How do I know that in hating death I am not like a man who left home in youth and no longer knows the way back? Lady Li was a daughter of the border guard of Ai. When she was first captured and brought to Qin, she wept until tears drenched her collar. But when she got to the palace, sharing the king's luxurious bed, and feasting on the finest meats, she regretted her tears.”
梦饮酒者，旦而哭泣；梦哭泣者， 旦而田猎。方其梦也，不知其梦也。梦之中又占其梦焉，觉而 后知其梦也。且有大觉而后知此其大梦也，而愚者自以为觉， 窃窃然知之。“君乎！牧乎！”固哉 ！丘也与女皆梦也 ，予谓女梦亦梦也。是其言也，其名为吊诡。万世之后而一遇大圣知其解者，是旦暮遇之也。
“How do I know that the dead don't regret the way they used to cling to life? If you dream of drinking wine, in the morning you will weep. If you dream of weeping, in the morning you will go out hunting. While dreaming you don't know it's a dream. You might even interpret a dream in your dream—and then you wake up and realize it was all a dream. Perhaps a great awakening would reveal all of this to be a vast dream. And yet the foolish imagine they are already awake—how clearly and certainly they understand it all!”
…
既使我与若辩矣，若胜我，我不若胜，若果是也？我果非 也邪？我胜若,若不吾胜,我果是也？而果非也邪？其或是也？ 其或非也邪？其俱是也？其俱非也邪？我与若不能相知也。 则人固受其黮闇，吾谁使正之？使同乎若者正之，既与若同矣， 恶能正之？使同乎我者正之，既同乎我矣，恶能正之？使异乎 我与若者正之，既异乎我与若矣，恶能正之？使同乎我与若者正之，既同乎我与若矣，恶能正之？然则我与若与人俱不能相 知也，而待彼也邪？”
“Suppose you and I get into a debate. If you win and I lose, does that really mean you are right and I am wrong? . . . Or could both of us be right, or both of us wrong? If neither of us can know, a third person would be even more benighted.”
“Whom should we have straighten out the matter? Someone who agrees with you? But since he already agrees with you, how can he straighten it out? . . . Someone who disagrees with both of us? But if he already disagrees with both of us, how can he straighten it out? . . . So neither you nor I nor any third party can ever know how it is—shall we wait for yet some ‘other’?”
…
罔两问景曰 ：“曩子行，今子止；曩子坐，今子起。何其 无特操与 ”
The Penumbra asked the Shadow, “At one moment, you move; at another, you are at rest. At one moment, you sit down; at another, you stand up. Why this instability of purpose?”
景曰 ：“吾有待而然者邪 ？吾所待又有待而然 者邪？吾待蛇蚹蜩翼邪？恶识所以然？恶识所以不然？”
“Do I have to depend upon something,” replied the Shadow, “to be what I am? Does that something have to depend upon something else in order to be what it is? Do I have to depend upon the scales of a snake or the wings of a cicada? How can I tell why I am so, or why I am not otherwise?”
…
昔者庄周梦为胡蝶，栩栩然胡蝶也。自喻适志与！不知周 也。俄然觉，则蘧蘧然周也。不知周之梦为胡蝶与？胡蝶之梦 为周与？？周与胡蝶则必有分矣。此之谓物化。
Once upon a time, Zhuang Zhou dreamed that he was a butterfly, a butterfly flying about, enjoying itself. It did not know that it was Zhuang Zhou. Suddenly he awoke and veritably was Zhuang Zhou again. We do not know whether it was Zhuang Zhou dreaming that he was a butterfly or whether it was the butterfly dreaming that it was Zhuang Zhou. Between Zhuang Zhou and the butterfly, there must be some distinction. This is a case of what is called the transformation of things.
.
.
.
养生主: THE CULTIVATION OF LIFE
吾生也有涯，而知也无涯。以有涯随无涯，殆已！已而为知者，殆而已矣！为善无近名，为恶无近刑，缘督以为经，可以保身，可以全生，可以养亲，可以尽年。
Life has a limit, but knowledge has none. With what is limited to pursue what is unlimited is perilous. To seek to redress this danger with further knowledge is more perilous. To do what convention considers good, avoid fame. To do what convention considers bad, avoid disgrace. Always pursue the middle course. These are the ways to preserve our body, to maintain our life, to support our parents, to complete our terms of years.
…
庖丁为文惠君解牛，手之所触，肩之所倚，足之所履，膝之所倚，砉然响然，奏刀騞然，莫不中音，合于桑林之舞，乃中经首之会。文惠君曰：“嘻，善哉！技盖至此乎?
Prince Wen Hui’s cook was cutting up a ox. Every blow of his hand, every heave of his shoulder, . . . every note of the movement of the chopper were in perfect harmony . . .
“Ah, admirable,” said the prince, “that your art should become so perfect!”
“庖丁释刀对曰：“臣之所好者道也，进乎技矣。始臣之解牛之时，所见无非全牛者；三年之后，未尝见全牛也；方今之时，臣以神遇而不以目视，官知止而神欲行。
The cook laid down his chopper and replied: “What your servant loves is dao, which is more advanced than art. When I first began to cut up oxen, what I saw was simply whole oxen. After three years’ practice, I saw no more oxen as wholes. At present, I work with my mind, but not with my eyes. The functions of my senses stop; my spirit dominates.”
依乎天理，批大郤，导大窾，因其固然。技经肯綮之未尝，而况大軱乎！良庖岁更刀，割也；族庖月更刀，折也；今臣之刀十九年矣，所解数千牛矣，而刀刃若新发于硎。
“Following tian li, my chopper slips through the great cavities, slides through the great openings, taking advantage of what is already there . . .”
[Fung translates “tian li” as “natural veins” but I prefer the literal “Heaven’s Order” or “the natural principle.” Both “tian” and “li” are hard to translate into English, the former is Heaven/Nature/God and the latter is reason/order/principle.]
彼节者有间而刀刃者无厚，以无厚入有间，恢恢乎其于游刃必有余地矣。是以十九年而刀刃若新发于硎。虽然， 每至于族，吾见其难为，怵然为戒，视为止，行为迟，动刀甚微，謋然已解，如土委地。
“For the joints have spaces within them, and the edge of the blade has no thickness at all. When what has no thickness enters into an empty space, it is vast and open, with more than enough room for the play of the blade." That is why my knife is still as sharp as if it had just come off the whetstone, even after nineteen years.”
“Nevertheless, when I come to a complicated joint, and see that there will be some difficulty, I proceed with caution. I fix my eyes on it. I move slowly. Then by a very gentle movement of my chopper, the part is quickly separated, and yields like earth crumbling.”
提刀而立，为之而四顾，为之踌躇满志，善刀而藏之 。”文惠君曰 ：“善哉！吾闻庖丁之言，得 养生焉 。”
“Then I retract the blade, stand up, and look all round, with an air of satisfaction. I wipe then my chopper and put it in its sheath.”
“Excellent,” said the prince, “from the words of this cook, I learned the ways of cultivating life.”
…
老聃死，秦失吊之，三号而出。弟子曰：“非夫子之友邪 ？”曰：“然 。” “然则吊焉若此可乎？”
When Laozi died, Qin Shi went to mourn over him. He uttered three yells and went out. A disciple asked him, “Were you not a friend of the master?”
“Yes, I was,” replied Qin Shi.
“If so, is it proper to offer your mourning merely in the way you have done?”
曰 ：“然 。始也吾 以为其人也，而今非也。向吾入而吊焉，有老者哭之，如哭其 子；少者哭之，如哭其母。彼其所以会之，必有不蕲言而言， 不蕲哭而哭者。
“Yes,” said Qin Shi, “at first I thought there would be his kind of people there, but then I saw that this was not the case. When I went in there to mourn, I saw the elders among them weeping as if for their sons, and the young among them weeping as if for their mothers. With such as these gathered there, I, too, would no doubt have proceeded to utter some unsought-for words and weep some unsought-for tears.”
是遁天倍情，忘其所受，古者谓之遁天之刑。 适来，夫子时也；适去，夫子顺也。安时而处顺，哀乐不能入也，古者谓是帝之县解。”
“This is to violate the principle of nature and to increase the emotions of man, forgetting what we have received from nature. These were called by the ancients the penalty of violating the principle of nature.”
“When it came time to arrive, the Master came. When he went, he simply followed the natural course. Those who are quiet at the proper occasion and follow the natural course cannot be affected by sorrow or joy. They were considered by the ancients as the men of the gods, who were released from bondage. The fingers may not be able to supply all the fuel. But the fire is transmitted, and we know not when it will come to an end.”
[We receive a certain amount from nature that cannot be altered through human effort. The man in bondage is a slave to his emotions/affects, as Spinoza would say, which is both the cause and penalty for his violation of tian, or nature. The sage, identifying himself with change itself, would be quiet at any occasion and follow any course. To him there is neither gain nor loss, neither death nor life.]
[Jiao Hung, a Ming Dynasty commentator wrote, “Though the waves may cease to exist, the sea is still there . . . There is no contradiction. He who knows that life and death are one is he who cultivates life best.”]
.
.
.
ULTRA-DENSE SUMMARY
(1) 逍遥游
A albatross flies high, while a quail flies low. Who isn’t perfect?
The cook may not keep the kitchen in order, but that doesn't mean the priest needs to replace him.
If a tree is beautiful, a table is made. If a tree is ugly, a nap is taken.
(2) 齐物论
Opinion begets right and wrong. Speech begets demarcations.
Everything is that, another thing’s other. Everything is this, its own self. Things do not know that they are another’s that; they only know that they are this. The that and the this produce each other. That and this ceasing to be opposites is the essence of dao.
To wear oneself out trying to unify things already in agreement is absurd. Attacking one system of right and wrong with another is not as good as attacking all systems with non-distinction.
Still, that people do pass judgments is a natural fact. While ordinary men argue to convince each other, the sage “rests in the evolution of nature.” He does not abolish different opinions but transcends them. This is called following two roads at once.
What is beyond this world, the sage does not discuss, although they do not deny its existence. What is within this world, the sage discusses, but does not pass judgments. What is in the past, he will give an opinion but not debate it.
…
The knowledge of the ancients was perfect. They had no intellectual knowledge of any kind: of being, beginning, lack of knowing beginning, and so forth into infinity. They lived in a state of pure experience. They did not know that there are things, let alone make distinctions between them like subject and object—they felt the One.
The sage see things in the light of Heaven. He is primitive and without knowledge. He blends together ten thousand years, and stops at the one, the whole, and the simple.
…
Great dao cannot be spoken of. Great arguments need no words. Great benevolence is not constant. Great purity is not professed. Speech that argues falls short of its aim.
He who knows this is the store of nature. When things are put in it, is not full, and when things are taken out, it is not empty; yet he himself does not know why it is so. This is called the preservation of enlightenment.
…
How do I know that a man who fears death is unlike a man who has been away from his home since youth and therefore has no intention to return?
How do I know if I am a human dreaming of a butterfly or a butterfly dreaming of a human?
(3) 养生主
Life has a limit, but knowledge has none. With what is limited to pursue what is unlimited is perilous. To seek to redress this danger with further knowledge is more perilous.
To do what convention considers good, avoid fame. To do what convention considers bad, avoid disgrace. Always pursue the middle course.
A great butcher cuts with spirit and not his eyes. His chopper follows tian li and slips through the great cavities. When he knows a difficult joint is coming, he proceeds by sight with caution and the joint is gently separated.
Qin Shi did not cry at Laozi’s funeral, for the Master came when it was time to and left by following the same natural course. The sage is released from bondage and affected by joy and sorrow. To him there is neither gain nor loss, neither death nor life.
.
.
.
Click here to continue the Zhuangzi Series. Visit the main work to learn more.