Zhuangzi 2.2 Joy and Anger, Sorrow and Delight

Original

喜怒哀樂，慮嘆變慹，姚佚啟態；樂出虛，蒸成菌。日夜相代乎前，而莫知其所萌。旦暮得此，其所由以生乎！

Helsing

Joy and anger, sorrow and delight;

Anxiety and regret [*], disruption and fixation [*];

Elegance and indulgence [*], open beginnings and outer forms [*];

(Like) music coming from hollows, (like) mushrooms condensing from steam.

Day and night, mutually replacing and proceeding (each other)

And we do not know from whence they sprout. Let it stop! Let it stop!

Day and night it happens like this, [and] what causes their being born!?

General Note:

The passage introduces a series of characters that seem to describe the complex fluctuations of life. However, the reader is met by a number of problems. Some terms are easily understood as specific emotional states while others terms are less clear. Several phrases seem ambiguous and require active interpretation from the reader. At least one term (zhi) is highly unique to the text (and does not appear to be a mistake). With the exception of Ziporyn, most translations (see below) view this passage as a catalogue of fluctuating emotions. Like Ziporyn, this translation attempts to broaden the scope of interpretation. 

The passage also continues the description of life in 2.2 (a). In both parts of the passage Zhuangzi is clearly concerned with the tumultuous, confrontational nature of life and the strains of psychological experience on the heart-mind. None of the standard sources of moral agency survive Zhuangzi’s critiques to emerge as viable, authoritative foundations of human flourishing. This culminates in identifying the “fixed” mind or cheng-xin as the single largest obstacle to following the continually unfolding possibilities of the Way.

A note on emotions:

Contemporary anglophone discussions of emotion in classic texts frequently limit emotional experience to a kind of Romantic expressionism: emotions are powerful internal states of passion or feeling that require creative expression. Classical Chinese texts certainly contain this mode of emotional experience. This is particularly evident in emotionally charged works such as the Book of Odes.

However, emotional life is more complex than simply passing through continually changing moments of emotional expression. We can also think in terms of attitudes or states: “heightened” emotional states such as excitement or anticipation, or “lowered” emotional states such as regret. We may also consider comportment or composition: how we regulate our emotional interaction in the world: as Zhuangzi notes, we may attempt to carry ourselves with emotional restraint, or we may simply indulge in any emotional impulse.

Anxiety and regret (慮嘆):

Commentary modernizes 慮嘆as 恢虑感叹 “vast worry and lament.” We can infer lament coming from the act of “sighing with feeling.” 虑 can be translated as “anxiety” which I think fits here. The pair match together as a dynamic of anxiety prior to a situation and regret following a situation.

Disruption and fixation (變慹):

Commentary suggests反复“backing out,” “changing” or “unstable” versus 恐惧“fear or dread.” Legge and Watson both agree on  變 as flighty or fickle, while Ziporyn gives a more neutral tone, with “transformations.” I use “disruption” to deconceptualize the term. 變 only appears in one other instance in the Qi Wu Lun, in ZZ 2.11: 死生无變於己，而況利害之端乎！ “Death and life (cause) no change in [him], so how (could) the extremes of profit and harm!” In this context “change” refers to emotional or dispositional disruptions caused by the pressures of profit, harm, life, and death.

The great mystery in this entire passage is 慹, which has no definition in any modern dictionary to the knowledge of this reader. The Shouwen explains 慹as 悑, which also has no immediate translation. Following the Shouwen further we find悑 leads to 惶 huáng, which means “fearful” or “anxious.” Using these ideas to look back at 慹, we can combine 執 (hold, catch, capture) + 心 (heart-mind, consciousness) to suggest 慹 is some kind of emotional paralysis.

Elegance and indulgence (姚佚):

啟 and 態 translate cleanly as “elegance” and “indulgence.” Contrast between “elegance” as a kind of restrained refinement versus vulgar indulgence of impulse or desire.

Open beginnings and outer forms (啟態):

“Beginning” or “opening” versus “form” or “appearance.” An alternate translation might be “enlightenment and appearance.” 啟 appears in Confucius 7.8 不憤不啟 which occurs in contemporary speech as the idiom: “a student shall not be enlightened until trying hard by themselves.” 

Legge

Joy and anger, sadness and pleasure,

Anticipation, regret, fickleness, fixedness,

vehemence and indolence, eagerness and tardiness;

Watson

Joy, anger, grief, delight,

worry, regret, fickleness, inflexibility,

modesty, willfulness, candor, insolence

Ziporyn

Joy and anger, sorrow and happiness,

plans and regrets, transformations and stagnations,

unguarded abandonment and deliberate posturing  

Commentary

喜怒哀乐，恢虑感叹，反复恐惧，轻浮躁动，放纵状况，装模作态;

Happiness, anger, sorrow, and joy; vast worries and sighs of regret; turning around and fear; frivolous and flighty; indulging circumstances and adopting appearances.

Google

joy and sorrow,

sighing and sighing,

Yao Yiqi state;

happy,

Steamed into bacteria.

Day and night have replaced each other,

And don't know how cute it is

 

 

 

 

Zhuangzi 2.2 Big knowing and small knowing

大知閑閑，小知閒閒；大言炎炎，小言詹詹。其寐也魂交，其覺也形開，與接為構，日以心鬭。縵者，窖者，密者。小恐惴惴，大恐縵縵。其發若機栝，其司是非之謂也；其留如詛盟，其守勝之謂也；其殺如秋冬，以言其日消也；其溺之所為之，不可使復之也；其厭也如緘，以言其老洫也；近死之心，莫使復陽也。喜怒哀樂，慮嘆變慹，姚佚啟態；樂出虛，蒸成菌。日夜相代乎前，而莫知其所萌。已乎已乎！旦暮得此，其所由以生乎！

Big knowing (zhi 知) is bound and idle[1]; Small knowing is partial and incomplete; big speech is hot and rousing; Small speech is verbose and indistinct. When sleeping the spirit wanders, upon waking the body rushes out, meeting and receiving [others] for building schemes, daily using the heart-mind in struggle. There are hesitations, pitfalls, and secrets, [there are] small fears that are apprehensive and worried, [there are] great fears like [endless] sheets of silk. [Everyone makes] pronouncements [flying out] like arrows from a bow, they take charge of naming of right and wrong, they stand their ground as if having sworn an oath; they struggle for victory in speech, and they decline like autumn and winter, and so dwindle like the light of day. [Like] those who have drowned in water, they cannot be ordered to return home; their distastes hold them like binding cords, taking words they (become) (dry overgrown) ditch, their heart-minds approach death and cannot return to the light. (Zhuangzi 2/3/26–29)

[1] 大知閑閑

Legge: “Great knowledge is wide and comprehensive; small knowledge is partial and restricted. Great speech is exact and complete; small speech is (merely) so much talk.”

Watson: “Great understanding is broad and unhurried; little understanding is cramped and busy. Great words are clear and limpid; little words are shrill and quarrelsome.”

Ziporyn: “A large consciousness is idle and spacey” (Ziporyn 2009: 9).

Commentary: 大智广博，小智偏下，大言生气凌人，小言争辩不休。"Great knowledge is broad and extensive; small knowledge is biased and narrow-minded; great speech (exaggeration) is grand and overbearing; small speech is contentious and unceasing."

My Commentary:

My interpretation is unconventional: I pair big knowledge and small knowledge together as both being problematic, in the same way that big speech and small speech are both problematic.

The dilemma is how to interpret 大知閑閑. Watson and Legge both view 大知 positively but try to force a parallel structure with 大言. Before looking at dazhi we can look at dayan.

There are two problems with their translations of 大言炎炎: the first is that the better translation is "great speech is bright and incendiary." This is a more direct translation (fiery) with a stronger series of connotations: n: fire; TCM: internal heat, a cause of disease; n: anger; v: to get angry; adj: fiery, flaming, or popular ("hot"). Legge and Watson treat 火 more like 光 (bright, smooth, polished), but without any reason other than trying to force a positive connotation parallel to their positive translations of 大知.

The second problem is that Zhuangzi is actually quite critical of exaggeration:

First, exaggeration is a further distortion of communication. If language is already an imperfect abstraction, then exaggeration further distorts the relationship between language and ongoing conditions.

Second, exaggeration exacerbates the problems of mistrust. If language is an imperfect conceptualization this is even more so for “great words.” Exaggeration creates aggrandized conceptualizations aimed in a particular direction for a particular effect.

The irony here is that Zhuangzi uses exaggeration to great effect, but that effect is often to draw attention to the shortcomings of language and knowledge (as opposed to applying a concept via shi/fei distinction and then “using” that concept appropriately).

The third problem is that Zhuangzi does not view speech as the source of illumination.  Words function like traps and snares, "capturing" meaning. [*] Once the meaning is found the words are not needed. Words are empty, and only by accepting the emptiness of words can we really understand how to have a word. 

More frequently, words obscure the Way. Words are actually complex schema types that combine distinctions and judgments (and really, all distinctions are judgments). Words "carve up" the world; they create objects (calling a thing makes it so), they create footpaths, and they create fixed systems of understanding.

So, big speech is not clear, limpid, complete, or any other of the adjectives applied; big speech (exaggeration) attempts to overcome the intrinsic uncertainty of knowledge through overstatement; but exaggeration is by nature “unrealistic” and so breeds suspicion, suspicion leads to contention, contention leads to dispute, and so forth.

So: If we reject a positive reading of "big words," this suggests we should also be skeptical of "big knowing." So how should we view 大知? All translations agree that big knowledge or big knowing should be interpreted in a positive manner. I offer a different approach that views 大知 in a critical light, parallel to 大言.

Stay tuned for updates. Currently revising notes for the second part of this commentary, which may form part of a conference paper. 

If you curious in reading an earlier version of this argument in article form, please DM me at: Wandering Clouds (@hingesofdao) / Twitter

Zhuangzi 2.1 Nanguo Ziqi and Yancheng Ziyou

南郭子綦隱几而坐，仰天而噓，嗒焉似喪其耦。顏成子游立侍乎前，曰：「何居乎？形固可使如槁木，而心固可使如死灰乎？今之隱几者，非昔之隱几者也。」子綦曰：「偃，不亦善乎而問之也！今者吾喪我，汝知之乎？女聞人籟而未聞地籟，女聞地籟而未聞天籟夫！」子游曰：「敢問其方。」子綦曰：「夫大塊噫氣，其名為風。是唯无作，作則萬竅怒呺。而獨不聞之翏翏乎？山林之畏佳，大木百圍之竅穴，似鼻，似口，似耳，似枅，似圈，似臼，似洼者，似污者；激者，謞者，叱者，吸者，叫者，譹者，宎者，咬者，前者唱于而隨者唱喁。泠風則小和，飄風則大和，厲風濟則眾竅為虛。而獨不見之調調、之刁刁乎？」子游曰：「地籟則眾竅是已，人籟則比竹是已。敢問天籟。」子綦曰：「夫吹萬不同，而使其自已1也，咸其自取，怒者其誰邪！」

Nanguo Ziqi (Sir Mottled South-wall) leans on a small table and sits. He looks up to Heaven and exhales, absently elsewhere as if mourning his spouse. 

Yancheng Ziyou (Sir Roaming Fixed-face), standing in attendance before him, says: "What [is this]? The body can appear like a withered tree, and the mind can appear like dead ash?

Zi Qi says: Yan, is it not good? But ask it (anyway)! Just now I lost myself - are you aware of it? You have heard of the piping of people, but (have) not heard of the piping of earth? You have heard of the piping of earth, but (have) not heard of the piping of heaven!

Zi You says: I dare to ask your methods. 

Zi Qi says: The great clod belches vital breath (氣) and its name becomes “wind.” When alone nothing happens; [but] when it happens, the ten-thousand apertures [become] a raging tumult. Or do you alone not hear the soaring wind? The craggy heights of the mountain forests: the great trees spanning a hundred hands with their apertures and cavities: like noses, like mouths, like ears; like square [frames], like round [enclosures], like mortars; some like sunken pools, some like hollow pits; some whistling, some hooting, some sucking, some crying out, some wailing, some blowing, some sighing; the ones before sighing “xu” (shoooooo!), the ones following howling (yaaaaooooh!). The light breezes imitate small melodies, the whirling gusts resemble a great chorus; the howling winds cross [through] and so the multitude of openings become empty. And only you do not see their blending harmonies and crafty tricks?

Zi Yue says: [so] the piping of earth is from these numerous apertures; and the piping of people may be compared to the bamboo [flute]; I dare to ask about the piping of heaven.

Zi Qi says: "Blowing the ten-thousand things in different ways, causing them to be themselves, each [with] their own choosings (取), who is the one who stirs (怒) them all up?

---

Some Notes on References:

• 庄子全解: The Zhuangzi Complete Understanding. Contemporary Chinese commentary.
• Shuowen: early Chinese character dictionary. Compiled 100 CE, presented 120 CE.
• Guangyun: "Broad Rhymes." Chinese rhyming dictionary, compiled in 1007-1008 CE. 

The Lofty Crags:

• 庄子全解:畏佳 = 嵔崔; 形容山勢高大險峻的樣子 / 形容山势高大险峻的样子. The commentary notes 畏佳 should actually be 嵔崔. 嵔崔 describes the lofty and precipitous style of the mountain features.
  
• 嵔 wěi wèi  (Guangyun): 嵔崔山髙曲下 the lofty crooked (places) below the towering mountains
  
• 崔 cuī (Shuowen): 大高也; 从山隹. The Great Heights. From (the sounds) of “mountain” (shan) and “birds” (zhui).

Cavities and Apertures:

• 庄子全解：百围大树上的空穴 the apertures and openings on the hundred-span great trees
  
• 枅 (Shuowen): 屋櫨也. 从木幵聲. The supporting block or column of a house. From the sound of 木 (mu4) and 幵 (kai1, “opening”).
  
• 似洼者: 有的像洼池 some are like a low-lying pool or hollow.
  
• 似污者: 有的像钱塘 some are like a walled embankment or pond

The Piping of Heaven 

According to the Complete Zhuangzi commentary these are the shapes of the numerous openings emitting the various dissimilar sounds 都是形容众窍发出的各种不同的声音. The notes in this section are a combination of commentary explanations and dictionary references. The section is notably challenging for trying to capture the different sounds of the winds passing through the apertures of the great trees.

• 激者:如水激之声 like the sound of water rushing (being excited) (Commentary)
  
• 謞:如飞箭声 like the noise of a flying arrow (Commentary)
  
• 叱:to loudly rebuke, shout at, to hoot at (Pleco)
  
• 吸:to inhale, breathe in, suck up (Pleco)
  
• 叫:to cry, shout; call, greet; hire, order (Pleco)
  
• 譹:如嚎哭声 to bawl, to wail, to cry (Shuowen)
  
• 宎 (yao3):如风吹深谷的声音 like the sound of the wind blowing through the deep valley or gorge (Commentary)
  
• 咬:哀叹声 sorrowful sigh; lamentation (Shuowen)

The Blending Harmonies and Crafty Arts

The Complete Zhuangzi Commentary 庄子全解 translates 調調 and 刁刁 in reference to the branches and leaves of the trees. Legge and Watson do this as well (presumably based on the commentary tradition). I agree with Ziporyn, who translates these terms more directly. 

• 調:树枝摇动的样子 the manner of the shaking branches of the trees (Commentary)
  
• 刁:树叶微动的样子 the manner of the slight motions of the leaves of the trees (Commentary)

My Comments (Abridged):

The passage contains multiple self-referential points, beginning with the names Mottled South-Wall and Wandering Fixed-Face. Wandering Fixed-Face doesn’t recognize the complexity of the winds, whereas Mottled South-Wall perceives the dappling complexity of the movements of the winds through the trees and hollows. Amusingly, Sir Fixed-Face is also roaming or wandering, while Mottled reached the destination of South Wall. This might be an allusion to the destination of the Southern Darkness. If this is the case, Fixed-Face may not be hopeless; he may be on the way to understanding, possibly having attained the ability to remain stoically detached. Sir Mottled, however, displays a greater complexity of understanding in his ability to discern the complex shifting of the multitudes.

The passages also reflects Zhuangzi’s thoughts on the perceived dichotomy between the multitudes and the piping of heaven; as Ziporyn points out, South-Wall recognizes there is no difference between the piping of heaven and the many various expressions of life through the voices of the ten-thousand things. In other words, there is no difference between the movements of heaven and the movements of the ten-thousand things. The movements of heaven can be seen in the movements of the ten-thousand things, and the movements of the ten-thousand things reflect the movements of heaven.

This has repercussions for a number of issues, but I am saving this for a more formal project (which I might preview here). Notably, connections to other parts of the text, psychological interpretations, and the politics of vital breath.

Zhuangzi 1.7 Huizi Has a Great Tree

Zhuangzi 1.7

惠子謂莊子曰：「吾有大樹，人謂之樗。其大本擁腫而不中繩墨，其小枝卷曲而不中規矩，立之塗，匠者不顧。今子之言，大而無用，眾所同去也。」莊子曰：「子獨不見狸狌乎？卑身而伏，以候敖者；東西跳梁，不避高下；中於機辟，死於罔罟。今夫斄牛*，其大若垂天之雲。此能為大矣，而不能執鼠。今子有大樹，患其無用，何不樹之於無何有之鄉，廣莫之野，彷徨乎無為其側，逍遙乎寢臥其下？不夭斤斧，物無害者，無所可用，安所困苦哉！」

Huizi spoke to Zhuangzi, saying: "I have a great tree, people call it Ailanthus. It's great root gathers and swells but matches no carpenter’s line;  it's small branches curl and crook and fit no compass or square; standing in the mud (by the roadside), no craftsman (gives it) a second look. Now sir, your words, are great but have no use, the people all agree in discarding (what you say).

Zhuangzi said: “Have you alone never seen a wildcat or a weasel? It's body low, crouching, [until] some wandering creature [appears]; east and west it leaps about, failing to avoid (things) high or  low, [it] falls into a snare or dies in a net. Now sir, [consider] the Wooly Yak, its greatness like clouds suspended from the heavens. It can be considered great, indeed, but cannot catch a mouse. Now, sir has this great tree, and worries it is without use. Why not plant it in a deserted village, or a broad, empty field? [1] [Why not] meander without purpose by its side, or freely and easily sleep beneath its (boughs)? Not cut short by axes or hatchets, things not harming it - why is there any distress![2]

Notes:

中 zhòng  fit, match, accord; hit the target

塗  tú mud = 途 tú way, road, route

辟 = 繴 bì fishing net

斄 = 彊曲毛 qiáng qū máo stubborn, curly wool

無為 without purpose

彷徨 walk aback and forth, undecided (meander)

逍遙 free and unfettered 

Comments:

[1]I really like Watson’s “Not-Even-Anything Village” and the “Field-of-Broad-and-Boundless.”

[2]Translations vary on the target of the phrase (either Huizi or the tree), but it’s worth noting the phrase is ambiguous. Surrendering the concept of instrumental utility relieves both Huizi and the Ailanthus (although, perhaps “releaves” might be more appropriate in the case of the tree).

Zhuangzi 1.6 Huizi Speaks to Zhuangzi About a Gourd

 惠子謂莊子曰：「魏王貽我大瓠之種，我樹之成而實五石，以盛水漿，其堅不能自舉也。剖之以為瓢，則瓠落無所容。非不呺然大也，吾為其無用而掊之。」莊子曰：「夫子固拙於用大矣。宋人有善為不龜手之藥者，世世以洴澼絖為事。客聞之，請買其方百金。聚族而謀曰：『我世世為洴澼絖，不過數金；今一朝而鬻技百金，請與之。』客得之，以說吳王。越有難，吳王使之將。冬，與越人水戰，大敗越人，裂地而封之。能不龜手一也，或以封，或不免於洴澼絖，則所用之異也。今子有五石之瓠，何不慮以為大樽而浮乎江湖，而憂其瓠落無所容？則夫子猶有蓬之心也夫！」

Huizi spoke to Zhuangzi, saying: “The King of Wei gave me the seed of a giant calabash. I cultivated it to completion, when it could fully hold [1] five stone! [2] I filled it with water and broth, [but] it [was] steadfast [3], I could not hoist it myself. (I) cut it in half to make two ladles, in this way the gourd fell [4] apart and cannot contain anything. Nothing but empty giants! I thought it was useless, so I broke it.”

Zhuangzi said: “You certainly are clumsy in using [that which is] great! Among the people of Song there was one who was skilled at making medicine preventing chapped [5] hands. [So] generations took washing silk as their business. A traveler heard about it and asked to purchase the method for 100 gold. The family convened and scheming [6] said: ‘For generations we have washed silk, and never encountered much wealth. Now in one morning we (can) sell (our) art for 100 gold. [Let's] go along with it.’ [7] The traveler obtained it and [thereby] spoke to the King of Wu. Having difficulties with Yue, the King of Wu appointed him general. [In] the winter, after a naval battle with Yue [in which] the people of Yue were greatly defeated, [the King] split the land and conferred it [to the traveler]. [8] Preventing chapped hands was the same (in each case): one [9] took a fief; [while] others were unable to quit washing silk. Now sir has a five-stone gourd. Why not consider making great wine-vessels and floating on the rivers and lakes [10], and not grieving the gourd that fell apart holds nothing? Your way, sir, is like having a mind of weeds [11] - yes sir!”

[1] 實 Watson gives “fit into; stuff into.” This is a little strange, as Watson’s use is the only recorded use of 實 in this manner. I think he’s trying to find a way to convey the idea that the gourd, when filled, weigh five stone. 實 usually means “true,” “actually,” or “fully,” but it can also be opposed to 虛. I think Zhuangzi here is playing on the opposition: the stone is “full,” which renders it immobile (just like the heartmind). By contrast, Zhuangzi and the DDJ both valorize “emptiness” as the real virtue.

[2] An estimated calculation regarding the weight of the gourds: if 1石 (stone) = 120 斤 jīn (also referred to as a catty or kati); and 1斤 jīn = 500g (PRC) or 600g (HK, SG); therefore: (5石)(120斤/石) = 600斤; and (600斤)(500g/斤) = 30,000g = 30kg (PRC); (600 斤)(600g/斤) = 30,000g = 36kg (HK, SG).

[3] 堅 n: "heavily fortified point; fortification," adj: "hard; solid; firm; strong" or "resolute, steadfast." I feel this alludes to Zhuangzi’s overall imagery criticizing “fixation” or “completeness,” particularly in the 成心 (as seen in ZZ 1.3 or ZZ 2.4); see also ZZ 1.2: 其留如詛盟: “those who halt like swearing an oath,” and 其守勝之謂也: “those who defend the victory of words.”

[4] The key is realizing that 落 can refer to the halves of the gourd falling apart. I note the difference here between 瓢 piáo (ladles) versus 瓠 hù (gourd), as the story depends on the different shapes; 落 luò to fall, to drop (like leaves from a tree); to “fall” (die); 无所容 not in any way contain/hold.

[5] 龜 jūn (chapping of the skin). But can we take a moment and appreciate not only deriving龜 jūn (chapped) from 龜 guī (turtle), but also the existence of 龜 as a character? Also 洴澼 píngpì can mean rinsing or bleaching, but the commentary suggests 漂洗 piǎoxǐ (washing or rinsing). I am uncertain if bleaching was part of the ancient practice of silk manufacturing.

[6A] Zhuangzi is consistently critical of 謀 móu as a method and a goal. Compare to other passages in Zhuangzi. ZZ 5.5: 聖人不謀，惡用知？The sage does not scheme; why does he need knowledge? ZZ 7.6: 無為名尸，無為謀府，無為事任，無為知主。Do not for fame play the corpse; do not for schemes govern; do not for affairs take office; do not become a lord of knowledge. ZZ 7.7: 儵與忽謀報渾沌之德，曰 : Shu and Hu scheme (how to) reciprocate Hun Dun’s virtue (Hun Dun = Blending Chaos, and they inadvertently kill Hun Dun by trying to give them the sensory capacities of human beings).

[6B] The real question however is what differentiates “scheming” from “wandering”? Scheming involves (1) a fixed goal; (2) reducing others (and one’s self) to instrumentalist calculations; and (3) being unable to release the conceptual scheme and return to following or mirroring; these are non-anthropocentric modes of relating to the world, opposed by the anthropocentric universal instrumentalization of nature. Essentially, schemes put people at the center of the world, subvert the world to those schemes, and become fixed and unflexible goals, and require endless schematiziation to justify the abstract conceptualization.

[7] 鬻 yù sell; vend (under duress); and 請 qǐng request; invite: “Please go along with it,” or “We request to go along with it.”

[8A] 裂地而封之 “split the land and enfeoffed it” refers to 分封制, the feudal system of the western Zhou dynasty (11C-771BC). Again note the importance of “enclosing” as an image (see 8B).

[8B] Also 裂地而封之: In addition to parallel-but-contrasting situations (the broken gourd versus winning a fief), the text suggests parallel-but-contrasting images: with the gourds: in the first instance, the gourds fall apart and cannot hold anything; in the second instance the land is split 裂 apart and then enclosed 封 to create a fief. At first glance it appears the King of Wu splits the land, but the parallel structure between the land and the gourds might suggest the traveler is splitting the land and taking a fief.

[9] 或 can be “someone” and “someone,” so here I use it as “(some)one” and “others.

[10] 江湖 jiānghú: the rivers and lakes; I suspect Zhuangzi (and perhaps this passage in particular) was the basis for using 江湖 as a synonym for “vagrant life.” The term 江湖is also synonymous for the “floating world” of wandering kung-fu heroes (also a kind of “vagrant life”). Zhuangzi’s vagrant heroes are a motley assortment of cripples, madmen, beggars, and ex-criminals. These figures are all, in some respect members of a wandering precariat who survive through creativity, transformation, and a rejection of fixed form. Zhuangzi regards the figures as possessing true “virtue” (德) the ability to identify with Dao, to be indifferent to loss, and to survive (via wandering) apart from the managerial system of sages and states. In this respect Zhuangzi’s heroes represent a radical critique of the Warring States valorization of sages, kings, and heroic figures. In this manner Zhuangzi both subverts and elevates the concept of virtue in warring states discourse. The term then later reappears in kung-fu.

[11] 則夫子猶有蓬之心也夫！ “Your way, sir, is like having a mind of weeds - yes sir!” Note the relation between Huizi’s attempt to fill the gourd versus his inability to empty his mind. The Confucian project of cultivating is one of building up, whereas Laozi and Zhuangzi both emphasize emptying out. Emptying is a necessary component of the therapeutic response to the fixed mind. The fixed-mind maintains fixed distinctions, fixed applications of language, and fixed intentions. Similarly, empty space is also necessary for life. Small birds find the holes and openings in the underbrush; Peng floats on the wind.