The thirty-three sections of the Chuang Tzu annotated by Kuo Hsiang of the Chin dynasty were published during the period of the Northern Sung dynasty. Meanwhile, a preface allegedly by Kuo Hsiang was also printed in the book. The preface is as follows:Chuang Tzu was a man who had good knowledge of the origins of things in the universe and avoided no fantastic ideas. His remarks are hard to understand yet pertinent to phenomena. Any remark which is hard to understand (...) yet pertinent to phenomena may be true but useless; any remark which touches no actual things may be lofty but impracticable. This is surely different from a reluctant rise after inability. If the mind is free from preoccupations, it will respond to events at any time, and as a result, remarks will be cautious. Adapting himself to changes in the universe, Chuang Tzu was not merely turning out writings in the form of dialogues on things beyond human experience. (shrink)

The book entitled the Huang Ti nei ching [Canonical Works of Huang Ti] has two sections - the "Su Wen" section and the "Ling Shu" section - and each section contains eighty-one articles. It was written by several authors in different historical periods. According to historical records and scholars' studies of the content and context of the book, we can roughly say that it was written in the period between the late years of the Warring States era and the early (...) years of the Eastern Han dynasty. Seven articles in the "Su Wen" section were materials from an "older version" and were merged into the book by Wang Fing in the Tang dynasty. They were probably written by scholars in the Eastern Han period or a little later. The two articles on acupuncture and pathology have been proved forgeries made in the Tang-Sung period. They should not have been included in the book because they contain more idealist dregs than do the other articles. (shrink)

Having read the works of Wang Ch'ung [A.D. 27-c. 100], I realized that they need to be recapitulated. Here I shall evaluate Wang Ch'ung and his thought and present what I feel to be the real significance that Wang Ch'ung's thought still has today.

In ancient times in our country, Wang Ch'ung was an eminent materialist and a brilliant atheist, a progressive thinker who opposed the orthodox feudal thought. This has gone basically unquestioned. This year the February 21 issue of Kuang-ming jih-pao printed in its philosophy section an article by Comrade T'ung Mo-an, "Is Wang Ch'ung a Peasant Class Thinker?" The article is an evaluation completely denying this. T'ung believes that the purpose of Wang Ch'ung's works was "to uphold the (...) rule of the Han," "ardently and unconditionally to sing the praises of the Han ruler and court," "to make sacred the rule of the Han," "to get the populace to live quietly, forever in a servile position," and "to view inimically and to slander peasant uprisings." "Wang Ch'ung was an orthodox thinker of the landlord class," "a thinker produced in the interests of the rule of the landlord class who confirmed the feudal orthodoxy." Although I myself am not praising Wang Ch'ung as a peasant class thinker or denying that in Wang Ch'ung's thought there are negative elements, I am completely unable to agree with the basic viewpoint that the author puts forward. (shrink)

After a busy day cooking meals, washing clothes, and feeding the pigs, chickens, and ducks, my mother would call to me, "Hey, Little Spring [Hsiao-ch'un, go and get ma's book and bring it here.".

The sources of "knowledge," for Hsün-tzu, came from the realities in objective existence. He took the impressions of these objectively existent realities as his basis of knowledge.

Old societies had the following superstition: Certain persons had demons attached to them, and things that they had used were considered "unclean." These things then became forbidden objects; if one came into contact with them, then one's body, too, would be polluted by the demonic influence.