Were there “Inner Chapters” in the Warring States? A New Examination of Evidence about the Zhuangzi

Abstract

This article questions the traditional beliefs that the seven “inner chapters” constitute the earliest stratum of the Zhuangzi, that they already formed a coherent unit in the Warring States, and that they came from a single hand. After reviewing what is known about the early history of the Zhuangzi text, various arguments that have been made in support of early, coherent inner chapters, are examined. Taking the Shiji portrait of the Zhuangzi as the starting point, it is shown that Sima Qian's description and use of the Zhuangzi already gives us reason to question the importance, or even existence, of the inner chapters in the Western Han. It is then shown that pre-Han and Han references to Zhuang Zhou, and parallels with the Zhuangzi text, do not necessarily even require (or support) the existence of most inner chapters, and certainly give no evidence that they were coherent and had any kind of canonical status. Though this does not constitute proof, it does give us reason to rethink the traditional beliefs about the authorship and structure of the early Zhuangzi text. In closing, the possibility of a Huainan Zhuangzi, and the role Liu An and his court might have played in the compilation of the inner chapters, is considered. Cet article met en question les conceptions traditionnelles suivant lesquelles les sept “chapitres intérieurs” constituent la strate la plus ancienne du Zhuangzi, formaient déjà un ensemble cohérent à l'époque des Royaumes Combattants, et étaient de la même main. Ce qu'on connaît de l'histoire ancienne du texte du Zhuangzi est passé en revue, puis sont examinés les divers arguments qui ont été avancés en faveur de l'ancienneté et de la cohérence des chapitres intérieurs. Partant du portrait du Zhuangzi dans le Shiji, il est démontré que déjà la description et l'usage du texte par Sima Qian nous invitent à nous poser des questions sur l'importance, voire l'existence, des chapitres intérieurs à l'époque des Han occidentaux. Puis il est constaté que les références à Zhuang Zhou sous les Han et avant, ainsi que les parallèles avec le texte du Zhuangzi, ne supposent pas nécessairement (ni ne confortent) l'existence de la plupart des chapitres intérieurs, et ne suggèrent certainement pas que ceux-ci formaient un ensemble cohérent et avaient un quelconque statut canonique. Si ces faits n'ont pas valeur de preuve, ils invitent à s'interroger sur les conceptions traditionnelles concernant l'auteur et la structure du texte primitif du Zhuangzi. En conclusion sont considérés la possibilité d'un Zhuangzi originaire de Huainan ainsi que le rôle qu'auraient pu jouer Liu An et sa cour dans la compilation des chapitres intérieurs.

Critique of Imperial Reason: Lessons from the Zhuangzi

“…This polyvocal and open form evades interpretive closure (Gentz and Meyer 2015, Tan 2016), and makes it difficult to ascribe to the text any specific or explicitly political position. Its uncertain provenance and complex history of transmission makes it difficult to assign authorial intent and to align the text with the known political views of any historical figure (Chan 2002, Graham 2003, Lin 2003, Liu 1994, Fraser 1997, Jiang 2016, Klein 2011.…”

Spontaneous thought and early Chinese ideas of ‘non-action’ and ‘emotion’

“…In the Confucian tradition, the material includes the transmitted texts purportedly representing the thoughts of Mencius 孟子 (372-289 BCE) and Xúnzǐ 荀子 (d. 238 BCE), and in addition the Human Nature Comes from Destiny 性自命出, an anonymous text discovered in the 1990s in a tomb that was closed around 300 BCE. In the Daoist tradition, the material includes the 'Inner Chapters' 內篇 of the Zhuāngzǐ 莊子 (traditionally attributed to Zhuāngzǐ 莊子, 370-287 BCE, though see Klein, 2011, for an alternative view) and the anonymous text called Inward Training 內業, which survived as one of the 76 (originally 86) predominantly Legalist chapters of the collection called Guǎnzǐ 管子. In the following, my translations are in large part based on the translations in Bloom (2009), Hutton (2014), Cook (2012), Graham (1989), and Roth (1999), though I have diverged from the latter whenever I disagree with them or find that the present context requires a change of wording.…”

Wandering the Way: A Eudaimonistic Approach to the Zhuāngzǐ

“…9 On the composite nature of Warring States texts, see Boltz (2005). On the possible authorial disunity of the Zhuāngzǐ "inner" books, see Zhāng (1983), Fraser (1997), Klein (2010), McCraw (2010), and Brooks (2011). toward a roughly overlapping eudaimonistic vision.…”