CONTENTS.

Page
Introduction[v]
Note on the Philosophy of Chuang Tzŭ, by Canon Moore[xviii]
CHAPTERI—Transcendental Bliss[1]
"II—The Identity of Contraries[12]
"III—Nourishment of the Soul[33]
"IV—Man among Men[38]
"V—The Evidence of Virtue Complete[56]
"VI—The Great Supreme[68]
"VII—How to Govern[91]
"VIII—Joined Toes[99]
"IX—Horses' Hoofs[106]
"X—Opening Trunks[110]
"XI—On Letting Alone[119]
"XII—The Universe[135]
"XIII—The Tao of God[157]
"XIV—The Circling Sky[173]
"XV—Self-Conceit[190]
"XVI—Exercise of Faculties[195]
"XVII—Autumn Floods[200]
"XVIII—Perfect Happiness[220]
"XIX—The Secret of Life[229]
"XX—Mountain Trees[245]
"XXI—T'ien Tzŭ Fang[261]
"XXII—Knowledge travels North[276]
"XXIII—Kêng Sang Ch'u[294]
"XXIV—Hsü Wu Kuei[311]
"XXV—Tsê Yang[335]
"XXVI—Contingencies[352]
"XXVII—Language[363]
"XXVIII—On Declining Power[370]
"XXIX—Robber Chê[387]
"XXX—On Swords[407]
"XXXI—The Old Fisherman[413]
"XXXII—Lieh Tzŭ[423]
"XXXIII—The Empire[437]
Index[455]
Errata and Addenda[466]

Introduction.

Chuang Tzŭ[1] belongs to the third and fourth centuries before Christ. He lived in the feudal age, when China was split up into a number of States owning a nominal allegiance to the royal, and weakly, House of Chou.

He is noticed by the historian Ssŭ-ma Ch'ien, who flourished at the close of the second century B.C., as follows:—

Chuang Tzŭ was a native of Mêng.[2] His personal name was Chou. He held a petty official post at Ch'i-yüan in Mêng.[3] He lived contemporaneously with Prince Hui of the Liang State and Prince Hsüan of the Ch'i State. His erudition was most varied; but his chief doctrines are based upon the sayings of Lao Tzŭ.[4] Consequently, his writings, which extend to over 100,000 words, are mostly allegorical.[5]

He wrote The Old Fisherman, Robber Chê, and Opening Trunks, with a view to asperse the Confucian school and to glorify the mysteries of Lao Tzŭ.[6] Wei Lei Hsü, Kêng Saṅg Tzŭ, and the like, are probably unsubstantial figments of his imagination.[7] Nevertheless, his literary and dialectic skill was such that the best scholars of the age proved unable to refute his destructive criticism of the Confucian and Mihist schools.[8]