生平經歷

司馬遷《史記·老莊申韓列傳》載：「莊子者，蒙人也，名周。周嘗為蒙漆園吏，與梁惠王、齊宣王同時。其學無所不闚，然其要本歸於老子之言。故其著書十餘萬言，大抵率寓言也。……其言洸洋自恣以適己，故自王公大人不能器之。」

根據以上記載，莊子名周。《知北游》中說「周、遍、咸，三者異名同實，其指一也！」這可能是莊子對自己名字的特地解釋。又有說莊子字子休，見于《警世通言》，但司馬遷沒有記載，《莊子》中也沒有相關証據，恐怕不確。

莊子的生活年代，一般認為是前369年—前286年。莊子逝世的那年，宋國滅亡。也有認為莊子活得更長的，《莊子》中有「舊國舊都，望之暢然」，顯然宋亡以後才稱呼「舊國舊都」。

莊子屬道家，從《莊子》很容易得出這個結論。司馬遷說莊子著書十萬餘言，而今本《莊子》僅33篇6萬5千多字，分內篇、外篇、雜篇三部分。《漢書·藝文志》載「《莊子》五十二篇」，可能是在晉代郭象注《莊子》刪去了。以前一般認為《莊子》全部為莊子所著。從宋代起，竟成問題，認為內篇為莊子本人所著，而外篇和雜篇是道家弟子託名。總的來說，《莊子》一書除了《雜篇·說劍》類似縱橫家所著以外，其思想還是統一的。莊子寫書風格獨特，自己稱（《雜篇·寓言》）以不拘一格的寓言寫作。

莊子除做過漆園吏以外，沒有擔任過其他官職。據《外篇·秋水》記載，楚威王曾派人邀請莊周為楚國宰相。莊子以寧為泥中嬉戲的活烏龜，也不願意為廟堂之上，受人敬拜，用以卜卦之龜殼為由，拒絕了楚威王的邀請（泥中之龜）。他一生淡泊名利，主張修身養性，清靜無為，順應自然，追求精神逍遙無待。一直過著深居簡出的隱居生活。和惠施交好。

對于莊子的行為，有些人認為這是真正的逍遙，也有人認為是憤世嫉俗的表現，清代胡文英在《莊子獨見》持此觀點，他說：「人只知三閭之哀怨，而不知漆園之哀怨有甚于三閭也。蓋三閭之哀怨在一國，而漆園之哀在天下；三閭之哀怨在一時，而漆園之哀怨在萬世。」

莊子還被認為是最早的無政府主義者。

思想淵源

世以「老莊」並稱，莊子和老子都是道家的代表人物。當然莊子的思想是承繼于老子的。相同點主要在「道法自然」的觀點中，莊子說「天有大美而不言……是故至人無為，大聖不作，觀于天地之謂也。」還有就是無為、反對戰爭等觀點。在養生觀點上，雖然老莊都談養生，但莊子更為重視，《讓王》中有「兩臂重于天下」。

但老莊之間還是有區別的。法家的韓非援引《老子》。而莊子拋棄了法家援引老子思想中講權術的一面。章太炎的《論諸子學》中有「其術似與老子相同，其心乃于老子絕異。故《天下篇》歷敘諸家，己與關尹、老聃裂分為二。其褒之以『至極』，尊之以『博大真人』者，以其自然之說，為己所取法也。其裂分為二者，不欲以老子之權術自污也。」

哲學思想

處世論

莊子認為人活在世上須曠達處之泰然，如「游于羿之彀中，中央者，中地也；然而不中者，命也」（《內篇·德充符》），羿,「古之善射者，夫利害相攻則天下皆羿也」，彀指利害得失，「故免乎弓矢之害者，自以為巧，欣然多己，及至不免，則自恨其謬而志傷神辱，斯未能達命之情者也」，中與不中而「知不可奈何而安之若命，唯有德者能之」（《內篇·德充符》）。對於君主的殘暴，莊子是一再強調的，「回聞衛君，其年壯，其行獨；輕用其國，而不見其過；輕用民死，死者以國量乎澤若蕉，民其無如矣。」。所以莊子不願去做官，因為他認為伴君如伴虎，只能「順」。「汝不知夫養虎者乎！不敢以生物與之，為其殺之之怒也；不敢以全物與之，為其決之之怒；時其饑飽，達其怒心。虎之與人異類而媚養己者，順也；故其殺者，逆也。」還要防止馬屁拍到馬腳上，「夫愛馬者，以筐盛矢，以蜄盛溺。適有蚊虻僕緣，而拊之不時，則缺銜毀首碎胸。」伴君之難，可見一斑。莊子認為人生應該追求自由。

與佛教相類似的，莊子也認為人生有悲的一面。《齊物論》中有「一受其成形，不忘以待盡。與物相刃相靡，其行盡如馳，而莫之能止，不亦悲乎！終身役役而不見其成功，苶然疲役而不知其所歸，可不哀邪！人謂之不死，奚益！其形化，其心與之然，可不謂大哀乎？人之生也，固若是芒乎？其我獨芒，而人亦有不芒者乎？」莊子認為如果能做到「齊物」，那麼他便能達到「逍遙」的境界。這是莊子哲學中另一個重要概念，這是個體精神解放的境界，即無矛盾地生存於世界之中。莊子並不否認矛盾，只是強調主觀上對矛盾的擺脫。莊子用「無為」來解釋這一術語，與老子不同，這裏「無為」是指心靈不被外物所拖累的自由自在，無拘無束的狀態。這種狀態，也被稱為「無待」，意為沒有相對的東西。這時，人們拋棄了功名利祿的追求欲望，「乘天地之正，而禦六氣之辯，以遊無窮」。這句被普遍認為《逍遙遊》一篇主旨，同時也是《莊子》一書的主旨。這是一種心與「道」合一的境界。

莊子認為一般人很虛偽，「人心險於山川，難於知天。天猶有春秋冬夏旦暮之期，人者厚貌深情。」。他批評儒家「以仁義攖人之心」，這樣會導致「天下脊脊大亂」」。而君主的專制統治和對知識的愛好，只會使人心更加敗壞，「民之於利甚勤，子有殺父，臣有殺君，正晝為盜，日中穴阫。」

流沙河認為，莊子的為人主要有四點，「一曰立場，站在環中。二曰方法，信奉無為。三曰理想，追慕澤雉。四曰修養，緊守心齋。」所謂環中，就是不持有任何立場。《內篇·齊物論》中有「得其環中，以應無窮」，《雜篇·則陽》中有「得其環中以隨成」。無為在《莊子》中經常出現，莊子認為無論治國還是做人，都要無為。但無為頗難解釋，流沙河認為是「偽」或是「人為」的意思。「澤雉十步一啄，百步一飲，不蘄畜乎樊中」，是追求自由。「若一志，無聽之以耳而聽之以心，無聽之以心而聽之以氣！聽止於耳，心止於符。氣也者，虛而待物者也。唯道集虛。虛者，心齋也。」，所謂心齋就是要排除心中的種種雜念。

體道

莊子的哲學思想大體可歸納為以道為實體的本體論、「萬物齊一」的相對主義認識論，並由此引發出其獨有的主觀唯心主義傾向和相對主義詭辯傾向。這種本于自然的人性論與倫理觀，為後世的中國知識分子提供了另一種生存方式和價值觀念的可能性。莊子的哲學提倡破除「肉身我」與「認知我」，追求超然物外的審美態度，于事于物不著痕跡。陰陽本指事物兩種相互對立的方面，「一陰一陽之謂道」（《周易·繫辭傳》），莊子將之定義為氣所包含的矛盾對立要素，「陰陽，氣之大者也」（《莊子·則陽》）。

在莊子哲學中，萬物是一個形而上的存在的部分，他將該存在稱為生主。這個存在「存在而無實體」，即「有情無形」。它是一切人類行為、情感的「真正主宰者」。因它驅使萬物而不受萬物驅使，故它是唯一超然于萬物的。因為所有其他萬物都處于驅使、受驅使的循環之中。唯獨它不然。人類作為生主的一部分，將自己投入主觀中，使自己無法與該形而上的存在一致。人類希求生主以外的事物，希望成為其他的事物。從而被外物所驅使，成為了受驅使的，從而破壞了生主的超然性。。生主既與萬物同時存在，莊子認為作為生主的一部分，人類應當從絕對的分別中抽離出來，並認識到一切的分別都是主觀的、虛幻的，這樣才可以脫離受外物驅使奴役的境地，保養生主。「道」是宇宙的本體，是一個無限的概念。由「道」而產生了天地萬物，「道」本身是萬物之源。 「夫道有情有信，無為無形，可傳而不可受，可得而不可見，自本自根，未有天地，自古以固存，神鬼神帝，生天生地。」。人如果得 「道」，即獲得了無限和自由。

莊子「道通為一」的思想和近代德日進的哲學思想在把宇宙看成一個有機整體的這一點上是相同的。

政治哲學

莊子和儒墨有一點很大的不同，儒家墨家推崇聖人，而道家則反對推崇聖賢。老子說：「不尚賢，使民不爭。不貴難得之貨，使民不為盜。」，「絕聖棄智，民利百倍；絕仁棄義，民複孝慈；絕巧棄利，盜賊無有。」莊子說「聖人生而大盜起」。莊子認為聖人的主義學說不過是「竊國大盜」的工具罷了。其中的典型例子就是田成子，篡奪了齊國的政權。「田成子一旦殺其君而盜其國，所盜者豈獨其國邪？並與其聖知之法而盜之……竊齊國，並與其聖知之法一守其盜賊之身。」對于聖人，莊子借用盜跖之口批評「黃帝尚不能全德……堯不慈，舜不孝，禹偏枯，湯放其主，武王伐紂。」，說孔子是「魯之巧偽人」。莊子還說「凶德有五，中德為首」，所謂「中德」就是有心為德，有心為德就要虛偽，「日出多偽，士民安取不偽。」，會導致天下大亂。莊子還對聖人學說的積極性懷疑，認為聖人可以使一人變好，也使三人變壞。另外，莊子反對儒家的等級觀念，儒家說「君君臣臣父父子子」，莊子認為「道通為一」，認為道在萬物，萬物平等。

對治國，莊子反對儒家的以禮法治國和法家的以法律治國。莊子認為儒家的仁義、禮法違背人性，使百姓「失其樸」。對于刑罰治國，「昔者堯治天下，不賞而民勸，不罰而民畏。今子賞罰而民且不仁德自此衰，刑自此立，後世之亂自此始矣。」。莊子反對儒家和法家的治國方法的核心，是以知治國。莊子認為知是「爭之器」，而且知往往會被大盜所利用，所謂「盜亦有道」便是如此。對于以知治國，莊子說「大亂之本，必生于堯舜之間，其末存乎千世之後。千世之後，其必有人與人相食者也。」

所以，莊子與老子一樣，主張無為治國，任其自然，認為「絕聖棄知而天下大治」，君主要「無容私」，「汝游心于淡，合氣與漠，順物自然而無容私焉，而天下治矣。」。莊子在《莊子》中描寫過他心中的「至德之世」，「不尚賢，不使能，上如標枝，民如野鹿。端正而不知以為義，相愛而不知以為仁，實而不知以為忠，當而不知以為信，蠢動而相使，不以為賜。是故行而無跡，事而無傳。」

文學貢獻

老子認為「道可道非常道」，莊子也認為道不可言。但道不可言，又不得不言，所以莊子採用的是寓言、巵言的方法，「寓言十九，重言十七，巵言日出，和以天倪。」這種方式讓莊子的思想像水一般，不會懼怕後人的肢解。同時讓他的觀點不會被歷史湮沒。不同的時期拜讀，會得更新的意義。莊周夢蝶、混沌開竅、庖丁解牛、惠施相梁、螳螂捕蟬等都是其出色的寓言。莊子的文字，想像高妙，天馬行空，流暢通達，堪稱中國文學史上的一宛奇葩，將先秦散文推向了一個新的高峰。

相對老子而言，莊子的思想傾向于對藝術及自由的追求。從莊周夢蝶、濠梁之辯（子非魚安知魚之樂）等事情可見。

信仰形象

道教稱南華微妙真人莊周、沖虛真人列禦寇、通玄真人辛文子、洞靈真人康桑楚，稱為四大真人，加上文始真人尹喜、質初真人徐甲、貴生真人楊朱，則稱「老君門下七真」。

指微派稱太上老君有高足太乙救苦天尊，老君自己化身為老聃，又命太乙救苦天尊化身為莊周，莊周白日飛昇於八月八日，次日居然又現身。民間在八月初八日祭祀太乙救苦天尊，政府在八月初九日，稱元成節。

「南華真仙」、「南華老仙」或「南華大仙」等，係一虛擬人物，多見於小說諸如《二刻拍案驚奇》和《三國演義》等，其原型應該來自於道教對莊子之封號「南華真人」或「南華真君」。

《三國演義》第一回中，南華老仙贈書《太平要術》給張角。書載：南華老仙，碧眼童顏，手執藜杖，以天書三卷授之曰：「此名太平要術。汝得之，當代天宣化，普救世人；若萌異心，必獲惡報。」角拜問姓名。老人曰：「吾乃南華老仙也。」言訖，化陣清風而去。

來由

唐玄宗天寶（742年—756年）初年，詔封莊周為南華真人，稱其著書《莊子》為《南華經》。不過，稱莊子為「南華」在唐朝前就已如此。成玄英《南華真經註疏序》中就稱莊子為「南華」，《隋書·經籍志》記載梁曠著有《南華論》。

約成於東晉末南朝初的《太極真人敷靈寶齋戒威儀諸經要訣》稱：「莊周者，太上南華仙人也，其前世學道時，願言：『我得道成仙，才智洞達，當出世化生人中，敷演《道德經五千文》，宣暢道意。』」，當時道教流傳的《靈寶經》中已稱莊子為南華仙人。

至於為何用「南華」作為封號，歷來說法不一。一是認為傳說莊周曾隱居於曹州南華山，清朝宣穎《南華經解》沿用，不過明代以前少有此說。若按《真誥》記載，莊子師「長桑公子」（又稱長桑真君，即扁鵲之師）隱於抱犢山，服北育火丹，白日升天，而非隱居在南華山。

另一說，則來自北宋道士陳景元。在《南華真經章句音義》中，陳景元主張南華是「義取離明英華，發揮道妙」之義。在《南華真經義海纂微》中，南宋褚伯秀認為，南華同南極、東華之類，均為上天職任仙真的封號，難以究其義理由來。

按道教《要修科儀戒律鈔》引用《上清洞真智慧觀身大戒文》稱「當念東遊青林東華，當念西遊安養西華，當念北遊碧羅北華，當念南遊太丹南華，當念遊遨留憩玉京、崑崙中華」，將「太丹南華」與「青林東華」、「安養西華」、「碧羅北華」、「玉京、崑崙中華」並舉，太丹南華可能是南方的仙境，類同玉京、崑崙。

文學與歷史

據司馬遷《史記·老子韓非列傳》記載：「莊子者，蒙人也，名周」。有說莊子字「子休」，見於成玄英《莊子註疏》的序文及小說《警世通言》，但此說僅載於小說，不見於《史記》，《莊子》中也缺乏相關證據。

雖然小說作者和道教徒取材於莊周隱居南華山的典故，但基本上，南華老仙的故事，仍屬作者構想、創作的人物和情節，不應將之誤解為史實，或歸類為歷史。

影視形象

• 1913年香港首部無聲電影《莊子試妻》：黎北海飾演莊周

• 《大秦帝國之縱橫》

Life

The only account of the life of Zhuangzi is a brief sketch in chapter 63 of Sima Qian's Records of the Grand Historian, and most of the information it contains seems to have simply been drawn from anecdotes in the Zhuangzi itself. In Sima's biography, he is described as a minor official from the town of Meng (in modern Anhui) in the state of Song, living in the time of King Hui of Liang and King Xuan of Qi (late 4th century BC). Sima Qian writes:

::Chuang-Tze had made himself well acquainted with all the literature of his time, but preferred the views of Lao-Tze; and ranked himself among his followers, so that of the more than ten myriads of characters contained in his published writings the greater part are occupied with metaphorical illustrations of Lao's doctrines. He made "The Old Fisherman," "The Robber Chih," and "The Cutting open Satchels," to satirize and expose the disciples of Confucius, and clearly exhibit the sentiments of Lao. Such names and characters as "Wei-lei Hsu" and "Khang-sang Tze" are fictitious, and the pieces where they occur are not to be understood as narratives of real events.

::But Chuang was an admirable writer and skillful composer, and by his instances and truthful descriptions hit and exposed the Mohists and Literati. The ablest scholars of his day could not escape his satire nor reply to it, while he allowed and enjoyed himself with his sparkling, dashing style; and thus it was that the greatest men, even kings and princes, could not use him for their purposes.

::King Wei of Chu, having heard of the ability of Chuang Chau, sent messengers with large gifts to bring him to his court, and promising also that he would make him his chief minister. Chuang-Tze, however, only laughed and said to them, "A thousand ounces of silver are a great gain to me; and to be a high noble and minister is a most honorable position. But have you not seen the victim-ox for the border sacrifice? It is carefully fed for several years, and robed with rich embroidery that it may be fit to enter the Grand Temple. When the time comes for it to do so, it would prefer to be a little pig, but it can not get to be so. Go away quickly, and do not soil me with your presence. I had rather amuse and enjoy myself in the midst of a filthy ditch than be subject to the rules and restrictions in the court of a sovereign. I have determined never to take office, but prefer the enjoyment of my own free will."

The validity of his existence has been questioned by Russell Kirkland, who writes:

According to modern understandings of Chinese tradition, the text known as the Chuang-tzu was the production of a 'Taoist' thinker of ancient China named Chuang Chou/Zhuang Zhou. In reality, it was nothing of the sort. The Chuang-tzu known to us today was the production of a thinker of the third century CE named Kuo Hsiang. Though Kuo was long called merely a 'commentator,' he was in reality much more: he arranged the texts and compiled the present 33-chapter edition. Regarding the identity of the original person named Chuang Chou/Zhuangzi, there is no reliable historical data at all.

However, Sima Qian's biography of Zhuangzi pre-dates Guo Xiang (Kuo Hsiang) by centuries. Furthermore, the Han Shu "Yiwenzhi" (Monograph on literature) lists a text Zhuangzi, showing that a text with this title existed no later than the early 1st century AD, again pre-dating Guo Xiang by centuries.

Writings

Zhuangzi is traditionally credited as the author of at least part of the work bearing his name, the Zhuangzi. This work, in its current shape consisting of 33 chapters, is traditionally divided into three parts: the first, known as the "Inner Chapters", consists of the first seven chapters; the second, known as the "Outer Chapters", consist of the next 15 chapters; the last, known as the "Mixed Chapters", consist of the remaining 11 chapters. The meaning of these three names is disputed: according to Guo Xiang, the "Inner Chapters" were written by Zhuangzi, the "Outer Chapters" written by his disciples, and the "Mixed Chapters" by other hands; the other interpretation is that the names refer to the origin of the titles of the chapters—the "Inner Chapters" take their titles from phrases inside the chapter, the "Outer Chapters" from the opening words of the chapters, and the "Mixed Chapters" from a mixture of these two sources.

Further study of the text does not provide a clear choice between these alternatives. On the one side, as Martin Palmer points out in the introduction to his translation, two of the three chapters Sima Qian cited in his biography of Zhuangzi, come from the "Outer Chapters" and the third from the "Mixed Chapters". "Neither of these are allowed as authentic Chuang Tzu chapters by certain purists, yet they breathe the very spirit of Chuang Tzu just as much as, for example, the famous 'butterfly passage' of chapter 2."

On the other hand, chapter 33 has been often considered as intrusive, being a survey of the major movements during the "Hundred Schools of Thought" with an emphasis on the philosophy of Hui Shi. Further, A.C. Graham and other critics have subjected the text to a stylistic analysis and identified four strains of thought in the book: a) the ideas of Zhuangzi or his disciples; b) a "primitivist" strain of thinking similar to Laozi in chapters 8-10 and the first half of chapter 11; c) a strain very strongly represented in chapters 28-31 which is attributed to the philosophy of Yang Chu; and d) a fourth strain which may be related to the philosophical school of Huang-Lao. In this spirit, Martin Palmer wrote that "trying to read Chuang Tzu sequentially is a mistake. The text is a collection, not a developing argument."

Zhuangzi was renowned for his brilliant wordplay and use of parables to convey messages. His critiques of Confucian society and historical figures are humorous and at times ironic.

Influence

Zhuangzi has influenced thinking far beyond East Asia. The German philosopher Martin Buber translated his texts in 1910. In 1930, Martin Heidegger asked for Buber's translation of Zhuangzi after his Bremen speech "On the Essence of Truth". In order to explain his own philosophy, Heidegger read from chapter 17, where Zhuangzi says to the thinker Hui Shih:

The historian of ideas Dag Herbjørnsrud concludes: "It may therefore be difficult to say where the philosophies of Lao Tzu and Zhuangzi end and where the most influential German thinking of the twentieth century starts ..."

In the beginning (08:59) of the film The Matrix (1999), the lead character Neo asks his visitors whether they had the feeling where they were not sure if they are awake or dreaming. This is a reference to Zhuangzi's "Butterfly Dream": "Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man."

Biological evolution

In a passage in his writings, Zhuangzi described the transmutation of species. In The Complete Works Of Chuang Tzu, translated by Burton Watson it is stated that:

The seeds of things have mysterious workings. In the water they become Break Vine, on the edges of the water they become Frog's Robe. If they sprout on the slopes they become Hill Slippers. If Hill Slippers get rich soil, they turn into Crow's Feet. The roots of Crow's Feet turn into maggots and their leaves turn into butterflies. Before long the butterflies are transformed and turn into insects that live under the stove; they look like snakes and their name is Ch'u-t'o. After a thousand days, the Ch'u-t'o insects become birds called Dried Leftover Bones. The saliva of the Dried Leftover Bones becomes Ssu-mi bugs and the Ssu-mi bugs become Vinegar Eaters. I-lo bugs are born from the Vinegar Eaters, and Huang-shuang bugs from Chiu-yu bugs. Chiu-yu bugs are born from Mou-jui bugs and Mou-jui bugs are born from Rot Grubs and Rot Grubs are born from Sheep's Groom. Sheep's Groom couples with bamboo that has not sprouted for a long while and produces Green Peace plants. Green Peace plants produce leopards and leopards produce horses and horses produce men. Men in time return again to the mysterious workings. So all creatures come out of the mysterious workings and go back into them again.

The 20th century Chinese philosopher and essayist Hu Shih considered Zhuangzi a Chinese forerunner of evolution.