《列子集释》Vol. 4

In the Shuowen Jiezi, xu is explained as lifting the eyes to look; the Cangjie Pian describes it as the appearance of wide-open eyes. Gao You’s commentary on the Huainanzi says suīxū means looking about and scanning one’s surroundings. The scripture then asks: “With whom can you still live together?” The point is a rebuke: why have you placed yourself so high, boasting of yourself until others sigh at you?

“Great whiteness seems like disgrace; overflowing virtue seems like insufficiency” means that what is most pure white can look as if it were stained, and one whose virtue is deepest can seem still to fall short. The commentary explains that this is because such a person does not compete with outward things for superiority, but habitually stays low and keeps humility and restraint. Some also read rǔ (disgrace) as related to dú (defilement), giving the sense of something soiled or tarnished.

After hearing this, Yang Zhu composed his expression, bowed respectfully, and said: “I will keep your teaching in mind.” Later, when he traveled and reached an inn, the innkeeper came out to welcome and settle him. Yang Zhu himself spread the mat for his host; the host’s wife held towel and comb to attend him. Those who had been sitting in the inn all rose and yielded their seats; those warming themselves at the stove also moved away from it.

If a person hides himself too much and makes himself seem unusual, others will be wary of him and keep their distance. Lu Wenchao thought that “cang” (hide) here might originally have read “zun” (honor/respect). Bo Jun pointed out that Han Feizi, “Inner Storage, Upper”: “When only one person warms himself at the stove, those who come later cannot get near.” This shows that “yang” means drawing close to the stove fire to warm oneself. Sima Biao also said that warming oneself at the fire is called “yang.” Huainanzi records that the rich wore brocade while the poor warmed themselves at the stove.

By contrast, one who knows to see himself as no different from the crowd will not be rejected. Commentators explain that a person who truly withdraws does not boast or put on airs of rank. When Yang Zhu first traveled, people came out to greet and see him off; later, when he heard words that accorded with the Way, he corrected himself, and innkeepers even competed with him for seats. Wang Chongmin and Wang Shumin, based on citations in Taiping Yulan and the context, thought that before “zheng xi” (competing for seats) there may originally have been words such as “zheng zao” (competing at the stove), meaning that neither innkeepers nor those warming at the fire avoided him anymore. Older notes took “e” as “to dislike,” read with the fanqie “wu lu qie” (the reading of e as dislike).

Yang Zhu passed through Song and went east to an inn. The innkeeper had two concubines: one beautiful, one ugly; the ugly one was held in esteem and the beautiful one was slighted…

When Yang Zhu was passing through the state of Song, he headed east and put up at an inn. The innkeeper had two concubines: one was beautiful, the other plain. The plain one was treated with respect, while the beautiful one held a lower status. Yang Zhu asked the innkeeper why this was so. A young man at the inn replied, “The beautiful one thinks herself beautiful, but I do not find her beautiful; the plain one knows she is not good-looking, and I do not find her unattractive either.”

Yang Zhu said to his disciples, “Remember this! If you are virtuous in conduct yet drop the attitude of thinking yourself virtuous, where would you fail to win people’s affection?”

The commentary says that pride, self-satisfaction, and boasting are disapproved by both spirits and human sentiment; humility, caution, and acting in accord with things naturally make people throughout the world glad to honor you. Conduct yourself in this way—who would reject you?

The exegesis holds that this passage sums up the two previous layers of meaning: someone who wins others’ closeness may still invite jealousy; if you do not insist that others draw near to you, people throughout the world will forget your faults—all the more so in the case of only two concubines at an inn.

There is in the world a method that often wins, and a method that usually cannot win. Tao Hongqing holds that “bu chang sheng” (not always victorious) should be read as “chang bu sheng” (always unable to win), because what follows—“the way of constant victory is softness, the way of constant defeat is hardness”—continues directly from this point. The way of constant victory lies in softness and yielding; the way of constant defeat lies in hardness and force. These two principles are in fact easy to understand; it is only that people often fail to grasp them.

Hence the ancients said: one who wins by force must first overcome those weaker than oneself; what is overcome is only what ranks below oneself. One who wins by softness first places oneself below the other; by not competing with things, things cannot overpower one. The strong, once they meet a match, fall into danger; the soft have no such danger, because this way of being in the world is inherently secure.

To govern oneself with this method is like wuwei (non-action); to take on the affairs of the world with it is also like wuwei (non-action). The point is: not striving to win, yet naturally able to succeed; not forcing oneself to bear burdens, yet naturally able to bear them. Commentators take this as following the way of softness, emptiness, and stillness, and resting in a position of non-contention. Whether it is the precious single body or the vast realm under heaven, both can be governed without a mind set on victory, as if empty and without deliberate action. “Tu” here denotes a state of empty stillness and non-action.

Guo Xiang said: hear what the ears can hear, see what the eyes can see; know that effort stops where one does not know, and capacity stops where one cannot act; let things naturally exert their function and follow their nature without competing with externals—this is the way of utmost softness. Then things naturally lift when they lift and support when they support; not a fraction of their weight falls upon me, nor do I strain to lift and hold them.

Firmness and softness are, in themselves, easy to understand. Why do people so often fail to grasp what they mean? Because the impulse to compete and prove oneself stronger runs too deep. When someone meets a person weaker than themselves, that is not true strength; when they meet someone evenly matched, they often land in danger. To demand this competitive spirit of oneself and to take on the affairs of the world in that spirit is to live like one who is driven and never at peace.

A soft and yielding person, even when facing someone weaker, does not wish to surpass them—how much less when facing someone stronger? Others may think they have not “won,” yet they have in fact overcome themselves. Because they do not force their will or boast, they never suffer loss. Laozi said: “The soft and weak overcome the hard and strong.”

The commentary says: To hold to softness is not in order to obtain firmness, yet firmness comes of itself; to preserve softness is not in order to obtain power, yet power comes of itself. Thus firmness and strength are not things one can secure by deliberate striving.

When softness accumulates to a sufficient degree, it eventually turns into firmness; when weakness accumulates sufficiently, it likewise turns into strength. By observing what a person accumulates, one can see whether they are headed toward misfortune or toward blessing.

Fortune and calamity take shape through long accumulation. Those who use force to crush people weaker than themselves will clash when they meet their equals, and in the end harm is inevitable. Soft, yielding strength can overcome those stronger than oneself; its power cannot be reckoned.

Laozi said: “An army that flaunts its strength will perish; trees that are hard and rigid are easily broken. Softness and yielding belong to the category of life; hardness and strength belong to the category of death.” The point of this citation is that when rigidity reaches an extreme, ruin comes easily; softness and yielding stay closer to vitality.

The noble person said: “Those who are domineering and overbearing often do not die well; those who must always win will surely meet a match. To accumulate De (virtue) and practice benevolence and righteousness widely is precisely the way of softness and yielding.”

Among those meant by si zhi tu (“those of the kind associated with death”), the Northern Song editions and Wang’s edition read hua zhi tu (“those of the kind associated with transformation”); the text is now emended to si zhi tu on the authority of the Cang edition and the Shide Tang edition. It is also worth noting that the Hanfeizi, “Jielao,” says that what shu (belongs to a category) is called tu (a kind or class); here too tu should be taken in that sense—as “category” or “kind.”

People’s outward forms need not all be alike. The character read as tong in some manuscripts should be tong (“same”). Wu Kaisheng explains: “Tong means ‘the same.’ Wisdom need not match appearance: someone wise may not look like you, and people who look alike may not share the same wisdom. Sages value sameness in wisdom and do not fixate on sameness in looks; ordinary people befriend those who look like them and keep their distance from those who think like them. If someone’s face resembles their own, they draw near and feel affection; if it does not, they keep away and feel fear.”

A body seven chi tall, with hands and feet of distinct shape, hair on the head and teeth in the mouth, able to stand upright and walk—that is called a ren (human being). Yet a human being is not necessarily without a beast’s heart; even when the heart is beast-like, one may still be treated with affection because the outward form is human. Wings, horns on the head, sharp teeth and parted claws, able to fly aloft or run crouching on the ground—that is called a qinshou (bird or beast). Yet a bird or beast is not necessarily without a human heart; even when the mind is human, one may still be shunned because the outward form is not human.

Fuxi (Paoxi), Nüwa, Shennong, and Yu of the Xia (Xia Hou Shi) are all said in tradition to have had forms unlike ordinary people—snake body and human face, ox head and tiger nose—while possessing the virtue of sages. Commentators clarify that these accounts do not mean they were literally covered in scales, crawling without limbs, or actually grew ox horns and tiger snouts; ancient sages often had unusual looks. What books on physiognomy call “turtle back,” “crane gait,” “kite shoulders,” and “hawk beak” are only ways of saying that certain features resembled those of animals in appearance.

The graph read as hui is to be read as hui (“filthy”).

Xia Jie, King Zhou of Shang, Duke Huan of Lu, and King Mu of Chu—though their outward form and the seven apertures of the human body were the same as ordinary people’s, inwardly they were like birds and beasts. Thus it is hard for the multitude, judging only by the sameness of outward appearance, to reach for the highest wisdom.

What draws all things close to one another is, at root, the communion of spirit (shen). Where spirit does not commune, even father and son grow distant. Therefore on a night of terror, if one stays in the same place with a living being, one is not afraid, because their spirits commune; if in an ordinary house one shares the room with a corpse, one is instead afraid, because the spirits differ. Corpse and living person still wear the same outward shape as before, yet one is at ease and one fearful—because the spirit of the same kind has departed; outward form alone cannot make one feel close. People fail to see that living things can share the same spirit yet differ in form, and so they worry and fear; they also judge closeness and distance by whether appearances match—truly they are confused.

Hence Zhuangzi says that what all things jointly possess and mutually share is shen (spirit). Shen is the master that nourishes life.

Bo Jun notes: Duke Huan of Lu killed his elder brother and seized the throne; King Mu of Chu killed his father and seized the throne—hence the text says they acted like birds and beasts. The passage quoted from Zhuangzi in the Jie commentary is not found in received editions of Zhuangzi. “Ji” is read as ji (“to hope” or “to reach for”). For “in a night of terror,” the Qin carved edition has “hou” (“after”) where other editions have “ju” (“to dwell”); here the four-commentary edition’s “ju” is adopted.

The Yellow Emperor once fought the Flame Emperor in the wilds of Banquan. Banquan lies in Shanggu. The Yellow Emperor led bears, pandas, wolves, leopards, chu (a large tiger), and tigers as vanguard, and used kites, he birds, eagles, and yuan (kites/hawks) as banners. Chu denotes a large tiger. In older editions the word diao (kite/hawk) may have lost the preceding yi (“using”); once yi is supplied, the sense is more complete.

Black bears, brown bears, and the like are fierce, combative wild beasts; eagles and ospreys are birds of prey. Subduing them by force is driving beasts through martial power. Yao put Kui in charge of music; when Kui struck the stone chime, the hundred beasts followed and danced. When the “Xiaoshao” suite was played nine times, the phoenix also came to dance in flight. That was moving beasts through sound.

Seen this way, how do the hearts and minds of beasts differ from those of humans? Their forms and voices are not like ours—only that people do not know how to communicate with them. The sage knows and penetrates all things, and so can guide and drive beasts.

Beasts are born with a measure of intelligence close to human beings. To harmonize desire and preserve life, they too need not learn wisdom from humans: male and female pair, mother and young stay close; they shun level ground and keep to rugged places; they flee cold and draw near warmth. In groups each kind keeps to its own flock; when they move they line up in order; the young stay within, the strong guard outside; when they drink they stay together, when they forage they call to one another.

In utmost antiquity, beasts lived together with humans and walked shoulder to shoulder with them. [Note] People of pure, deep De need not be feared by beasts. Only in the age of emperors and kings did beasts begin to panic and scatter.

In later ages, animals hid themselves and fled everywhere to escape harm. Commentators say that humans injure animals, and animals likewise know how to keep out of human reach.

In the east there was the land of the Jié clan. Its people could often understand the cries of the six domestic animals—horse, ox, sheep, cock, dog, and pig—apparently by relying on knowledge that grasped only one side of things.

The annotators explain: the tortoise and dragon stand among armored and scaly creatures; the qilin and phoenix stand among furred and feathered ones. Down to flying insects and crawling worms, all call and answer, conveying intent to one another and keeping each other in check—no different in principle from human beings. Because people do not understand animal speech, they assume the cries of birds and beasts are meaningless noise. If one exhausts the principles of things and applies wisdom fully, the paths of understanding are innumerable; if one seizes on a single case and thinks one has got it, by luck one may grasp only one thread.

The Zuo Commentary to the Spring and Autumn Annals records that Jié Gélú heard cattle lowing and said, “Three calves have been born; all may serve as sacrificial victims.” The same passage appears in the commentary to A New Account of Tales of the World. In the manuscripts the numeral appears as both “three” and “four”; following the Zuo Commentary and the Shishuo commentary, it should read “three.” The collated text also gives the pronunciations of characters such as cháng, yuān, and rú.

The sages of antiquity could fully grasp the conditions of all things and could also understand the voices of living beings of every kind. They gathered these creatures together, taught them one by one, brought them under instruction, and enabled them to live in harmony with human beings. First they summoned ghosts and spirits, and Chimei (spirits said to haunt mountains and forests)—for example, Yu the Great once convened the host of spirits at Kuaiji; next they reached the peoples of the four directions; finally they assembled birds and beasts, insects, and moths and the like—for example, the legend that a hundred beasts danced to the music of Shun.

Ancient commentators explain that the Erya calls creatures with legs “chong” (insects/worms) and those without legs “e” (moths/crawlers); another manuscript reads “chong yi” (insects and ants). The point of this passage is that the minds of all kinds of living beings are not so far removed that they cannot be reached. Therefore the sages’ objects of instruction were not left out.

Commentators also cite examples: in the Spring and Autumn period, Jie Gelu could tell from a cow’s lowing which three beasts it had borne for sacrifice; Yu the Great’s convening of the host of spirits and Shun’s dance that made the hundred beasts join in are further cases of the same idea. Qin Enfu held that under “a hundred beasts” the two characters “shuai wu” (leading the dance) are missing; Sun Yirang held that under “Shun” the character “wu” (dance) is missing, so that “Shun danced and the hundred beasts [joined]” pairs in form with “Yu the Great convened the host of spirits” above.

In the state of Song there was a monkey keeper who loved raising monkeys. He kept many of them and could understand their minds; the monkeys in turn grasped his intentions. To satisfy their appetites he did not hesitate to cut back his own family’s food. When supplies at home gradually ran short, he planned to ration the monkeys’ food but feared they would not obey him. So he first deceived them, saying: “I’ll give you acorns—three in the morning and four in the evening. Will that be enough?” The monkeys all leapt up in anger. After a while he said again: “I’ll give you acorns—four in the morning and three in the evening. Will that be enough?” Then the monkeys all quieted down and were pleased.

Things deceive one another through the gap between cleverness and foolishness, much like this. The sage governs the people with wisdom just as the monkey keeper governed his monkeys with a small trick. In name and in fact nothing was lost, yet it was enough to sway their joy and anger.

All things possess some measure of spiritual responsiveness, but human beings are the most intelligent among them. Those whose wisdom stands out are called sages and worthies; those whose talent is outstanding may become rulers. The sage assigns each person according to their capacity so that everyone finds their proper place; whether great or small, each can function fittingly. No one is cast aside, and nothing is wasted. To gather all things under the guidance of wisdom—is that limited to ruling monkeys alone?

Ji Shizi, who raised fighting cocks for King Xuan of Zhou, was training a bird for the king. After ten days, the king asked, “Can the cock go into the pit yet?” Ji Shizi replied, “Not yet. Right now it only bluffs and struts as if it were full of fight.”

Ten days later the king asked again. Ji Shizi said, “Still not. At the sight of another cock’s shadow or the sound of another cock’s crow, it reacts at once.”

After another ten days the king asked once more. Ji Shizi said, “Not yet. It still glares and looks fiercely aggressive.”

Ten days after that the king asked again. Ji Shizi said, “It’s about ready. Even when other cocks crow and challenge it, it no longer responds. From a distance it looks like a wooden cock. Its spirit and temperament have been brought to full maturity; other cocks dare not fight it and turn and run when they see it.”

The story uses training a fighting cock to illustrate the path of self-cultivation: puffing oneself up with bravado is not true strength; reacting too quickly to the outside world means one is still pulled about by things; glaring and showing off anger still harbors a mind set on winning. Only when the spirit is settled and one is unmoved by provocation is cultivation mature. The “wooden cock” means outwardly calm, without the restlessness of combat—not that the bird has lost its capacity to fight.

Hui Ang, a kinsman of Hui Shi, went to see King Kang of Song. The king stamped his feet, coughed, and said in a hurried voice: “What I favor are men who are fierce and strong; I do not favor those who speak of benevolence and righteousness. With what do you intend to instruct me, sir?”

“Guest, what do you intend to use to teach me?” King Song of Song asked. Hui Ang replied, “I have a method by which a person, even if fierce and brave, cannot be pierced when a blade is thrust at him; even if very strong, cannot be struck when a fist is swung at him. Would Your Majesty not care to hear of it?”

The king said, “Good—that is exactly what I wish to hear.”

Hui Ang said, “Making blades fail to pierce and fists fail to strike is still a kind of humiliation. I have another method by which a person, even if courageous, dares not thrust; even if powerful, dares not strike. What is meant by ‘dares not’ is not that there is no thought of harming others in the mind. I have still another method by which a person can be brought to have no thought of harming others at all. The reason one has no such thought is that there is no will in the heart to cherish and treat others well. I have yet another method by which all the men and women under heaven can be made to delight in cherishing and helping you. This is loftier than relying on fierceness and strength alone—it stands above four successive levels. Would Your Majesty not care to hear of it?”

The “four layers” here refer to the four successive states Hui Ang describes: being stabbed or beaten yet unharmed; others not daring to act; others having no thought of acting at all; and everyone under heaven willingly cherishing and helping you. Commentators differ on how exactly to punctuate and explain “above the four layers”; one reading holds that this final state—in which all wish to cherish and help—transcends the four levels that precede it.

The Huainanzi, "Daoying Xun" (Responding to the Way), cites this passage. Gao You's commentary says: "This means placing 'the mind of supreme benefit' above the four layers. 'Accumulation' (lei) means stacking layer upon layer, as if speaking of something above four tiers." Gao You also says: "The four matters mentioned earlier are all bound by worldly entanglements, yet whether man or woman, none fails to delight in taking this as supreme." Neither explanation makes the meaning fully clear. Wu Kaisheng holds that "above the four accumulations" refers to the four situations described above, and that Gao You's note is mistaken.

King Song said: "That is exactly what I wished to know."

Commentary: "Missing the target when thrusting, missing when striking" is one level; "daring not to thrust, daring not to strike" is the second; "having no intention to strike anyone in the first place" is the third; "making men and women alike gladly love and benefit from it" is the fourth. If one compares these four levels in order and takes the highest among them, what would that be? Hence King Song was intent on hearing Hui Ying's answer.

Hui Ying replied: "That would be Confucius and Mozi."

Commentary: This shows that harmonizing the myriad things through wisdom and guiding people through teaching are both practices that extend from the Dao and ascend to De (Virtue/Power). Confucius (Kong Qiu) and Mozi (Mo Di) had no fief, yet became leaders whom people revered. The Shiwen (Textual Notes) says "Di" is read as "dí." Mo Di was a grand officer of Song, lived after Confucius, and wrote seventy-one treatises. He honored filial piety, revered ghosts and spirits, advocated strengthening the root and economizing expenditure, and also devoted himself to relieving the world's distress; he was skilled in both attack and defense. They held no office, yet became leaders of the multitude. Throughout the realm, no man or woman failed to stretch the neck and stand on tiptoe, hoping they would bring peace and benefit.

"Now Your Majesty is a ruler with ten thousand chariots." The Lüshi Chunqiu reads "a thousand chariots." If you truly had such an aspiration, then everyone within the four borders could receive benefit. Your Majesty would be far more worthy than Confucius and Mozi."

King Song had nothing to say. Hui Ying withdrew in haste. King Song said to those around him: "This guest is truly eloquent; he used words to make me assent…"

Hui Ang hurried out. The King of Song said to those around him: “This guest is truly skilled at persuasion—he even convinced me!”

The commentary explains that this passage uses reverence for the Dao (the Way) to make De (Virtue/Power) visible, and uses deeds that others can see to benefit them. Most people only notice how widely the teachings of Confucius and Mozi spread, and do not realize that others withdraw into seclusion to keep to the Dao and thereby show De. The phrase “asking for the ford, not flocking with birds and beasts” alludes to the story in which Confucius sends Zilu to ask passersby for the crossing, then laments that human beings cannot keep company with birds and beasts. Here the text borrows that allusion from the Analects, “Weishi” (Micro-Substance), to clarify the chapter’s main point, though the usage does not match the original sense in the Analects.

The word shuo (to persuade) is normally read in its usual pronunciation, but may also be read shui; one textual variant has “xiǎo guǎ rén yě” (enlightened even me) in place of “fú guǎ rén yě” (convinced even me).

From Liezi Jishi (Collected Commentaries on the Liezi), volume 3, chapter “Zhou Mu Wang” (King Mu of Zhou), third.

King Mu of Zhou, personal name Man, was the son of King Zhao of Zhou. At that time, a man of illusion from the farthest western lands came to the Zhou court. He could pass through fire and water and through metal and stone; he could overturn mountains and rivers and shift whole cities. He traveled through empty air without falling and met solid obstacles without being stopped. His transformations were boundless and hard to fathom. This man could change not only the shape of things but also people’s minds, so that for a time they forgot what they had known and thought before.

King Mu honored him as one would a spirit and served him as one would a lord. He vacated the main hall for him to live in, presented the three sacrificial animals—ox, sheep, and pig—for his food, and chose singing and dancing girls to please him.

The man of illusion, however, found King Mu’s palace too low and mean to dwell in, the food from the kitchen too rank and foul to eat, and the palace women too plain in looks to keep company with. Commentators hold that in the phrase about rank food, one graph may be a scribal error for another, and that the line as a whole means the halls were mean, the fare rank and unpleasant, and the attendants homely in appearance.

“Xiang” is read as “xiang” (to enjoy or partake). The Ritual of Zhou, “Officer of Heaven, Inner Provisions,” states: “Among meats that may not be eaten are horses with black backs, horses with spotted forelegs, and foul-smelling mole crickets.” Zheng Xuan explains: “‘Ban bi’ means fur naturally marked with stripes; ‘lou’ refers to the stench of mole crickets.” The passage should be understood according to the reading in the Ritual of Zhou, “Inner Provisions.” “Yong” is read as “yong”; “ban” is read as “ban.” Bo Jun notes that the current text of the Fangyan still writes “lougou” (mole cricket) and does not use the graph with the female radical.

King Mu’s consorts and attendants carried a rank odor, so that people could not draw near them. [Commentary] The transforming man (hua ren) said the royal residence was crude, the king’s kitchen fare was rank, and the king’s consorts smelled foul, in order to show that he did not value sound and color, flavors, or where he lived. Yu Yue says “shan” means foul and repulsive. The Guangya, “Vessels,” says: “Shan means stench.” Here “cannot be approached” (bu ke qin) means that one finds it hard to come close.

King Mu therefore had the palace rebuilt for the transforming man. “Works of earth and wood” (tu mu zhi gong) denotes the construction of palace buildings. [Collation] Wang Shumin notes that Hong Xingzu’s quotation in Rongzhai Suibi, juan 3, adds “palace buildings” after “build”; “nai” in the Shiwen is written with the ancient graph; “wei” is read as “wei” (for, on behalf of).

The structures were coated with red ocher and white earth for ornament. “Zhe” is read as “zhe,” meaning reddish brown; “e” is read as “e,” meaning white earth. Every refined craft was brought into play without exception. The Five Stores were thereby emptied. [Commentary] The Five Stores were Zhou offices in charge of goods and provisions: the Grand Store, Jade Store, Inner Store, Outer Store, and Provision Store. The tower-palace was then finished, rising a thousand ren high and looking down upon Mount Zhongnan. Zhongnan is a mountain in the Jingzhao region; for this reason the lofty terrace was called the “Terrace at the Center of Heaven” (Zhongtian zhi tai).

King Mu also chose young women from the regions of Zheng and Wei to enter the palace; they were lovely in appearance and soft and graceful in bearing. “Emei” denotes beautiful, captivating women; “miman” denotes delicate and yielding grace. “Mao” is read as “mao.”

“E” denotes women of lovely looks and light, graceful bearing. East of Hangu Pass, in the lands along the Yellow River and in Qi, people called such women miao; some also called them yao. In Zheng and Wei, young women chosen for fine features and slender, delicate figures were anointed with scented unguents, their brows shaped into elegant arches, fitted with hairpins (ji) and ear ornaments (er), clothed in fine, thin silk (a) and in plain, closely woven cloth (xi, written as xi for xi), and made to trail the long sashes of fine white gauze (qi wan) woven in Qi.

Here e mei means beautiful eyebrows; ji is a hair ornament and er an ear ornament; a names a fine, thin silk fabric, while xi (graphically xi) means thin cloth; qi wan is the fine white silk gauze produced in Qi.

Fanzi said, “Fine white silk comes from Qi and Lu.” Palace women powdered their faces and drew their brows with dai (a green-black pigment for eyebrows), wore jade rings, and mingled their dress with fragrant herbs such as zhi and ruo, so that scent filled the halls and pavilions. The palace also performed pieces such as Chengyun, Liuying, Jiushao, and Chenlu to please the huaren (a figure possessed of extraordinary powers). Chengyun is traditionally attributed to the Yellow Emperor, Liuying to Emperor Ku, Jiushao to Shun, and Chenlu to Tang. Jiushao is also written Jiuzhao; shao and zhao were interchangeable in ancient texts.

Each month they presented jade garments; each day they offered rare jade delicacies. Even so, the huaren would not accept these offerings. The king had no recourse and had to accompany him in person on his outings. The king did not grasp the huaren’s intent and instead kept adding ornament and tribute. The huaren remained unmoved, which showed that his mind was not set on such treasures and pleasures.

Before long, the huaren asked to travel with the king. The king took hold of his sleeve; the huaren then rose into the air and only halted halfway up the sky.

The commentary states that shang is read via the fanqie spelling shi zhang qie—the old reverse-cut method of indicating pronunciation, here approximating zhang. Ji is read qi qi qie; ji means “to reach” or “up to.” Wang Chongmin argued that ji and ji (and) share the same sense, so pairing them is redundant; the character ji may originally have been a gloss placed beneath ji, which was later miscopied into the main text. Citations in the leishu Yiwen leiju, Chuxue ji, and Taiping yulan omit ji, and Wang Shumin noted the same for other quotations.

The Palace of the Transformers—the dwelling of numinous beings—is built of gold and silver and trimmed with pearls and jade. It towers above clouds and rain, yet nothing can be seen supporting it from below. Wang Shumin pointed out that one quotation adds suo before ju, reading er bu zhi xia zhi suo ju (“yet one does not know what supports it below”), which is more complete and should be preferred. Seen from afar, the palace seems to float on billowing vapor. Whatever the eyes see, the ears hear, the nose smells, or the mouth tastes is unlike anything in the human realm.

Wang Shi identified this place with Qingdu, Ziwei, Juntian, and Guangle—the abode of the Heavenly Emperor. The commentary explains that Qingdu and Ziwei are the Emperor’s residences. A biography records that Duke Mu of Qin fell ill and lost consciousness; on waking he said he had gone to the Heavenly Emperor, felt great joy, toured Juntian with the gods, and heard Guangle. The music was performed nine times and the dances unfolded in succession—nothing like the music of Xia, Shang, and Zhou—yet the sounds were deeply moving. Another tradition ascribes a similar experience to Zhao Jianzi. The commentary places this account in the Shiji, “Biography of Bian Que and Lord Cang.” In some versions Mu is written Miao; the le in Guangle is read yue, the le in shen le as luo, and Miao is read as Mu.

When the king looked down, the palaces and towers appeared like clods of earth and stone and heaps of kindling piled together. The commentary gives kuai as kou dui qie and explains su as firewood or brush. Bi Yuan thought the word ren in the gloss might be a mistake for ye; the Shide Hall edition reads ye instead.

Su was a woodcutter. Yang Bojun’s note holds that the character rendered as “ren” (person) may be a scribal error for “ye” (also); the Shide Hall edition reads “ye” instead.

King Mu believed he had lived there for decades, yet never thought of his own state. Commentators say this means his habitual thinking had been altered. [Commentary] “Zhongtian” refers to an exceptionally subtle state of mind. King Mu had not yet fully released his attachments and desires, so the huaren (transformed person) used splendid palaces to beguile him and shift what he valued most.

The huaren came again to pay his respects to King Mu and invited him to travel together. The pronunciation note says “fu” in “fu” is read fu-you qie. Where they went, looking up one could not see sun or moon, looking down one could not see rivers or seas. When light and shadow fell upon him, King Mu’s eyes dazzled and he could not see clearly; when sounds reached him, his ears were in turmoil and he could not hear clearly. The bones of his whole body and his inner organs all trembled in alarm and could not settle; his mind was confused and his spirit dazed, so he asked the huaren to take him back.

Commentators say the realm of the vast and indistinct void is not something people of the world can enter in the first place; that mind and senses should be disoriented is only natural. “Yi” means to shift or move aside. The huaren moved King Mu away, and King Mu felt as if he were falling from empty space.

[Commentary] The ultimate principle is the realm the huaren reached. The ten thousand forms had vanished—how could there still be sun, moon, rivers, or seas? Every kind of delusion had been cleared away—how could there still be light and shadow? A worldly body cannot remain there, and ordinary thoughts have never known such a realm. King Mu still clung to the world and had not forgotten it in his heart, so he asked to return.

The pronunciation note says “yun” in “yun” is read yin yun, meaning to fall or plummet. When King Mu awoke, he found himself still seated where he had been before.

The commentary text writes a variant form for the character normally read as yun, meaning “to fall” or “to plummet.” After waking, King Mu was still seated where he had been before. Xiang is read xiang, meaning “previously.” The attendants around him were the same as before. The wine before him had not yet cleared, and the dishes on the table were not yet dry. Fei is read fugui qie and means “dry”; some versions also give the reading fei.

King Mu asked where he had gone. His attendants answered, “Your Majesty was only sitting quietly in thought.” From then on King Mu was dazed and absent; only after three months did he return to clarity. The commentary punctuates sanyue er fu as one phrase; another version has sanyue bu fu (“did not recover for three months”). King Mu again questioned the huaren (transformation person)—the one who had enabled his spirit journey—about how his body had not moved at all. The annotators explain that he was asking why the body stayed still while the spirit traveled. The exegesis holds that the huaren removed thoughts that cling to outer things and brought the mind into a still, luminous state; in a single thought, the realms experienced lie far beyond what ten thousand generations could reach. For a person of utmost attainment, would any other special method even be needed? While King Mu sat in stillness, the wine was still not clear and the dishes still not dry; those on either side saw only him sitting silently and did not see him going back and forth outward, so King Mu sat in oblivion for three months and dared not ask again. Qin Enfu thought the word sheng in the commentary was mistaken and might be an extra character. Yang Bojun collated the text and noted that in Qin’s version the wei in yao wei fei appears as fu; here the reading follows the Sijie edition’s correction.

The huaren replied, “Your Majesty and I traveled only in spirit—how could the physical form move?” The annotators say that “spirit” here means reaching swiftly without hurrying, arriving at a distant place without walking. Everyday life illustrates this: in one night of shallow sleep, a dream may span a hundred years’ worth of events or show places immensely far away; while awake, in the time it takes to bow or look up one may think beyond the liuhe (six directions—the cosmos in all directions). Vulgar, wandering thoughts can even do as much—how much more when the spirit moves alone, without relying on the body or physical objects, penetrating in round completeness, mysteriously illumined, quiet and fixed yet empty and bright? The commentary notes that jue is read jiao.

Moreover, what difference was there between the place where Liezi had lived before and the king’s palace? What difference was there between the places he had traveled before and the king’s gardens? The king had long taken it for granted that Liezi was still there and had only stepped away for a while. Commentators explain that the places the king and Liezi had seen were none of them fixed, unchanging reality. The king was used to treating them as always present, so when Liezi was briefly out of sight he assumed a temporary absence—this was confusion in the mind. Here xian (often written with the character for “leisure”) is used in the sense of xi, “to be accustomed to”; “always presuming presence” (heng you) stands opposed to “temporarily absent” (zan wang).

When change in the world reaches its extreme, how could the principle between fast and slow be fully traced and measured? Commentators say change has no end, and the principle between fast and slow is hard to split apart; to chase and copy its traces by intellect alone is beyond knowing.

The commentary says that the marvel of the spirit person’s transformation of form becomes all the clearer from this. The king had merely grown used to what he ordinarily saw, and so wondered why Liezi had suddenly vanished. As for one who has attained the Way, the body often fades from view—what is there to doubt? Whether the spirit person’s transformations are fast or slow, they cannot be exhaustively described.

The king was greatly delighted on hearing this. He set aside the business of government and no longer took pleasure in the hierarchy of lord and subject, master and servant. Commentators hold that, moved by words of utmost principle, he forgot the order and disorder of worldly affairs and the high and low of the ruler–minister relation. Then he wandered far at will; “far wandering” here means forgetting the familiar life before one’s eyes.

The commentary, citing Zhuangzi, points out that one who honors the Way casts off the affairs of the empire and no longer keeps worldly things on the mind. Sound, color, and desire can drown a person—they are not what one who has the Way values.

The term taozhu (“to mold and cast”) was originally written with a different second character (taoyu); here it is emended to taozhu following the Four Explanations edition. “Ordering the carriage of the eight steeds” means having the team of eight fine horses harnessed and ready. Jun (fine steed) is read like jun (talented); cheng (to ride/harness) is read like sheng (victory)—the same applies below.

The passage says that Cheng (of the Cheng clan) was so drawn to the Way being discussed that he neglected state affairs and no longer cared for his concubines. “Wandering far” (yuanyou) means the spirit-mind roams far, to the point of forgetting familiar people and things close at hand.

As for the “right harness” horse in the chariot team, one character in the original is in an ancient form that is hard to identify; commentators take it to be hua (splendid bay). Liu (bay) is read like liu (to stay). Hualiu and Lu’er (Green Ear) are both names among the Eight Steeds. Sun Yirang notes that the character may have been corrupted from the seal-script form of another horse-name character, then further altered in shape and with left-right reversal, which is why it is hard to read. Ren Dachun cites the Mu Tianzi Zhuan (“right harness □ liu”) and suspects that missing character is hua, adding that the two graphs are close in form and can mutually corroborate each other.

“On the right, the side horse is Chiji (Red Thoroughbred); on the left, a white □” describes the right can (side horse) as Chiji and the left as “white □.” A can is a horse on either flank that helps pull the chariot. That character appears in old texts as yi or yi (ceremony); commentators explain from the ancient graph that it is equivalent to yi (righteousness). The Mu Tianzi Zhuan also has baiyi (white yi), with Guo Pu glossing it as the ancient yi character. Hong Yi thought the word should connect with horses that have whorl-like hair at the elbow in the Erya “Explanation of Livestock,” and might be the character jian. Sun Yirang points out that “white □” in the Mu Tianzi Zhuan has variant readings; Guo Pu’s explanation matches the note here. Among horse types listed in the Guangya “Explanation of Livestock” there is lu (stag-pattern); he suspects the character here may be used for lu.

In the Mu Tianzi Zhuan, the text reads “□□ as right-hand attendant,” which is also a copyist’s error. Consider again the line “for the chief chariot, Zaofu served as driver”: since Zaofu already holds the role of driver, he should not simultaneously be named as chief of the chariot. Therefore, after “for the chief chariot,” a character for “the king” must have dropped out. The sense is presumably that on the chariot the Son of Heaven rides, the Son of Heaven himself acts as chief of the chariot; when the narrative later turns to the chariot used after changing mounts, the Son of Heaven no longer rides in it, and Bo Tian takes over as chief of the chariot. The Mu Tianzi Zhuan has “the Son of Heaven as chief of the chariot,” which supports this reading. In the present edition a “king” character is missing, so the text reads as if “chief of the chariot” and “driver” referred to the same person, which also fails to match the account of changing chariots below. Wang Shumin likewise holds that the current text omits “king”; however, “king” seems to belong before “chief of the chariot,” so that “the king as chief of the chariot” parallels the pattern “Bo Tian as chief of the chariot” below.

The forms recorded in the Shiwen differ from those in the present text, with separate notes on pronunciation and variant readings: for Zaofu, “Zao” is read with the fanqie qi-dao qie, and “fu” is read fu. The Shiji says that King Mu of Zhou rode Hualiu and Lü’er, with Zaofu as charioteer, traveling a thousand li in a day. Several archaic graphs appear in commentaries, with differing forms in various editions and differing readings. The Huainanzi says that when Qian Ju and Taibing drove, they used neither reins nor bit nor whip; Gao You explains that both were men of antiquity who had attained the Way and were skilled at driving. Ren Dachun holds that one graph should be written in another form. The preface by Chen Jingyuan of the Song says that the two graphs are “Taibing,” showing that the version he saw agreed with the present text. Only the Shiwen preserves the archaic graphs. Wu Renchen also notes that the Shilin Yanyu records that the Tang figure Wang Qi did not recognize these two graphs; on investigation, the Liezi gives one graph with the pronunciation bing, but the source of the other graph has not yet been identified.

When Wang Shizhen wrote the two characters in question, he appears to have recorded them incorrectly. Wu Renchen knew that one of the characters came from the Liezi, yet he said he could not find a source for the other—because he had only seen the commonly circulated Liezi, not Yan Shun’s Liezi shiwen (Commentary on the Liezi).

A look at the preface by Tu Weizhen as quoted in the Tongya shows that when Tang scholars debated the point, only Wang Qi, Wang Yuanmei, Hu Mingrui, and a few others left remarks that survive. The copy Wang Qi used still had the two characters in their disputed form, which is why he said he did not recognize them. Yan Shun’s Shiwen likewise writes them in that same disputed form—evidence that in older Tang-era texts, one of the two graphs was often written in a variant shape.

Wang Yuanmei and Hu Mingrui wrote the pair in the miscopied form; even so, the wording of the old Shiwen can still be used to trace how the shapes changed. Yet the Shiwen also states, under one of the graphs, that the original reading was written differently and gives a phonetic gloss as “upper qi, lower he”—a pronunciation that does not fit the sense of the passage.

Yan Shun probably meant that in another recension the pair appears as two different graphs, the upper read qi and the lower read he. That is not merely a graphic difference: reading them as qige (“qi–he”) is not the same as reading them as taibing. The Wuyin jiyun records a fanqie reading zu xi qie for one graph, placing it in the same initial series as qi, and hu la qie for the other, in the same initial series as he. That supports a version in which the two characters were read separately as qi and he.

But the Huainanzi has taibing, and there is no textual basis for reading the graphs here as qige. The definitive edition therefore follows the reading tai for the first graph and bing for the second—that is, taibing—and does not adopt the alternate pronunciation.

Also examining the Mu Tianzi Zhuan (Tale of King Mu): “□□ serves as the you fu (the right-hand paired horse when driving).” The graphs for “□” and “□” are close in shape, and “□” and “□” are close as well, so copyists introduced errors as the text was transmitted.

Sun Yirang said: The “yun” in Shiwen Zilin should be the graph yin. Yiqie Jing Yinyi (Phonetic and Semantic Glossary of All Scriptures) cites Zilin six times and always writes “yinyin” (phonetic glosses), meaning that work. Every edition wrongly has “yun,” and Ren did not emend it.

On the secondary chariot, the two fu horses were Quhuang on the right and Yulun on the left; the two can (outrigger) horses were Daoli on the left and Shanzi on the right. Jiang Chaobo said: Erya lists among horse types a “xiao ling daoli”; Guangya writes “tao □,” Yupian “tao □,” and Shiji, “Basic Annals of Qin,” “wen li”—all variant spellings of Daoli. Shiwen says li is read li yi qie (fanqie). Daoli is the “xian li” in Xunzi, “Nature Is Bad.”

Bai Yao drove the chariot. Shiwen reads yao as yu biao qie. Guo Pu said Bai Yao is a personal name. Can Bai drove; Ben Rong was the right fu horse. Jiang Chaobo said: In the Mu Tianzi Zhuan, Ben Rong is a man of the Gao line who commanded the qi cui (Seven Gatherings) warriors, but Zhang Zhan’s commentary does not explain this.

Chariot and horses ran a thousand li and reached the border of the Jusou people’s state. Wang Zhong said Jusou is the Qushou of the Yugong. Shiwen reads jusou as qushou, a Western Rong state.

The Jusou people offered blood of a white swan for the Son of Heaven to yin (drink), and prepared cattle and horse dong (milk) for him to xi (wash) his feet. The gloss says dong means milk—presenting what they valued to the honored Son of Heaven. Shiwen: yin yu jin qie; dong zhu yong qie; xi xian li qie; cheng shi zheng qie.

After drinking, the Son of Heaven went on and lodged in a bend of Kunlun, north of the Red Water. The comment cites Shanhai Jing: “Kunlun has waters of five colors.” Shiwen gives the phonetic note for Kunlun as “cheng, shi zheng qie.”

After finishing his wine, King Mu continued on his journey and spent the night on the slope of Kunlun Mountain, on the north bank of the Red River. The ancient classic Shanhaijing (Classic of Mountains and Seas) states that Kunlun Mountain has waters of five colors; it also records that at the shore of the shifting sands, beyond the Red River, before the Black River, there stands a great mountain called the Mound of Kunlun, where Xiwangmu (Queen Mother of the West) dwells in a cave within the mountain.

The next day, King Mu ascended the Mound of Kunlun and viewed the palace of the Yellow Emperor (Huangdi). Traditional accounts say that Huangdi once toured the four directions, ascended Kunlun Mountain, built a palace on the summit, and there sealed and entrusted things for transmission to later generations.

Subsequently, King Mu paid his respects to Xiwangmu in the manner due a guest, and they drank wine beside the Jasper Pool (Yaochi). Commentaries identify Xiwangmu as a human figure with tiger’s teeth, disheveled hair, wearing a sheng ornament on her head, skilled at long whistling cries. Xiwangmu sang for King Mu a song entitled Baiyun (White Clouds), and King Mu replied in kind with a song entitled Donggui (Returning East), whose lyrics sounded mournful.

In the end, King Mu looked westward to watch the place where the sun sets. Commentaries citing the Muwangzi Zhuan (Biography of King Mu of Zhou) say that he ascended westward to Mount Yan; here yannai is a paired connective in classical Chinese meaning “thereupon” or “then.”

The Son of Heaven regarded the common people’s descendants as those favored and entrusted with hope by Heaven. He then drove his chariot up Mount Yan, carved his footprints on the mountain rocks, planted a mulberry tree beside them, and inscribed the words “Mount of the Queen Mother of the West.” He could travel ten thousand li in a single day. The commentary glosses “travel ten thousand li in one day” as written “ten thousand paces in one day,” and explains that “pace” (xing) should be read as li.

The Son of Heaven sighed and said: “Alas! My virtue is insufficient, yet I enjoy such delight. Will later ages investigate and reproach my faults?” The note says “xie” means to distinguish and discern clearly. Here “shu” is read with the fanqie “se ju qie,” meaning to blame or censure. From “ordered the chariot, riding the eight steeds” through the events here, this appears in the Mu Tianzi Zhuan (Tradition of the Son of Heaven Mu).

Was King Mu a transcendent being? The commentary holds that he was not; Wu Kaisheng reads “ji” as “qi,” i.e., “could it be that…?” He fully indulged in the pleasures of this life until he died after a hundred years. The commentary says this is because he understood that worldly affairs are impermanent, so he let his heart follow pleasure. The Jin Shu, biography of Shu Xi, cites the Zhushu Jinian (Bamboo Annals): from Zhou’s receiving the Mandate until King Mu was already a hundred years—people therefore mistakenly thought King Mu lived to a hundred. “Deng jia” should be written “deng xia,” meaning to pass away; people called it “deng xia,” showing that he had in fact died.

He selected outstanding horses and employed capable men, appointing them according to local conditions; he did not confine himself to the domains of Huaxia or the Yi and Di—wherever it accorded with the direction of the Dao (the Way), he could go. He did not avoid the palace of Xuanyuan (the Yellow Emperor’s dwelling), intending to exhaust all between Heaven and Earth and to explore what spiritual wisdom could comprehend. He did not rely on exalted virtue to boast of his deeds; rather, he took joy in seeking the Dao to reach a state of communion with the divine.

Some people, after undergoing transformations across a thousand years, ascend to heaven; ordinary people then assume they have become immortals and departed far away.

Qin Enfu said: “This missing character is not found in character dictionaries. The Jiyun has a homograph read qi, an ancient form of qi (to stand on tiptoe), but that sense does not fit here.” Sun Yirang held that “□ hua” should read zhi hua (body/limb transformation), close in meaning to shijie—the Daoist idea of abandoning the physical body and departing through transformation. The Jiyun entry Qin Enfu cites does not apply here. The Shiwen notes that jia is read as xia.

Lao Chengzi studied illusion arts under Master Yin Wen. Wang Chongmin pointed out that Taiping Yulan juan 752 cites “Kao Chengzi,” matching the Shiwen; the Shiwen also writes kao and says one manuscript has Lao Chengzi, author of eighteen pian. Ren Dachun, citing the Jijiupian and related sources, argued that ancient texts do record a “Lao Cheng clan”; both Liezi and the Hanshu Yiwenzhi list Lao Chengzi, so the Liezi version Bo Hou saw read Lao Chengzi, as in the present text.

Lao Chengzi studied for three years, yet Master Yin Wen never taught him the essentials of illusion. Lao Chengzi then asked where he had gone wrong and asked to leave. Yin Wen bowed, invited him inside, dismissed those present, and said:

“When Laozi (La Dan) traveled west, he turned back and told me: vital breath that has life and a body with form—all belong to change and illusion. When zaohua (the power that creates and transforms the ten thousand things) first moves, yin and yang turn over—this is called birth and death; when the pattern of change reaches its limit, the ten thousand things shift and alter with their forms—this is called change, and also called illusion.

“Grasp the regularities by which heaven and earth run and hold the guiding threads of yin-yang transformation, and one can mold and transform the ten thousand things without finding it difficult. The craft of the maker is subtle and its efficacy far-reaching— truly hard to probe and hard to exhaust.”

Commentators explain that the “maker” here is not a conscious lord but natural change that appears marvelously subtle. Qi gathers and knits into form; form in turn flows through change, so it does not vanish all at once.

Tao Hongqing argued that Zhang Zhan’s commentary did not clarify the miao in qiaomiao (“subtle craft”). Miao originally should be written as miao (second/minute sense) or miao (subtle). The Daodejing says “constantly without desire, thereby observe its miao”; Wang Bi glosses: “Miao means subtle to the utmost point.” Thus qiaomiao means zaohua’s working is subtly marvelous and hard to perceive.

When one relies on external things to display skill, the technique is easily exposed and the effect achieved remains shallow; therefore, as transformations arise, they likewise vanish just as quickly. Commentators explain that whether one uses external objects to produce change or simply pushes along forms already fixed in shape, the display can only last for a moment before it disappears. Because the effect is striking and the event conspicuous, anyone who sees it will be astonished.

Only someone who understands that illusion and transformation are no different from birth and death may properly study the arts of illusion. Here the word rendered as “with” or “by” carries the sense of “by means of” or “in order to”—that is, only after grasping this point may one learn those arts. Commentators add that the body itself is already illusory; to go on and study illusion on top of that is illusion learning from illusion. Form and breath shift without pause, renewing moment by moment and never standing still—how is that unlike a phantasm? Changes stirred by shen and qi run deep and are hard to detect; changes wrought by technique sit right before the eyes and are easy to see. Yet people fail to see that what is hard to detect is the greater transformation, while what is easy to see is only the lesser. If one already knows that illusion is not separate from life and death, what need is there to study illusion at all?

When Laochengzi returned home, he followed Yinwen xiansheng’s teaching and reflected deeply for three months. In the phrase “reflect deeply” (shensi), the character for “deep” appears in some editions as another graph pronounced the same way and bearing the same meaning of depth.

This passage first explains that in the Liezi, the characters yin and shen can be read as mutually equivalent. Yin here carries the sense of depth or profundity, as in “deep wisdom and settled deliberation” (qi zhi shen er lü chen), where both shen and chen point to far-reaching thought. The original remark that “the two words yin and shen often interchange in such contexts” means they can gloss each other in passages of this kind.

“Thus one can freely master survival and destruction, and turn or regulate the four seasons” (sui neng cun wang zi zai, □ jiao si shi) describes someone who can handle coming-to-be and passing-away at will and who can overturn or reorder the seasons. The lacuna before jiao is filled in commentarial tradition with the idea of turning or manipulating (fan dong, bo nong). Legendary wonders linked to this include thunder in winter and ice in summer, and creatures that fly becoming walkers, or walkers becoming flyers.

The commentary argues that if one can think deeply about a single moment’s affairs and still grasp their pattern, how much more so for someone who understands without deliberate effort? Every living thing must follow a definite principle (li), and bodily form arises from life (sheng). There is no life without any principle, nor form without life. Life and form, form and principle—though one may be subtle and the other coarse—take turns as host and guest, each giving way to the other in endless alternation.

Hence the myriad things are unstable: sometimes they gather, sometimes they scatter. When one adjusts them along their natural grain, the effect may be invisible yet the task succeeds; when adjustment goes wrong, traces appear and transformations are exposed. If the four seasons run awry, the order of sun, moon, and stars is disrupted; if thunder and ice appear in the wrong seasons, or objects are heated until they vaporize, cloud and sand may be refined and congeal into bing hong (ice masses). The note singles out bing hong as the correct reading; other editions’ shui qing is rejected. The pronunciation note gives shuo for shuo (read as shuo, “melt/refine”) and hong for hong.

If one extends such reasoning and exhausts the subtle laws of yin-yang change, penetrating the dispositions of the myriad things, one can mould and transform them with an efficacy comparable to natural creation (zaohua). Mastery of partial numerological arts (shushu), relying on mutual resonance between qi and form so that things flash in and out of sight in an instant, or birds and beasts change shape in the blink of an eye—that belongs only to the shallower fringe of such techniques.

Liezi said: “Those who are skilled at performing transformations follow a path that is profound yet ordinary, and the achievements they accomplish are no different from what ordinary people do. The virtue of the Five Emperors and the achievements of the Three Kings were not necessarily accomplished entirely through clever schemes and bold force; some may also have been realized through transformation. Who can see through the subtle principle involved?”

[Note] This speaks of how the achievements of emperors and kings appear no different from those of ordinary people. What emperors and kings do is simply to relieve the people and settle all things; thus their achievements show themselves in hidden ways, and the world may not know them for what they are.

[Note] The merit of emperors and kings that the world praises is not the root reason they became emperors and kings. Whether by yielding the throne in abdication or by taking the realm through war, since both are borrowed paths to reach the goal, why reject borrowing illusion and transformation? It is only that sages apply the art of transformation in secret and do not display signs that would startle people.

[Commentary] If one masters the root of spirit and qi and clearly perceives the source of life and death, one can change without limit; that is inevitable principle. But this requires inner realization and personal verification, so it cannot be transmitted through words and writing.

Yu Yue said: In Lu Chongxuan’s edition the character read as “therefore” (gu) is written as “firm/solid” (gu); the two forms interchange in old texts. Zhang Zhan’s edition changed it to “therefore,” which on the contrary is not how the ancient book originally read.

Those who are skilled at this art never display or employ this method throughout their lives. Commentators say “zhu” (implement/display) appears in some versions as “zhe,” read zhi-lü cut. So no one in the world spreads it openly.

[Note] It is like the Dao of the sage: it acts in daily life, yet the people do not notice. Deliberately displaying strange things to startle the world is what ordinary people do.

While a person is awake, there are eight signs (manifestations that can be verified); while dreaming, there are six kinds of situation (categories that can be used for divination). The commentary says that “zheng” means verification and “hou” means divination or inspection. The method of divining the six kinds of dream imagery, and what they mean, appears in the Zhou Rituals (Zhou guan).

What are the eight signs? The first is “gu,” meaning what has already happened; the second is “wei,” meaning what one is doing or planning to do. Tao Hongqing held that “gu” and “wei” respectively refer to setting aside old matters and planning new ones, and that they correspond to the pairs gain and loss, sorrow and joy, and life and death below. The third is gain, the fourth is loss; the fifth is sorrow, the sixth is joy; the seventh is life, the eighth is death. The commentary also notes that “sang” (mourning) is read with the Xizang rhyme (xizang qie), and “yue” (music/joy) is read as luo (the Luo rhyme).

These eight signs are things that the bodily senses come into contact with. On this sentence, Yu Yue thought the text should read “ci ba zhe, xing suo jie ye”—that is, “these eight situations are what the bodily senses contact”; Wang Chongmin agreed. The Jifu edition reads “ci ba zhe zheng xing suo jie ye.” Wang Shumin argued that the character “zheng” may not be an interpolation and that the original may have read “ci ba zheng zhe, xing suo jie ye.” Different scholars offer different collation views on the wording of the received text.

Once one truly understands the root of change in things, even when encountering all manner of strange phenomena, the heart will not be alarmed. [Explanation] By keeping the mind empty and still, clearing away stray thoughts, turning inward in contemplation, and guarding the spirit (shen), one can achieve unimpeded mutual resonance (gan tong) and extend transformative influence to all living beings. People only see the outward signs of this influence and do not grasp the foundation that runs through all change. Because the principle involved lies deep and does not show itself, it is hard to detect; and the effects it achieves look no different from ordinary human affairs. Thus the deeds of the Five Emperors and Three Kings are known to people only as feats of martial prowess, while the role of resonance and transformative teaching in them goes unrecognized.

Human experience, broadly speaking, falls within eight signs while awake and six situations in dreams. What the scripture calls “past, action, gain, loss, sorrow, joy, birth, and death” are things the body contacts and undergoes; “uprightness, startled surprise, pondering, waking, joy, and fear” are states in which the spirit interacts and responds. What the body undergoes, everyone calls what is seen while awake; what the spirit responds to, everyone calls dreams. Wakefulness and dreaming differ in appearance, yet from the root of change there is no distinction. To see these waking signs and dream situations as ordinary changes is to understand where they come from. Once one knows how to guard the spirit and keep the mind from disorder, and knows that change has its own root, then what is there to fear in any sign or state?

The body’s flourishing, decline, growth, and waning all connect with Heaven and Earth and also respond to change in outer things through mutual resonance. [Note] Human beings share in yin-yang qi; the form of the body resembles Heaven and Earth; fortune and misfortune cycle, and naturally relate and resonate with one another. When yin qi is strong, one may dream of crossing great waters and feel terror. [Note] This is loss of harmony between yin and yang, so one dreams of being submerged and drowned in fear. When yang qi is strong, one may dream of crossing great fire and being burned by fierce flames. [Note] Fire is violent; meeting it, one is burned.

The character written as gai in various editions appears as sheng (sacrificial animal) in all of them. In the line “after the offering is set, then gai, xiao, blend the savory fragrance,” the commentary gives gai the same pronunciation as yue (“joy”). Jingshun’s commentary likewise has gai with the same reading. Thus the graph sheng was not in Master Gu’s original text but was added by a later hand; on this basis the emendation shows that in the Tang period this character had not yet been corrupted. The Yuxian also lists this character, though the Guyi congshu fragment of the Yuxian lacks the “fire” radical section, so it cannot be checked there. The commentary states that fan (to roast) is read like fan (trouble), and gai is read like yue.

When yin and yang are both in excess, one dreams of killing or of giving birth. [Note] Yin and yang are meant to work in harmony; if they go too far, they injure each other, so in dreams there may appear birth at one time and slaughter at another. The commentary notes that kang is written as kang (excess) in some versions.

When one has eaten too much, one dreams of giving things to others; when one is extremely hungry, one dreams of taking things from others. [Note] Where there is surplus, one wants to give; where there is lack, one wants to take. This resembles the waking state. In the note, “wanting to take” appears as “involving taking” in the Northern Song and Wang editions; here it follows the Daozang reading “wanting to take.”

Therefore when the body feels light and weak, one dreams of soaring; when it feels heavy and solid, one dreams of sinking. If one sleeps with a belt under one, one dreams of snakes; if a bird carries off one’s hair, one dreams of flying. [Note] These are all cases of stimulus by resemblance. The canonical edition has the word er (“and”) after lei (“kind/type”), and the note ends with ye (“indeed”).

When illness is about to come on, one dreams of fire; when the illness is severe, one dreams of food. One who drinks wine dreams of sorrow; one who sings and laughs dreams of weeping. [Note] These passages explain dreams: some arise from what is happening in life, others from what is the opposite of one’s situation. This corresponds to the “six dreams” and their six types in the Zhouli—they are not without cause. [Explanation] When spirit and qi fix on some concrete image, the dream shifts accordingly; when yin and yang qi respond to each other, the dream shifts as well. Sometimes the dream is a rebound when circumstances reach an extreme; sometimes one dreams of joy and sorrow reversed from waking life.

Some dreams are reactions that arise when feelings have developed to an extreme; some dreams are signs that appear because things resemble one another; some dreams infer actual circumstances from some cause; and some are dreams that go against reason and have not yet revealed the true situation. If one can concentrate the spirit, grasp principle, and accord with what is real—so that the spirit is deep, still, and compliant with the Dao—one can understand that even in silence one can penetrate change, and neither sorrow nor joy can disturb the inner mind.

Tao Hongqing held that the word meng (dream) should be supplied at the beginning of both lines “those who drink wine are anxious” and “those who sing and dance weep.” Yang Bojun agreed with Tao and cited Zhuangzi, “Discussion on Making All Things Equal” (Qi Wu Lun): “One who dreams of drinking wine weeps at dawn; one who dreams of weeping goes hunting at dawn”—the wording differs slightly, but both passages include meng. Yang Bojun also held that wei in “or go against reason and have not yet revealed feeling” is a spurious addition.

Liezi said: “When spirit meets external things, a dream is formed; when the body meets external things, actual experience is formed.” A comment cites Zhuangzi: “In sleep the spirit interchanges; in waking the body stretches.” Yang Bojun noted that in the quotation in Taiping Yulan, juan 397, there is a gu (therefore) before this sentence, and “Master Liezi said” also reads “therefore”; the Zhuangzi passage cited in the note is from Qi Wu Lun, where modern editions read hun jiao (soul interchange) instead.

Thus daytime thought and nighttime dreams are both results of spirit and body meeting external things together. The comment says that xiang here means thoughts and feelings that arise while awake, not the usual idea that if you think about something by day you dream of it at night. Therefore, for one whose spirit is concentrated, thought and dreams naturally dissolve.

The comment continues: trusting how one feels when awake without understanding the state of dreams; trusting the state of dreams without penetrating what is real after waking—these are all phenomena of things changing and coming and going. For example, dreaming one has become a bird and flies into the sky, or dreaming one has become a fish and dives into the deep—these are transformations of thought appearing in alternation. In the note, the character li appears in some versions as li (another graph with the same pronunciation); both readings are defensible; but because the quoted passage from the Book of Poetry, Xiaoya, “Fourth Month,” uses li, li should be followed.

In antiquity, the perfected ones (zhenren)—those who had attained the Way—forgot themselves while awake and did not dream when they slept. Is that mere empty talk?

The commentary asks: however the perfected one finds himself, he does not cling to a self; on that account one might expect that he would not even need sleep—so how could he still dream? The point here is to use parable and allegory to clarify the teaching.

The exegesis holds that people usually treat the activity of the six senses (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind) as real, and what happens when consciousness moves on its own as unreal; yet in a dream, when one acts, one often takes the dream for truth. All of these can be called illusory appearances. People do not see that waking activity is the movement of spirit (shen), and dream activity is also the movement of spirit. To trust one and deny the other is not to understand the principle. If one can forget the self, one will not dream—is there any other principle between these two?

Zhuangzi, in the chapter on “Purposefulness” (Zhuoke pian), says that the sage while alive follows nature, and when dead transforms with the ten thousand things; in sleep he does not dream, and when awake he has no sorrow. Zhuangzi’s “Greater Masters” (Dazongshi pian) and the Huainanzi’s “Training in Authenticity” (Chuzhen xun) express much the same idea.

The word here read as ji is taken in the sense of qi—“how could it be?” or “surely not?”

To the south of the western extremity there was a country. In some editions the word for “corner” or “remote border” appears written in two alternate forms; the meaning is the same—a corner or outlying region.

Far at the western extreme, on the southern fringe, there is a country called Gǔmǎng (“land of ancient wilds”). It has no fixed boundaries, so no one can say precisely where it lies. The terms yú and yú both mean a corner or remote edge and are used interchangeably; in old books yú can also be written with the same sound as yú, again pointing to a jutting angle or outlying place.

In Gǔmǎng the two breaths of Yin and Yang never join, so cold and heat cannot be told apart. The sun and moon do not shine there, so day and night cannot be told apart. The people neither eat nor wear clothes, yet they sleep most of the time. They wake only once every fifty days. Whatever they meet in sleep they hold to be real; whatever they see after waking they take to be empty illusion.

At the center of the world within the four seas lies the middle kingdom. Its lands run south and north of the Yellow River and east and west of Mount Tai, more than ten thousand li across in every direction. Here Yin and Yang keep a steady measure, so the seasons turn and the weather shifts—now cold, now hot.

The boundary between darkness and brightness is clearly defined, which is why there are day and night. In this context du (degree/measure) is paired with fen (division), and shen (examine) with cha (inspect); the wording can be read along those parallel lines. The character fen, given the fan-wen-qie reading in the old phonetic gloss, means to distinguish or to mark a boundary.

In one region, some people are clever and others dull; the myriad things flourish and the arts are many. There ruler and subject stand in a fixed order, and ritual and law keep society in line. What people do is too numerous to count. When they are awake, they treat what happens while awake as real and what they see in dreams as unreal.

Far to the north of the eastern extremity lies a country called the Fuluo Kingdom. Fu is read fu; yu (warmth) is read yu. The climate there stays warm year-round; it receives only the leftover light of the sun and moon, and good crops do not grow well. The people eat wild roots and tree fruit and do not know how to cook with fire. By nature they are hard and fierce, and the strong bully the weak. Ji carries the sense of treading on or oppressing others, and commentators need not propose a different reading here. They honor the strong and the victorious and do not value moral principle. They are often on the move and rarely rest; they stay awake at all times and never sleep.

Commentators say that customs differ from place to place: in some lands the roles of waking and dreaming are reversed, and habits of action and sleep are not the same. Such differences are merely each region’s adaptation to its own environment and are not grounds for mutual reproach.

The explanatory note holds that the text brings up these two countries to show that, although the forms of human life differ, the spiritual nature is fundamentally the same.

If one does not grasp how subtle principles align with the turns of fate and circumstance, one will treat dream and waking life, dress and food, as if they were all the same. When cravings and desires are never released, the mind stays tethered to the mundane world.

Tao Hongqing remarks: “South of the western extremity lies a country whose borders are unknown, called the land of Gumang…” He also says: “North of the eastern extremity lies a country called the land of Fuluo…” On modern geographical grounds, the words for “south” and “north” in these lines ought to be exchanged.

In the Zhou dynasty, Master Yin (Yin shi) vigorously managed his household estate. The word for “govern/manage” (zhi) is read here as chi, in the sense of running and ordering affairs. The hired laborers (yifu) in Yin’s employ worked from before dawn until nightfall without a moment’s rest. Qin Ben writes quyi (urge to labor) as quyi (hasten to service); qu and qu are the same in sound in this usage. Ren Dachun cites examples from the Records of the Grand Historian and the Book of Han to show that qu is sometimes the usual written form for qu (to hurry, to go). Yu Yue adds that one vulgar graph for qu shares the shape of the “walk quickly” character in the Shuowen, yet differs in reading and meaning.

One old laborer was already worn to the bone, yet was still pressed to take on more tasks. Yifu names menial workers of low rank and could also serve as a term of abuse. The Zuo Commentary records Jiang Qian angrily shouting at someone: “Hey, you laborer! No wonder the ruler wanted you dead and to install Zhi in your place.” By day that old laborer groaned and cried out as he kept working; by night, dulled and spent, he sank into deep sleep. Shenhu means moaning and calling out; commentators infer from the reading of hu that the text may be corrupt at this point.

He sat on the throne of the Central Kingdom, and the hundred officials rushed to wait on him in the palace halls. The states of Jin and Chu submitted to him, and the barbarian lands to the south and the Di tribes to the north came to pay court. He toured his own mountains and rivers, and his territory was vast and broad. He had many concubines and palace women, fine food and strong wine, and whatever he wished for was at hand. His joy was beyond compare. When he woke, he was again a laborer. Someone asked him about it, and he replied: “The joy of being a ruler is in the mind alone. How need it depend on the body? I was a ruler in my dream last night, and I am a laborer when awake today. When I was a ruler, was there any difference from being awake? When I am a laborer, is there any difference from the dream? While I am a laborer and a ruler, you and I are awake. If you suddenly got the joy of being a ruler, you would know that being a laborer is not a hardship. I have often sought joy in being a ruler and have never been weary of it. If I were to be a ruler in reality, would I be any less weary than as a laborer? If I could roam at will in the dream and wake as a laborer, I would follow my time and accept my lot without complaint. You and I are both dreaming—why do you find my dream so strange?”

The laborer was a man who knew the Way. Yet Confucius and Mozi were both narrow-minded. How much more so are the likes of you and me! Even if fate did not make one a laborer, who could say that the two of you are not dreaming?

Yin shi, seeing that Master Yan was poor and in low standing, advised him to go to the court and seek an audience with the Son of Heaven. Master Yan replied: “I have already told the Son of Heaven. Suppose I go to the court and tell him again, I would only be destroying my own achievement and seeking a reputation for nothing. I will tell you a story. There was once a man who lived by the sea who was very fond of oysters. One morning he went to the sea and gathered a full basket. He ate until evening, and his mouth and stomach were both upset and in pain. He spat out the oysters, nearly to death, and then recovered. He went to the sea again and said to the oysters: ‘I heard that a gentleman can forget an insult. I was ignorant and ate you in full. I beg your pardon. Can I eat you again?’”

Yin shi was displeased and said: “Master Yan is too proud. Who can listen to you?” Master Yan replied: “That is not so. If I told the Son of Heaven and he listened, it would benefit the world; if he did not listen, it would benefit only me. Why must it benefit the world? For example: there are people who break their backs and strain their strength to plant trees and hoe weeds, thinking they have no rival in the world. When they see Ziqi of Shangqiu, they suddenly forget what they were doing, cart and plow forgotten, and follow him with hands clasped. I have no rival in the world, yet the two of you want to compete with me. It is like Qi and Lu putting on fine robes and caps and setting up a great hall and banquet to treat a pig or a dog. I also look on with respect; why need I seek to change you?”

When Zhongni went to Chu, he saw a man of Jie standing by the side of the road, about as old as his father. Zhongni asked him to take the reins and drive, and he went into the city of Shang. When they arrived, he said to Confucius: “When I went into the city of Shang, I saw a man with a dark complexion and a deep gaze. I do not know whether he is a sage or not. If he is a sage, I know I am not fit to be his driver.” Confucius said: “My judgment is not as good as yours. I have tried to use my eyes, but my eyes failed. I have tried to use my ears, but my ears failed. I have tried to use my mind, but my mind failed. I can only try to learn from you.”

When they arrived at the inn, the driver said to the innkeeper: “I have seen your guest. He is a sage. If you are afraid that your inn is too small to accommodate him, I will respectfully ask you to move to another place.” The innkeeper said: “I have already made my vow. Even if it is a small inn, I will follow the ritual. I have heard that a guest who comes to a superior man’s house, if the superior man is not at home, the guest may not enter unless he is invited. Now that the superior man is here, how can I not receive him?” When Confucius heard this, he made the driver sit with him as an equal.

When they arrived in Chu, Nanrong Chu set up a banquet for them. After several rounds of wine, Nanrong Chu said: “Has the superior man ever been to Song?” Confucius said: “I have.” Nanrong Chu said: “Do you know Mi Zisi?” Confucius said: “I know him.” Nanrong Chu said: “What kind of man is he?” Confucius said: “Mi Zisi is a man who has the virtue of a superior man but not the appearance, and the appearance of a superior man but not the wisdom. He is pure as if cut and polished, bound as if twisted and knotted. He is like a room that has not been swept, like a vessel that has not been carved. He is silent and seems to have nothing; when he speaks, he seems to have something. He is empty and seems to have no place; when he is filled, he seems to have no limit. He is like a clear pool with no fish, like a mirror with no dust. He is like a bell with no sound, like a vessel with no bottom. He is like a closed door with no key, like a well with no rope. He is like a field with no crops, like a mountain with no trees. He is like a river with no water, like a road with no travelers. He is like a house with no master, like a country with no ruler. He is like a body with no soul, like a shadow with no form. He is like a word with no meaning, like a book with no writing. He is like a dream with no reality, like a wake with no dream. He is like a life with no death, like a death with no life. He is like a being with no non-being, like a non-being with no being. He is like the Dao with no name, like a name with no Dao. He is like the One with no two, like two with no One. He is like heaven with no earth, like earth with no heaven. He is like yin with no yang, like yang with no yin. He is like the beginning with no end, like the end with no beginning. He is like the far with no near, like the near with no far. He is like the big with no small, like the small with no big. He is like the many with no few, like the few with no many. He is like the strong with no weak, like the weak with no strong. He is like the noble with no low, like the low with no noble. He is like the wise with no foolish, like the foolish with no wise. He is like the good with no evil, like the evil with no good. He is like the true with no false, like the false with no true. He is like the real with no unreal, like the unreal with no real. He is like the permanent with no change, like the change with no permanent. He is like the still with no movement, like the movement with no still. He is like the empty with no full, like the full with no empty. He is like the hidden with no manifest, like the manifest with no hidden. He is like the subtle with no coarse, like the coarse with no subtle. He is like the spirit with no matter, like the matter with no spirit. He is like the nature with no life, like the life with no nature. He is like the mind with no body, like the body with no mind. He is like the knowledge with no action, like the action with no knowledge. He is like the virtue with no name, like the name with no virtue. He is like the Way with no path, like the path with no Way. He is like the sage with no common man, like the common man with no sage. He is like the lord with no subject, like the subject with no lord. He is like the father with no son, like the son with no father. He is like the husband with no wife, like the wife with no husband. He is like the elder with no younger, like the younger with no elder. He is like the friend with no enemy, like the enemy with no friend. He is like the self with no other, like the other with no self. He is like the inside with no outside, like the outside with no inside. He is like the top with no bottom, like the bottom with no top. He is like the left with no right, like the right with no left. He is like the front with no back, like the back with no front. He is like the light with no dark, like the dark with no light. He is like the sound with no silence, like the silence with no sound. He is like the form with no formlessness, like the formlessness with no form. He is like the being with no emptiness, like the emptiness with no being. He is like the one with no many, like the many with no one. He is like the same with no different, like the different with no same. He is like the equal with no unequal, like the unequal with no equal. He is like the whole with no part, like the part with no whole. He is like the all with no none, like the none with no all. He is like the infinite with no finite, like the finite with no infinite. He is like the eternal with no temporal, like the temporal with no eternal. He is like the absolute with no relative, like the relative with no absolute. He is like the universal with no particular, like the particular with no universal. He is like the general with no specific, like the specific with no general. He is like the abstract with no concrete, like the concrete with no abstract. He is like the ideal with no actual, like the actual with no ideal. He is like the possible with no impossible, like the impossible with no possible. He is like the necessary with no contingent, like the contingent with no necessary. He is like the certain with no uncertain, like the uncertain with no certain. He is like the known with no unknown, like the unknown with no known. He is like the seen with no unseen, like the unseen with no seen. He is like the heard with no unheard, like the unheard with no heard. He is like the felt with no unfelt, like the unfelt with no felt. He is like the thought with no unthought, like the unthought with no thought. He is like the said with no unsaid, like the unsaid with no said. He is like the done with no undone, like the undone with no done. He is like the born with no unborn, like the unborn with no born. He is like the living with no dead, like the dead with no living. He is like the waking with no sleeping, like the sleeping with no waking. He is like the conscious with no unconscious, like the unconscious with no conscious. He is like the rational with no irrational, like the irrational with no rational. He is like the moral with no immoral, like the immoral with no moral. He is like the legal with no illegal, like the illegal with no legal. He is like the just with no unjust, like the unjust with no just. He is like the fair with no unfair, like the unfair with no fair. He is like the right with no wrong, like the wrong with no right. He is like the true with no lie, like the lie with no true. He is like the honest with no dishonest, like the dishonest with no honest. He is like the sincere with no insincere, like the insincere with no sincere. He is like the loyal with no disloyal, like the disloyal with no loyal. He is like the faithful with no unfaithful, like the unfaithful with no faithful. He is like the trust with no distrust, like the distrust with no trust. He is like the hope with no despair, like the despair with no hope. He is like the love with no hate, like the hate with no love. He is like the joy with no sorrow, like the sorrow with no joy. He is like the peace with no war, like the war with no peace. He is like the harmony with no discord, like the discord with no harmony. He is like the unity with no division, like the division with no unity. He is like the order with no chaos, like the chaos with no order. He is like the structure with no formlessness, like the formlessness with no structure. He is like the law with no lawlessness, like the lawlessness with no law. He is like the rule with no exception, like the exception with no rule. He is like the norm with no deviation, like the deviation with no norm. He is like the standard with no non-standard, like the non-standard with no standard. He is like the model with no anti-model, like the anti-model with no model. He is like the example with no counter-example, like the counter-example with no example. He is like the type with no anti-type, like the anti-type with no type. He is like the kind with no unkind, like the unkind with no kind. He is like the class with no out-class, like the out-class with no class. He is like the group with no out-group, like the out-group with no group. He is like the member with no non-member, like the non-member with no member. He is like the part with no whole, like the whole with no part. He is like the element with no system, like the system with no element. He is like the component with no composite, like the composite with no component. He is like the simple with no complex, like the complex with no simple. He is like the basic with no advanced, like the advanced with no basic. He is like the elementary with no sophisticated, like the sophisticated with no elementary. He is like the primitive with no civilized, like the civilized with no primitive. He is like the natural with no artificial, like the artificial with no natural. He is like the spontaneous with no deliberate, like the deliberate with no spontaneous. He is like the free with no bound, like the bound with no free. He is like the open with no closed, like the closed with no open. He is like the public with no private, like the private with no public. He is like the common with no uncommon, like the uncommon with no common. He is like the ordinary with no extraordinary, like the extraordinary with no ordinary. He is like the usual with no unusual, like the unusual with no usual. He is like the normal with no abnormal, like the abnormal with no normal. He is like the regular with no irregular, like the irregular with no regular. He is like the stable with no unstable, like the unstable with no stable. He is like the fixed with no unfixed, like the unfixed with no fixed. He is like the constant with no variable, like the variable with no constant. He is like the permanent with no temporary, like the temporary with no permanent. He is like the lasting with no fleeting, like the fleeting with no lasting. He is like the enduring with no passing, like the passing with no enduring. He is like the eternal with no momentary, like the momentary with no eternal. He is like the timeless with no timely, like the timely with no timeless. He is like the spaceless with no spatial, like the spatial with no spaceless. He is like the boundless with no bounded, like the bounded with no boundless. He is like the limitless with no limited, like the limited with no limitless. He is like the infinite with no finite, like the finite with no infinite. He is like the absolute with no relative, like the relative with no absolute. He is like the ultimate with no penultimate, like the penultimate with no ultimate. He is like the final with no initial, like the initial with no final. He is like the end with no beginning, like the beginning with no end. He is like the conclusion with no premise, like the premise with no conclusion. He is like the result with no cause, like the cause with no result. He is like the effect with no source, like the source with no effect. He is like the outcome with no input, like the input with no outcome. He is like the output with no process, like the process with no output. He is like the product with no production, like the production with no product. He is like the creation with no creator, like the creator with no creation. He is like the creature with no creation, like the creation with no creature. He is like the made with no maker, like the maker with no made. He is like the built with no builder, like the builder with no built. He is like the formed with no former, like the former with no formed. He is like the shaped with no shaper, like the shaper with no shaped. He is like the molded with no molder, like the molder with no molded. He is like the crafted with no crafter, like the crafter with no crafted. He is like the designed with no designer, like the designer with no designed. He is like the planned with no planner, like the planner with no planned. He is like the intended with no intender, like the intender with no intended. He is like the purposed with no purposer, like the purposer with no purposed. He is like the meant with no meaner, like the meaner with no meant. He is like the signified with no signifier, like the signifier with no signified. He is like the represented with no representer, like the representer with no represented. He is like the symbolized with no symbolizer, like the symbolizer with no symbolized. He is like the expressed with no expresser, like the expresser with no expressed. He is like the communicated with no communicator, like the communicator with no communicated. He is like the understood with no understander, like the understander with no understood. He is like the known with no knower, like the knower with no known. He is like the perceived with no perceiver, like the perceiver with no perceived. He is like the felt with no feeler, like the feeler with no felt. He is like the experienced with no experiencer, like the experiencer with no experienced. He is like the lived with no liver, like the liver with no lived. He is like the existed with no existent, like the existent with no existed. He is like the been with no being, like the being with no been. He is like the had with no haver, like the haver with no had. He is like the owned with no owner, like the owner with no owned. He is like the possessed with no possessor, like the possessor with no possessed. He is like the held with no holder, like the holder with no held. He is like the kept with no keeper, like the keeper with no kept. He is like the retained with no retainer, like the retainer with no retained. He is like the maintained with no maintainer, like the maintainer with no maintained. He is like the preserved with no preserver, like the preserver with no preserved. He is like the conserved with no conserver, like the conserver with no conserved. He is like the saved with no saver, like the saver with no saved. He is like the protected with no protector, like the protector with no protected. He is like the defended with no defender, like the defender with no defended. He is like the guarded with no guard, like the guard with no guarded. He is like the secured with no securer, like the securer with no secured. He is like the safe with no safety, like the safety with no safe. He is like the sound with no unsound, like the unsound with no sound. He is like the healthy with no unhealthy, like the unhealthy with no healthy. He is like the whole with no broken, like the broken with no whole. He is like the intact with no damaged, like the damaged with no intact. He is like the perfect with no imperfect, like the imperfect with no perfect. He is like the complete with no incomplete, like the incomplete with no complete. He is like the finished with no unfinished, like the unfinished with no finished. He is like the done with no undone, like the undone with no done. He is like the accomplished with no unaccomplished, like the unaccomplished with no accomplished. He is like the achieved with no unachieved, like the unachieved with no achieved. He is like the attained with no unattained, like the unattained with no attained. He is like the reached with no unreached, like the unreached with no reached. He is like the gained with no lost, like the lost with no gained. He is like the won with no lost, like the lost with no won. He is like the succeeded with no failed, like the failed with no succeeded. He is like the fulfilled with no unfulfilled, like the unfulfilled with no fulfilled. He is like the satisfied with no unsatisfied, like the unsatisfied with no satisfied. He is like the content with no discontent, like the discontent with no content. He is like the happy with no unhappy, like the unhappy with no happy. He is like the pleased with no displeased, like the displeased with no pleased. He is like the glad with no sad, like the sad with no glad. He is like the joyful with no joyless, like the joyless with no joyful. He is like the cheerful with no cheerless, like the cheerless with no cheerful. He is like the bright with no dark, like the dark with no bright. He is like the sunny with no cloudy, like the cloudy with no sunny. He is like the clear with no unclear, like the unclear with no clear. He is like the transparent with no opaque, like the opaque with no transparent. He is like the visible with no invisible, like the invisible with no visible. He is like the manifest with no hidden, like the hidden with no manifest. He is like the apparent with no latent, like the latent with no apparent. He is like the obvious with no obscure, like the obscure with no obvious. He is like the evident with no doubtful, like the doubtful with no evident. He is like the certain with no uncertain, like the uncertain with no certain. He is like the sure with no unsure, like the unsure with no sure. He is like the confident with no diffident, like the diffident with no confident. He is like the bold with no timid, like the timid with no bold. He is like the brave with no cowardly, like the cowardly with no brave. He is like the fearless with no fearful, like the fearful with no fearless. He is like the daring with no cautious, like the cautious with no daring. He is like the adventurous with no conservative, like the conservative with no adventurous. He is like the progressive with no regressive, like the regressive with no progressive. He is like the forward with no backward, like the backward with no forward. He is like the advanced with no retarded, like the retarded with no advanced. He is like the developed with no undeveloped, like the undeveloped with no developed. He is like the mature with no immature, like the immature with no mature. He is like the grown with no ungrown, like the ungrown with no grown. He is like the adult with no child, like the child with no adult. He is like the old with no young, like the young with no old. He is like the aged with no youthful, like the youthful with no aged. He is like the senior with no junior, like the junior with no senior. He is like the elder with no younger, like the younger with no elder. He is like the superior with no inferior, like the inferior with no superior. He is like the higher with no lower, like the lower with no higher. He is like the upper with no under, like the under with no upper. He is like the above with no below, like the below with no above. He is like the over with no under, like the under with no over. He is like the top with no bottom, like the bottom with no top. He is like the peak with no valley, like the valley with no peak. He is like the summit with no base, like the base with no summit. He is like the height with no depth, like the depth with no height. He is like the high with no low, like the low with no high. He is like the tall with no short, like the short with no tall. He is like the long with no short, like the short with no long. He is like the wide with no narrow, like the narrow with no wide. He is like the broad with no thin, like the thin with no broad. He is like the thick with no thin, like the thin with no thick. He is like the fat with no thin, like the thin with no fat. He is like the heavy with no light, like the light with no heavy. He is like the hard with no soft, like the soft with no hard. He is like the strong with no weak, like the weak with no strong. He is like the firm with no loose, like the loose with no firm. He is like the solid with no liquid, like the liquid with no solid. He is like the stable with no unstable, like the unstable with no stable. He is like the steady with no unsteady, like the unsteady with no steady. He is like the fixed with no mobile, like the mobile with no fixed. He is like the static with no dynamic, like the dynamic with no static. He is like the still with no moving, like the moving with no still. He is like the rest with no motion, like the motion with no rest. He is like the quiet with no noisy, like the noisy with no quiet. He is like the silent with no loud, like the loud with no silent. He is like the calm with no stormy, like the stormy with no calm. He is like the peaceful with no turbulent, like the turbulent with no peaceful. He is like the serene with no agitated, like the agitated with no serene. He is like the tranquil with no disturbed, like the disturbed with no tranquil. He is like the composed with no discomposed, like the discomposed with no composed. He is like the collected with no scattered, like the scattered with no collected. He is like the concentrated with no dispersed, like the dispersed with no concentrated. He is like the focused with no distracted, like the distracted with no focused. He is like the attentive with no inattentive, like the inattentive with no attentive. He is like the mindful with no mindless, like the mindless with no mindful. He is like the aware with no unaware, like the unaware with no aware. He is like the conscious with no unconscious, like the unconscious with no conscious. He is like the awake with no asleep, like the asleep with no awake. He is like the alert with no drowsy, like the drowsy with no alert. He is like the vigilant with no negligent, like the negligent with no vigilant. He is like the watchful with no careless, like the careless with no watchful. He is like the careful with no careless, like the careless with no careful. He is like the cautious with no reckless, like the reckless with no cautious. He is like the prudent with no imprudent, like the imprudent with no prudent. He is like the wise with no foolish, like the foolish with no wise. He is like the sensible with no senseless, like the senseless with no sensible. He is like the reasonable with no unreasonable, like the unreasonable with no reasonable. He is like the rational with no irrational, like the irrational with no rational. He is like the logical with no illogical, like the illogical with no logical. He is like the coherent with no incoherent, like the incoherent with no coherent. He is like the consistent with no inconsistent, like the inconsistent with no consistent. He is like the compatible with no incompatible, like the incompatible with no compatible. He is like the harmonious with no discordant, like the discordant with no harmonious. He is like the congruent with no incongruent, like the incongruent with no congruent. He is like the matching with no mismatching, like the mismatching with no matching. He is like the fitting with no unfitting, like the unfitting with no fitting. He is like the suitable with no unsuitable, like the unsuitable with no suitable. He is like the appropriate with no inappropriate, like the inappropriate with no appropriate. He is like the proper with no improper, like the improper with no proper. He is like the correct with no incorrect, like the incorrect with no correct. He is like the right with no wrong, like the wrong with no right. He is like the accurate with no inaccurate, like the inaccurate with no accurate. He is like the precise with no imprecise, like the imprecise with no precise. He is like the exact with no inexact, like the inexact with no exact. He is like the true with no false, like the false with no true. He is like the genuine with no fake, like the fake with no genuine. He is like the authentic with no inauthentic, like the inauthentic with no authentic. He is like the real with no unreal, like the unreal with no real. He is like the actual with no virtual, like the virtual with no actual. He is like the factual with no fictional, like the fictional with no factual. He is like the literal with no figurative, like the figurative with no literal. He is like the direct with no indirect, like the indirect with no direct. He is like the straight with no crooked, like the crooked with no straight. He is like the plain with no fancy, like the fancy with no plain. He is like the simple with no elaborate, like the elaborate with no simple. He is like the easy with no difficult, like the difficult with no easy. He is like the smooth with no rough, like the rough with no smooth. He is like the even with no uneven, like the uneven with no even. He is like the flat with no bumpy, like the bumpy with no flat. He is like the level with no slanted, like the slanted with no level. He is like the horizontal with no vertical, like the vertical with no horizontal. He is like the parallel with no perpendicular, like the perpendicular with no parallel. He is like the symmetric with no asymmetric, like the asymmetric with no symmetric. He is like the balanced with no unbalanced, like the unbalanced with no balanced. He is like the equal with no unequal, like the unequal with no equal. He is like the same with no different, like the different with no same. He is like the identical with no distinct, like the distinct with no identical. He is like the similar with no dissimilar, like the dissimilar with no similar. He is like the alike with no unlike, like the unlike with no alike. He is like the comparable with no incomparable, like the incomparable with no comparable. He is like the relative with no absolute, like the absolute with no relative. He is like the dependent with no independent, like the independent with no dependent. He is like the conditional with no unconditional, like the unconditional with no conditional. He is like the contingent with no necessary, like the necessary with no contingent. He is like the possible with no impossible, like the impossible with no possible. He is like the probable with no improbable, like the improbable with no probable. He is like the likely with no unlikely, like the unlikely with no likely. He is like the expected with no unexpected, like the unexpected with no expected. He is like the predictable with no unpredictable, like the unpredictable with no predictable. He is like the determined with no undetermined, like the undetermined with no determined. He is like the decided with no undecided, like the undecided with no decided. He is like the settled with no unsettled, like the unsettled with no settled. He is like the resolved with no unresolved, like the unresolved with no resolved. He is like the fixed with no unfixed, like the unfixed with no fixed. He is like the definite with no indefinite, like the indefinite with no definite. He is like the clear with no vague, like the vague with no clear. He is like the distinct with no indistinct, like the indistinct with no distinct. He is like the sharp with no dull, like the dull with no sharp. He is like the keen with no blunt, like the blunt with no keen. He is like the acute with no obtuse, like the obtuse with no acute. He is like the sensitive with no insensitive, like the insensitive with no sensitive. He is like the responsive with no unresponsive, like the unresponsive with no responsive. He is like the reactive with no unreactive, like the unreactive with no reactive. He is like the active with no passive, like the passive with no active. He is like the dynamic with no static, like the static with no dynamic. He is like the energetic with no lethargic, like the lethargic with no energetic. He is like the vigorous with no weak, like the weak with no vigorous. He is like the lively with no lifeless, like the lifeless with no lively. He is like the animated with no inanimate, like the inanimate with no animated. He is like the vital with no dead, like the dead with no vital. He is like the living with no non-living, like the non-living with no living. He is like the organic with no inorganic, like the inorganic with no organic. He is like the biological with no abiological, like the abiological with no biological. He is like the natural with no unnatural, like the unnatural with no natural. He is like the normal with no abnormal, like the abnormal with no normal. He is like the typical with no atypical, like the atypical with no typical. He is like the standard with no non-standard, like the non-standard with no standard. He is like the regular with no irregular, like the irregular with no regular. He is like the ordinary with no extraordinary, like the extraordinary with no ordinary. He is like the common with no rare, like the rare with no common. He is like the usual with no unusual, like the unusual with no usual. He is like the frequent with no infrequent, like the infrequent with no frequent. He is like the often with no seldom, like the seldom with no often. He is like the always with no never, like the never with no always. He is like the ever with no never, like the never with no ever. He is like the perpetual with no temporary, like the temporary with no perpetual. He is like the continuous with no intermittent, like the intermittent with no continuous. He is like the constant with no inconstant, like the inconstant with no constant. He is like the persistent with no fleeting, like the fleeting with no persistent. He is like the enduring with no transient, like the transient with no enduring. He is like the lasting with no brief, like the brief with no lasting. He is like the permanent with no impermanent, like the impermanent with no permanent. He is like the eternal with no temporal, like the temporal with no eternal. He is like the immortal with no mortal, like the mortal with no immortal. He is like the deathless with no mortal, like the mortal with no deathless. He is like the undying with no dying, like the dying with no undying. He is like the everlasting with no ephemeral, like the ephemeral with no everlasting. He is like the infinite with no finite, like the finite with no infinite. He is like the boundless with no bounded, like the bounded with no boundless. He is like the limitless with no limited, like the limited with no limitless. He is like the endless with no end, like the end with no endless. He is like the beginningless with no beginning, like the beginning with no beginningless. He is like the timeless with no time, like the time with no timeless. He is like the spaceless with no space, like the space with no spaceless. He is like the formless with no form, like the form with no formless. He is like the nameless with no name, like the name with no nameless. He is like the wordless with no word, like the word with no wordless. He is like the speechless with no speech, like the speech with no speechless. He is like the thoughtless with no thought, like the thought with no thoughtless. He is like the mindless with no mind, like the mind with no mindless. He is like the heartless with no heart, like the heart with no heartless. He is like the soulless with no soul, like the soul with no soulless. He is like the spiritless with no spirit, like the spirit with no spiritless. He is like the lifeless with no life, like the life with no lifeless. He is like the breathless with no breath, like the breath with no breathless. He is like the motionless with no motion, like the motion with no motionless. He is like the changeless with no change, like the change with no changeless. He is like the rest with no unrest, like the unrest with no rest. He is like the peace with no strife, like the strife with no peace. He is like the stillness with no turmoil, like the turmoil with no stillness. He is like the silence with no noise, like the noise with no silence. He is like the emptiness with no fullness, like the fullness with no emptiness. He is like the void with no plenitude, like the plenitude with no void. He is like the nothing with no something, like the something with no nothing. He is like the zero with no one, like the one with no zero. He is like the null with no being, like the being with no null. He is like the non-existence with no existence, like the existence with no non-existence. He is like the absence with no presence, like the presence with no absence. He is like the lack with no plenty, like the plenty with no lack. He is like the want with no abundance, like the abundance with no want. He is like the need with no sufficiency, like the sufficiency with no need. He is like the poverty with no wealth, like the wealth with no poverty. He is like the scarcity with no plenty, like the plenty with no scarcity. He is like the famine with no feast, like the feast with no famine. He is like the hunger with no satiety, like the satiety with no hunger. He is like the thirst with no quench, like the quench with no thirst. He is like the cold with no warmth, like the warmth with no cold. He is like the heat with no cool, like the cool with no heat. He is like the darkness with no light, like the light with no darkness. He is like the night with no day, like the day with no night. He is like the winter with no summer, like the summer with no winter. He is like the death with no birth, like the birth with no death. He is like the decay with no growth, like the growth with no decay. He is like the decline with no rise, like the rise with no decline. He is like the fall with no spring, like the spring with no fall. He is like the down with no up, like the up with no down. He is like the out with no in, like the in with no out. He is like the exit with no entrance, like the entrance with no exit. He is like the departure with no arrival, like the arrival with no departure. He is like the leaving with no staying, like the staying with no leaving. He is like the going with no coming, like the coming with no going. He is like the passing with no remaining, like the remaining with no passing. He is like the transient with no permanent, like the permanent with no transient. He is like the fleeting with no lasting, like the lasting with no fleeting. He is like the momentary with no eternal, like the eternal with no momentary. He is like the instant with no duration, like the duration with no instant. He is like the now with no then, like the then with no now. He is like the present with no past, like the past with no present. He is like the future with no present, like the present with no future. He is like the here with no there, like the there with no here. He is like the this with no that, like the that with no this. He is like the self with no other, like the other with no self. He is like the me with no you, like the you with no me. He is like the we with no they, like the they with no we. He is like the one with no many, like the many with no one. He is like the individual with no collective, like the collective with no individual. He is like the single with no multiple, like the multiple with no single. He is like the alone with no together, like the together with no alone. He is like the separate with no united, like the united with no separate. He is like the divided with no whole, like the whole with no divided. He is like the part with no whole, like the whole with no part. He is like the fragment with no totality, like the totality with no fragment. He is like the piece with no puzzle, like the puzzle with no piece. He is like the detail with no whole, like the whole with no detail. He is like the particular with no universal, like the universal with no particular. He is like the specific with no general, like the general with no specific. He is like the concrete with no abstract, like the abstract with no concrete. He is like the material with no immaterial, like the immaterial with no material. He is like the physical with no metaphysical, like the metaphysical with no physical. He is like the corporeal with no incorporeal, like the incorporeal with no corporeal. He is like the bodily with no spiritual, like the spiritual with no bodily. He is like the flesh with no spirit, like the spirit with no flesh. He is like the world with no otherworld, like the otherworld with no world. He is like the secular with no sacred, like the sacred with no secular. He is like the profane with no holy, like the holy with no profane. He is like the mundane with no divine, like the divine with no mundane. He is like the human with no divine, like the divine with no human. He is like the mortal with no immortal, like the immortal with no mortal. He is like the earthly with no heavenly, like the heavenly with no earthly. He is like the below with no above, like the above with no below. He is like the hell with no heaven, like the heaven with no hell. He is like the evil with no good, like the good with no evil. He is like the sin with no virtue, like the virtue with no sin. He is like the wrong with no right, like the right with no wrong. He is like the bad with no good, like the good with no bad. He is like the ugly with no beautiful, like the beautiful with no ugly. He is like the false with no true, like the true with no false. He is like the lie with no truth, like the truth with no lie. He is like the deception with no honesty, like the honesty with no deception. He is like the fraud with no integrity, like the integrity with no fraud. He is like the corruption with no purity, like the purity with no corruption. He is like the pollution with no cleanliness, like the cleanliness with no pollution. He is like the disease with no health, like the health with no disease. He is like the sickness with no wellness, like the wellness with no sickness. He is like the pain with no pleasure, like the pleasure with no pain. He is like the suffering with no joy, like the joy with no suffering. He is like the sorrow with no happiness, like the happiness with no sorrow. He is like the grief with no comfort, like the comfort with no grief. He is like the despair with no hope, like the hope with no despair. He is like the fear with no courage, like the courage with no fear. He is like the anxiety with no peace, like the peace with no anxiety. He is like the worry with no ease, like the ease with no worry. He is like the stress with no relaxation, like the relaxation with no stress. He is like the tension with no release, like the release with no tension. He is like the conflict with no harmony, like the harmony with no conflict. He is like the war with no peace, like the peace with no war. He is like the violence with no gentleness, like the gentleness with no violence. He is like the aggression with no passivity, like the passivity with no aggression. He is like the attack with no defense, like the defense with no attack. He is like the offense with no protection, like the protection with no offense. He is like the enemy with no friend, like the friend with no enemy. He is like the foe with no ally, like the ally with no foe. He is like the stranger with no kin, like the kin with no stranger. He is like the alien with no native, like the native with no alien. He is like the foreign with no domestic, like the domestic with no foreign. He is like the external with no internal, like the internal with no external. He is like the outer with no inner, like the inner with no outer. He is like the surface with no depth, like the depth with no surface. He is like the shallow with no profound, like the profound with no shallow. He is like the superficial with no deep, like the deep with no superficial. He is like the apparent with no hidden, like the hidden with no apparent. He is like the obvious with no subtle, like the subtle with no obvious. He is like the gross with no fine, like the fine with no gross. He is like the coarse with no refined, like the refined with no coarse. He is like the crude with no polished, like the polished with no crude. He is like the raw with no cooked, like the cooked with no raw. He is like the unripe with no ripe, like the ripe with no unripe. He is like the immature with no mature, like the mature with no immature. He is like the undeveloped with no developed, like the developed with no undeveloped. He is like the primitive with no advanced, like the advanced with no primitive. He is like the ancient with no modern, like the modern with no ancient. He is like the old with no new, like the new with no old. He is like the past with no future, like the future with no past. He is like the tradition with no innovation, like the innovation with no tradition. He is like the custom with no change, like the change with no custom. He is like the habit with no novelty, like the novelty with no habit. He is like the routine with no surprise, like the surprise with no routine. He is like the familiar with no strange, like the strange with no familiar. He is like the known with no unknown, like the unknown with no known. He is like the explored with no unexplored, like the unexplored with no explored. He is like the mapped with no unmapped, like the unmapped with no mapped. He is like the charted with no uncharted, like the uncharted with no charted. He is like the discovered with no undiscovered, like the undiscovered with no discovered. He is like the found with no lost, like the lost with no found. He is like the revealed with no concealed, like the concealed with no revealed. He is like the exposed with no hidden, like the hidden with no exposed. He is like the open with no secret, like the secret with no open. He is like the public with no private, like the private with no public. He is like the shared with no exclusive, like the exclusive with no shared. He is like the common with no unique, like the unique with no common. He is like the general with no special, like the special with no general. He is like the universal with no particular, like the particular with no universal. He is like the all with no none, like the none with no all. He is like the everything with no nothing, like the nothing with no everything. He is like the whole with no part, like the part with no whole. He is like the total with no partial, like the partial with no total. He is like the complete with no incomplete, like the incomplete with no complete. He is like the full with no empty, like the empty with no full. He is like the satisfied with no wanting, like the wanting with no satisfied. He is like the content with no restless, like the restless with no content. He is like the at peace with no troubled, like the troubled with no at peace. He is like the at rest with no agitated, like the agitated with no at rest. He is like the at ease with no strained, like the strained with no at ease. He is like the comfortable with no uncomfortable, like the uncomfortable with no comfortable. He is like the pleasant with no unpleasant, like the unpleasant with no pleasant. He is like the agreeable with no disagreeable, like the disagreeable with no agreeable. He is like the acceptable with no unacceptable, like the unacceptable with no acceptable. He is like the tolerable with no intolerable, like the intolerable with no tolerable. He is like the bearable with no unbearable, like the unbearable with no bearable. He is like the endurable with no unendurable, like the unendurable with no endurable. He is like the survivable with no unsurvivable, like the unsurvivable with no survivable. He is like the livable with no unlivable, like the unlivable with no livable. He is like the workable with no unworkable, like the unworkable with no workable. He is like the feasible with no infeasible, like the infeasible with no feasible. He is like the possible with no impossible, like the impossible with no possible. He is like the doable with no undoable, like the undoable with no doable. He is like the achievable with no unachievable, like the unachievable with no achievable. He is like the attainable with no unattainable, like the unattainable with no attainable. He is like the reachable with no unreachable, like the unreachable with no reachable. He is like the accessible with no inaccessible, like the inaccessible with no accessible. He is like the available with no unavailable, like the unavailable with no available. He is like the obtainable with no unobtainable, like the unobtainable with no obtainable. He is like the acquirable with no unacquirable, like the unacquirable with no acquirable. He is like the gainable with no ungainable, like the ungainable with no gainable. He is like the winnable with no unwinnable, like the unwinnable with no winnable. He is like the succeedable with no unsucceedable, like the unsucceedable with no succeedable. He is like the fulfillable with no unfulfillable, like the unfulfillable with no fulfillable. He is like the satisfiable with no unsatisfiable, like the unsatisfiable with no satisfiable. He is like the completable with no uncompletable, like the uncompletable with no completable. He is like the finishable with no unfinishable, like the unfinishable with no finishable. He is like the doable with no undoable, like the undoable with no doable. He is like the manageable with no unmanageable, like the unmanageable with no manageable. He is like the controllable with no uncontrollable, like the uncontrollable with no controllable. He is like the governable with no ungovernable, like the ungovernable with no governable. He is like the ruleable with no unruleable, like the unruleable with no ruleable. He is like the orderable with no unorderable, like the unorderable with no orderable. He is like the arrangeable with no unarrangeable, like the unarrangeable with no arrangeable. He is like the organizable with no unorganizable, like the unorganizable with no organizable. He is like the systematizable with no unsystematizable, like the unsystematizable with no systematizable. He is like the structurable with no unstructurable, like the unstructurable with no structurable. He is like the formable with no unformable, like the unformable with no formable. He is like the shapeable with no unshapeable, like the unshapeable with no shapeable. He is like the moldable with no unmoldable, like the unmoldable with no moldable. He is like the flexible with no inflexible, like the inflexible with no flexible. He is like the adaptable with no unadaptable, like the unadaptable with no adaptable. He is like the adjustable with no unadjustable, like the unadjustable with no adjustable. He is like the modifiable with no unmodifiable, like the unmodifiable with no modifiable. He is like the changeable with no unchangeable, like the unchangeable with no changeable. He is like the alterable with no unalterable, like the unalterable with no alterable. He is like the transformable with no untransformable, like the untransformable with no transformable. He is like the convertible with no unconvertible, like the unconvertible with no convertible. He is like the translatable with no untranslatable, like the untranslatable with no translatable. He is like the interpretable with no uninterpretable, like the uninterpretable with no interpretable. He is like the understandable with no understandable, like the understandable with no understandable. He is like the comprehensible with no incomprehensible, like the incomprehensible with no comprehensible. He is like the intelligible with no unintelligible, like the unintelligible with no intelligible. He is like the clear with no obscure, like the obscure with no clear. He is like the plain with no cryptic, like the cryptic with no plain. He is like the simple with no complex, like the complex with no simple. He is like the easy with no hard, like the hard with no easy. He is like the light with no heavy, like the heavy with no light. He is like the soft with no hard, like the hard with no soft. He is like the gentle with no harsh, like the harsh with no gentle. He is like the mild with no severe, like the severe with no mild. He is like the moderate with no extreme, like the extreme with no moderate. He is like the temperate with no intemperate, like the intemperate with no temperate. He is like the balanced with no unbalanced, like the unbalanced with no balanced. He is like the centered with no off-center, like the off-center with no centered. He is like the stable with no unstable, like the unstable with no stable. He is like the steady with no unsteady, like the unsteady with no steady. He is like the firm with no shaky, like the shaky with no firm. He is like the solid with no weak, like the weak with no solid. He is like the strong with no fragile, like the fragile with no strong. He is like the durable with no fragile, like the fragile with no durable. He is like the lasting with no fleeting, like the fleeting with no lasting. He is like the permanent with no temporary, like the temporary with no permanent. He is like the enduring with no passing, like the passing with no enduring. He is like the eternal with no momentary, like the momentary with no eternal. He is like the immortal with no mortal, like the mortal with no immortal. He is like the deathless with no dying, like the dying with no deathless. He is like the undying with no perishing, like the perishing with no undying. He is like the imperishable with no perishable, like the perishable with no imperishable. He is like the indestructible with no destructible, like the destructible with no indestructible. He is like the invincible with no vincible, like the vincible with no invincible. He is like the unconquerable with no conquerable, like the conquerable with no unconquerable. He is like the unbeatable with no beatable, like the beatable with no unbeatable. He is like the unsurpassable with no surpassable, like the surpassable with no unsurpassable. He is like the unmatched with no matched, like the matched with no unmatched. He is like the unparalleled with no paralleled, like the paralleled with no unparalleled. He is like the unequaled with no equaled, like the equaled with no unequaled. He is like the incomparable with no comparable, like the comparable with no incomparable. He is like the unique with no common, like the common with no unique. He is like the singular with no plural, like the plural with no singular. He is like the one with no many, like the many with no one. He is like the only with no other, like the other with no only. He is like the sole with no multiple, like the multiple with no sole. He is like the exclusive with no inclusive, like the inclusive with no exclusive. He is like the alone with no accompanied, like the accompanied with no alone. He is like the solitary with no social, like the social with no solitary. He is like the isolated with no connected, like the connected with no isolated. He is like the separate with no joined, like the joined with no separate. He is like the independent with no dependent, like the dependent with no independent. He is like the autonomous with no heteronomous, like the heteronomous with no autonomous. He is like the free with no bound, like the bound with no free. He is like the liberated with no enslaved, like the enslaved with no liberated. He is like the released with no captive, like the captive with no released. He is like the escaped with no trapped, like the trapped with no escaped. He is like the saved with no lost, like the lost with no saved. He is like the redeemed with no damned, like the damned with no redeemed. He is like the blessed with no cursed, like the cursed with no blessed. He is like the favored with no disfavored, like the disfavored with no favored. He is like the chosen with no rejected, like the rejected with no chosen. He is like the elected with no defeated, like the defeated with no elected. He is like the selected with no excluded, like the excluded with no selected. He is like the included with no excluded, like the excluded with no included. He is like the accepted with no rejected, like the rejected with no accepted. He is like the welcomed with no shunned, like the shunned with no welcomed. He is like the embraced with no spurned, like the spurned with no embraced. He is like the loved with no hated, like the hated with no loved. He is like the cherished with no despised, like the despised with no cherished. He is like the valued with no devalued, like the devalued with no valued. He is like the prized with no worthless, like the worthless with no prized. He is like the treasured with no discarded, like the discarded with no treasured. He is like the honored with no dishonored, like the dishonored with no honored. He is like the respected with no disrespected, like the disrespected with no respected. He is like the admired with no scorned, like the scorned with no admired. He is like the praised with no blamed, like the blamed with no praised. He is like the commended with no condemned, like the condemned with no commended. He is like the approved with no disapproved, like the disapproved with no approved. He is like the endorsed with no opposed, like the opposed with no endorsed. He is like the supported with no opposed, like the opposed with no supported. He is like the backed with no abandoned, like the abandoned with no backed. He is like the defended with no attacked, like the attacked with no defended. He is like the protected with no exposed, like the exposed with no protected. He is like the shielded with no vulnerable, like the vulnerable with no shielded. He is like the guarded with no unguarded, like the unguarded with no guarded. He is like the secure with no insecure, like the insecure with no secure. He is like the safe with no dangerous, like the dangerous with no safe. He is like the sound with no unsound, like the unsound with no sound. He is like the healthy with no sick, like the sick with no healthy. He is like the well with no ill, like the ill with no well. He is like the whole with no broken, like the broken with no whole. He is like the intact with no damaged, like the damaged with no intact. He is like the perfect with no flawed, like the flawed with no perfect. He is like the flawless with no blemished, like the blemished with no flawless. He is like the pure with no impure, like the impure with no pure. He is like the clean with no dirty, like the dirty with no clean. He is like the spotless with no stained, like the stained with no spotless. He is like the clear with no cloudy, like the cloudy with no clear. He is like the transparent with no opaque, like the opaque with no transparent. He is like the lucid with no murky, like the murky with no lucid. He is like the bright with no dim, like the dim with no bright. He is like the shining with no dull, like the dull with no shining. He is like the radiant with no dark, like the dark with no radiant. He is like the luminous with no shadowy, like the shadowy with no luminous. He is like the glowing with no faded, like the faded with no glowing. He is like the vivid with no pale, like the pale with no vivid. He is like the colorful with no colorless, like the colorless with no colorful. He is like the rich with no poor, like the poor with no rich. He is like the abundant with no scarce, like the scarce with no abundant. He is like the plentiful with no meager, like the meager with no plentiful. He is like the copious with no sparse, like the sparse with no copious. He is like the ample with no insufficient, like the insufficient with no ample. He is like the enough with no lacking, like the lacking with no enough. He is like the sufficient with no deficient, like the deficient with no sufficient. He is like the adequate with no inadequate, like the inadequate with no adequate. He is like the satisfactory with no unsatisfactory, like the unsatisfactory with no satisfactory. He is like the acceptable with no unacceptable, like the unacceptable with no acceptable. He is like the passable with no failing, like the failing with no passable. He is like the good with no bad, like the bad with no good. He is like the fine with no poor, like the poor with no fine. He is like the excellent with no inferior, like the inferior with no excellent. He is like the superior with no inferior, like the inferior with no superior. He is like the outstanding with no mediocre, like the mediocre with no outstanding. He is like the remarkable with no ordinary, like the ordinary with no remarkable. He is like the extraordinary with no commonplace, like the commonplace with no extraordinary. He is like the exceptional with no usual, like the usual with no exceptional. He is like the rare with no common, like the common with no rare. He is like the special with no generic, like the generic with no special. He is like the particular with no general, like the general with no particular. He is like the specific with no vague, like the vague with no specific. He is like the definite with no indefinite, like the indefinite with no definite. He is like the certain with no uncertain, like the uncertain with no certain. He is like the sure with no doubtful, like the doubtful with no sure. He is like the confident with no hesitant, like the hesitant with no confident. He is like the decisive with no indecisive, like the indecisive with no decisive. He is like the resolute with no wavering, like the wavering with no resolute. He is like the determined with no undetermined, like the undetermined with no determined. He is like the fixed with no wavering, like the wavering with no fixed. He is like the settled with no unsettled, like the unsettled with no settled. He is like the established with no unsettled, like the unsettled with no established. He is like the confirmed with no unconfirmed, like the unconfirmed with no confirmed. He is like the verified with no unverified, like the unverified with no verified. He is like the validated with no invalidated, like the invalidated with no validated. He is like the proven with no unproven, like the unproven with no proven. He is like the demonstrated with no undemonstrated, like the undemonstrated with no demonstrated. He is like the shown with no hidden, like the hidden with no shown. He is like the revealed with no concealed, like the concealed with no revealed. He is like the disclosed with no secret, like the secret with no disclosed. He is like the exposed with no covered, like the covered with no exposed. He is like the open with no closed, like the closed with no open. He is like the public with no private, like the private with no public. He is like the manifest with no latent, like the latent with no manifest. He is like the evident with no obscure, like the obscure with no evident. He is like the obvious with no hidden, like the hidden with no obvious. He is like the apparent with no concealed, like the concealed with no apparent. He is like the visible with no invisible, like the invisible with no visible. He is like the perceptible with no imperceptible, like the imperceptible with no perceptible. He is like the noticeable with no unnoticeable, like the unnoticeable with no noticeable. He is like the observable with no unobservable, like the unobservable with no observable. He is like the detectable with no undetectable, like the undetectable with no detectable. He is like the recognizable with no unrecognizable, like the unrecognizable with no recognizable. He is like the identifiable with no unidentifiable, like the unidentifiable with no identifiable. He is like the distinguishable with no indistinguishable, like the indistinguishable with no distinguishable. He is like the differentiable with no indifferentiable, like the indifferentiable with no differentiable. He is like the separable with no inseparable, like the inseparable with no separable. He is like the divisible with no indivisible, like the indivisible with no divisible. He is like the partible with no impartible, like the impartible with no partible. He is like the breakable with no unbreakable, like the unbreakable with no breakable. He is like the fragmentable with no unfragmentable, like the unfragmentable with no fragmentable. He is like the destructible with no indestructible, like the indestructible with no destructible. He is like the mortal with no immortal, like the immortal with no mortal. He is like the perishable with no imperishable, like the imperishable with no perishable. He is like the temporary with no permanent, like the permanent with no temporary. He is like the fleeting with no lasting, like the lasting with no fleeting. He is like the transient with no enduring, like the enduring with no transient. He is like the passing with no remaining, like the remaining with no passing. He is like the momentary with no eternal, like the eternal with no momentary. He is like the brief with no long, like the long with no brief. He is like the short with no extended, like the extended with no short. He is like the quick with no slow, like the slow with no quick. He is like the fast with no sluggish, like the sluggish with no fast. He is like the rapid with no gradual, like the gradual with no rapid. He is like the swift with no tardy, like the tardy with no swift. He is like the speedy with no delayed, like the delayed with no speedy. He is like the immediate with no deferred, like the deferred with no immediate. He is like the instant with no prolonged, like the prolonged with no instant. He is like the sudden with no gradual, like the gradual with no sudden. He is like the abrupt with no smooth, like the smooth with no abrupt. He is like the sharp with no gentle, like the gentle with no sharp. He is like the steep with no gradual, like the gradual with no steep. He is like the vertical with no horizontal, like the horizontal with no vertical. He is like the upright with no prone, like the prone with no upright. He is like the erect with no slumped, like the slumped with no erect. He is like the standing with no sitting, like the sitting with no standing. He is like the active with no passive, like the passive with no active. He is like the moving with no still, like the still with no moving. He is like the going with no stopping, like the stopping with no going. He is like the proceeding with no retreating, like the retreating with no proceeding. He is like the advancing with no receding, like the receding with no advancing. He is like the progressing with no regressing, like the regressing with no progressing. He is like the developing with no declining, like the declining with no developing. He is like the growing with no shrinking, like the shrinking with no growing. He is like the expanding with no contracting, like the contracting with no expanding. He is like the increasing with no decreasing, like the decreasing with no increasing. He is like the rising with no falling, like the falling with no rising. He is like the ascending with no descending, like the descending with no ascending. He is like the climbing with no descending, like the descending with no climbing. He is like the mounting with no dismounting, like the dismounting with no mounting. He is like the lifting with no lowering, like the lowering with no lifting. He is like the raising with no dropping, like the dropping with no raising. He is like the elevating with no depressing, like the depressing with no elevating. He is like the heightening with no lessening, like the lessening with no heightening. He is like the intensifying with no weakening, like the weakening with no intensifying. He is like the strengthening with no enfeebling, like the enfeebling with no strengthening. He is like the reinforcing with no undermining, like the undermining with no reinforcing. He is like the supporting with no weakening, like the weakening with no supporting. He is like the sustaining with no exhausting, like the exhausting with no sustaining. He is like the maintaining with no neglecting, like the neglecting with no maintaining. He is like the preserving with no destroying, like the destroying with no preserving. He is like the conserving with no wasting, like the wasting with no conserving. He is like the saving with no squandering, like the squandering with no saving. He is like the hoarding with no dispersing, like the dispersing with no hoarding. He is like the accumulating with no dissipating, like the dissipating with no accumulating. He is like the gathering with no scattering, like the scattering with no gathering. He is like the collecting with no distributing, like the distributing with no collecting. He is like the assembling with no disassembling, like the disassembling with no assembling. He is like the uniting with no dividing, like the dividing with no uniting. He is like the joining with no separating, like the separating with no joining. He is like the connecting with no disconnecting, like the disconnecting with no connecting. He is like the linking with no unlinking, like the unlinking with no linking. He is like the binding with no unbinding, like the unbinding with no binding. He is like the tying with no untying, like the untying with no tying. He is like the fastening with no loosening, like the loosening with no fastening. He is like the securing with no releasing, like the releasing with no securing. He is like the locking with no unlocking, like the unlocking with no locking. He is like the closing with no opening, like the opening with no closing. He is like the shutting with no opening, like the opening with no shutting. He is like the sealing with no unsealing, like the unsealing with no sealing. He is like the covering with no uncovering, like the uncovering with no covering. He is like the hiding with no revealing, like the revealing with no hiding. He is like the concealing with no exposing, like the exposing with no concealing. He is like the masking with no unmasking, like the unmasking with no masking. He is like the veiling with no unveiling, like the unveiling with no veiling. He is like the shrouding with no uncovering, like the uncovering with no shrouding. He is like the obscuring with no clarifying, like the clarifying with no obscuring. He is like the clouding with no clearing, like the clearing with no clouding. He is like the darkening with no brightening, like the brightening with no darkening. He is like the dimming with no illuminating, like the illuminating with no dimming. He is like the shadowing with no lighting, like the lighting with no shadowing. He is like the eclipsing with no revealing, like the revealing with no eclipsing. He is like the blocking with no unblocking, like the unblocking with no blocking. He is like the obstructing with no clearing, like the clearing with no obstructing. He is like the hindering with no helping, like the helping with no hindering. He is like the impeding with no facilitating, like the facilitating with no impeding. He is like the preventing with no allowing, like the allowing with no preventing. He is like the stopping with no starting, like the starting with no stopping. He is like the halting with no continuing, like the continuing with no halting. He is like the ceasing with no beginning, like the beginning with no ceasing. He is like the ending with no commencing, like the commencing with no ending. He is like the finishing with no starting, like the starting with no finishing. He is like the completing with no initiating, like the initiating with no completing. He is like the concluding with no opening, like the opening with no concluding. He is like the terminating with no originating, like the originating with no terminating. He is like the closing with no opening, like the opening with no closing. He is like the final with no initial, like the initial with no final. He is like the last with no first, like the first with no last. He is like the ultimate with no primary, like the primary with no ultimate. He is like the supreme with no inferior, like the inferior with no supreme. He is like the highest with no lowest, like the lowest with no highest. He is like the greatest with no least, like the least with no greatest. He is like the maximum with no minimum, like the minimum with no maximum. He is like the most with no least, like the least with no most. He is like the all with no none, like the none with no all. He is like the totality with no void, like the void with no totality. He is like the fullness with no emptiness, like the emptiness with no fullness. He is like the completeness with no incompleteness, like the incompleteness with no completeness. He is like the wholeness with no fragmentation, like the fragmentation with no wholeness. He is like the integrity with no corruption, like the corruption with no integrity. He is like the unity with no division, like the division with no unity. He is like the oneness with no multiplicity, like the multiplicity with no oneness. He is like the singularity with no plurality, like the plurality with no singularity. He is like the simplicity with no complexity, like the complexity with no simplicity. He is like the purity with no mixture, like the mixture with no purity. He is like the clarity with no confusion, like the confusion with no clarity. He is like the order with no disorder, like the disorder with no order. He is like the harmony with no discord, like the discord with no harmony. He is like the peace with no conflict, like the conflict with no peace. He is like the balance with no imbalance, like the imbalance with no balance. He is like the equilibrium with no disequilibrium, like the disequilibrium with no equilibrium. He is like the stability with no instability, like the instability with no stability. He is like the constancy with no variability, like the variability with no constancy. He is like the permanence with no change, like the change with no permanence. He is like the eternity with no temporality, like the temporality with no eternity. He is like the infinity with no finitude, like the finitude with no infinity. He is like the absoluteness with no relativity, like the relativity with no absoluteness. He is like the perfection with no imperfection, like the imperfection with no perfection. He is like the ideal with no real, like the real with no ideal. He is like the model with no deviation, like the deviation with no model. He is like the standard with no anomaly, like the anomaly with no standard. He is like the norm with no aberration, like the aberration with no norm. He is like the rule with no exception, like the exception with no rule. He is like the law with no violation, like the violation with no law. He is like the principle with no breach, like the breach with no principle. He is like the truth with no falsehood, like the falsehood with no truth. He is like the reality with no illusion, like the illusion with no reality. He is like the fact with no fiction, like the fiction with no fact. He is like the actual with no potential, like the potential with no actual. He is like the existent with no nonexistent, like the nonexistent with no existent. He is like the being with no nonbeing, like the nonbeing with no being. He is like the something with no nothing, like the nothing with no something. He is like the presence with no absence, like the absence with no presence. He is like the manifestation with no concealment, like the concealment with no manifestation. He is like the appearance with no disappearance, like the disappearance with no appearance. He is like the emergence with no submergence, like the submergence with no emergence. He is like the birth with no death, like the death with no birth. He is like the creation with no destruction, like the destruction with no creation. He is like the generation with no degeneration, like the degeneration with no generation. He is like the production with no consumption, like the consumption with no production. He is like the construction with no deconstruction, like the deconstruction with no construction. He is like the building with no demolition, like the demolition with no building. He is like the formation with no dissolution, like the dissolution with no formation. He is like the composition with no decomposition, like the decomposition with no composition. He is like the synthesis with no analysis, like the analysis with no synthesis. He is like the integration with no disintegration, like the disintegration with no integration. He is like the unification with no separation, like the separation with no unification. He is like the consolidation with no fragmentation, like the fragmentation with no consolidation. He is like the combination with no separation, like the separation with no combination. He is like the merger with no split, like the split with no merger. He is like the fusion with no fission, like the fission with no fusion. He is like the blend with no separation, like the separation with no blend. He is like the mix with no purity, like the purity with no mix. He is like the alloy with no element, like the element with no alloy. He is like the compound with no simple, like the simple with no compound. He is like the composite with no simple, like the simple with no composite. He is like the complex with no simple, like the simple with no complex. He is like the intricate with no plain, like the plain with no intricate. He is like the elaborate with no simple, like the simple with no elaborate. He is like the ornate with no plain, like the plain with no ornate. He is like the decorated with no bare, like the bare with no decorated. He is like the adorned with no plain, like the plain with no adorned. He is like the embellished with no unadorned, like the unadorned with no embellished. He is like the enriched with no impoverished, like the impoverished with no enriched. He is like the enhanced with no diminished, like the diminished with no enhanced. He is like the improved with no worsened, like the worsened with no improved. He is like the better with no worse, like the worse with no better. He is like the superior with no inferior, like the inferior with no superior. He is like the higher with no lower, like the lower with no higher. He is like the greater with no lesser, like the lesser with no greater. He is like the more with no less, like the less with no more. He is like the plus with no minus, like the minus with no plus. He is like the positive with no negative, like the negative with no positive. He is like the affirmative with no negative, like the negative with no affirmative. He is like the yes with no no, like the no with no yes. He is like the agree with no disagree, like the disagree with no agree. He is like the consent with no dissent, like the dissent with no consent. He is like the accept with no reject, like the reject with no accept. He is like the approve with no disapprove, like the disapprove with no approve. He is like the endorse with no oppose, like the oppose with no endorse. He is like the support with no oppose, like the oppose with no support. He is like the favor with no disfavor, like the disfavor with no favor. He is like the prefer with no disprefer, like the disprefer with no prefer. He is like the choose with no reject, like the reject with no choose. He is like the select with no exclude, like the exclude with no select. He is like the pick with no leave, like the leave with no pick. He is like the take with no give, like the give with no take. He is like the receive with no give, like the give with no receive. He is like the get with no lose, like the lose with no get. He is like the gain with no loss, like the loss with no gain. He is like the win with no lose, like the lose with no win. He is like the profit with no loss, like the loss with no profit. He is like the benefit with no harm, like the harm with no benefit. He is like the advantage with no disadvantage, like the disadvantage with no advantage. He is like the gain with no cost, like the cost with no gain. He is like the reward with no punishment, like the punishment with no reward. He is like the prize with no penalty, like the penalty with no prize. He is like the success with no failure, like the failure with no success. He is like the victory with no defeat, like the defeat with no victory. He is like the triumph with no disaster, like the disaster with no triumph. He is like the achievement with no failure, like the failure with no achievement. He is like the accomplishment with no failure, like the failure with no accomplishment. He is like the fulfillment with no frustration, like the frustration with no fulfillment. He is like the satisfaction with no dissatisfaction, like the dissatisfaction with no satisfaction. He is like the contentment with no discontent, like the discontent with no contentment. He is like the happiness with no unhappiness, like the unhappiness with no happiness. He is like the joy with no sorrow, like the sorrow with no joy. He is like the delight with no distress, like the distress with no delight. He is like the pleasure with no pain, like the pain with no pleasure. He is like the comfort with no discomfort, like the discomfort with no comfort. He is like the ease with no difficulty, like the difficulty with no ease. He is like the relaxation with no tension, like the tension with no relaxation. He is like the rest with no labor, like the labor with no rest. He is like the leisure with no work, like the work with no leisure. He is like the play with no work, like the work with no play. He is like the fun with no boredom, like the boredom with no fun. He is like the entertainment with no drudgery, like the drudgery with no entertainment. He is like the amusement with no tedium, like the tedium with no amusement. He is like the interest with no dullness, like the dullness with no interest. He is like the excitement with no boredom, like the boredom with no excitement. He is like the thrill with no calm, like the calm with no thrill. He is like the passion with no apathy, like the apathy with no passion. He is like the enthusiasm with no indifference, like the indifference with no enthusiasm. He is like the zeal with no lethargy, like the lethargy with no zeal. He is like the fervor with no coolness, like the coolness with no fervor. He is like the ardor with no coldness, like the coldness with no ardor. He is like the warmth with no chill, like the chill with no warmth. He is like the heat with no cold, like the cold with no heat. He is like the fire with no ice, like the ice with no fire. He is like the light with no dark, like the dark with no light. He is like the day with no night, like the night with no day. He is like the sun with no moon, like the moon with no sun. He is like the summer with no winter, like the winter with no summer. He is like the spring with no autumn, like the autumn with no spring. He is like the bloom with no wither, like the wither with no bloom. He is like the growth with no decay, like the decay with no growth. He is like the life with no death, like the death with no life. He is like the health with no sickness, like the sickness with no health. He is like the strength with no weakness, like the weakness with no strength. He is like the vigor with no feebleness, like the feebleness with no vigor. He is like the energy with no fatigue, like the fatigue with no energy. He is like the power with no impotence, like the impotence with no power. He is like the might with no weakness, like the weakness with no might. He is like the force with no weakness, like the weakness with no force. He is like the capacity with no incapacity, like the incapacity with no capacity. He is like the ability with no inability, like the inability with no ability. He is like the skill with no clumsiness, like the clumsiness with no skill. He is like the talent with no ineptitude, like the ineptitude with no talent. He is like the genius with no stupidity, like the stupidity with no genius. He is like the intelligence with no dullness, like the dullness with no intelligence. He is like the wisdom with no folly, like the folly with no wisdom. He is like the knowledge with no ignorance, like the ignorance with no knowledge. He is like the understanding with no misunderstanding, like the misunderstanding with no understandingHis spirit wandered and scattered; every night he dreamed he had become a ruler. He ascended the seat of the Central States, and the myriad officers hastened to serve him in the halls and chambers. Jin and Chu bowed to him, and the Man peoples of the south and the Di of the north came to his court. He traveled his mountains and rivers, and his domain was vast. He had beautiful consorts, fine food and strong drink, and whatever he desired was at hand. His delight was beyond compare. When he awoke, he was a hired hand again. Someone questioned him, and he answered: “The pleasure of being a ruler is in the mind alone—what need is there to depend on the body? Last night in sleep I was a ruler; today awake I am a hired hand. When I was a ruler, was that any different from being awake? When I am a hired hand, is that any different from the dream? Whether hired hand or ruler, you and I are awake. If you suddenly knew the joy of being a ruler, you would see that being a hired hand is no hardship. I have often found joy in being a ruler and have never grown tired of it. If I were a ruler in fact, would I be less weary than as a hired hand? If I can roam freely in dreams and wake as a hired hand, I follow my lot and accept my fate without complaint. You and I are both dreaming—why do you alone find my dream strange?”

That hired hand was one who understood the Way. Yet Confucius and Mozi were both cramped in their views—how much more so are you and I! Even if fate had not made him a hired hand, who can say that you and I are not dreaming?

The Yin family’s master, seeing that Master Yan was poor and of low standing, urged him to go to court and have an audience with the Son of Heaven. Master Yan replied: “I have already told the Son of Heaven. If I went again, I would only ruin what I have achieved and chase an empty name. Let me give you a parable. There was a man by the sea who loved oysters. One morning he went to the shore and filled a basket. He ate until evening; his mouth and stomach were upset and pained. He vomited until he nearly died, then recovered. When he went to the sea again he said to the oysters: ‘I have heard that a gentleman can forget an insult. I was foolish and ate my fill of you. I beg forgiveness—may I eat you again?’”

The Yin master was displeased and said: “Master Yan is too proud—who could heed you?” Master Yan said: “That is not so. If I spoke to the Son of Heaven and he listened, the world would benefit; if he did not listen, I alone would benefit. Why must the world benefit? Some men break their backs and strain their strength planting trees and hoeing weeds, thinking none under heaven can compare with them. Yet when they see Ziqi of Shangqiu, they forget their work at once—cart and plow abandoned—and follow him with clasped hands. Under heaven I have no peer, yet you two wish to vie with me. It is like Qi and Lu dressing in fine robes and caps and spreading a great hall and feast to honor a pig or a dog. I look on with respect too—why must I try to change you?”

When Zhongni traveled to Chu, he saw a man of Jie by the roadside, about the age of his father. Zhongni had him hold the reins and drive, and they entered the Shang district. On arrival the driver said to Confucius: “When I entered Shang city I saw a man with a dark complexion and deep-set gaze. I do not know whether he is a sage; if he is, I know I am not fit to be his driver.” Confucius said: “My judgment is not equal to yours. I tried my eyes—they failed; I tried my ears—they failed; I tried my mind—it failed. I can only learn from you.”

When they reached the inn, the driver said to the innkeeper: “I have seen your guest—he is a sage. If you fear your inn is too small for him, I respectfully ask you to move elsewhere.” The innkeeper said: “I have already vowed: though the inn is small, I will observe ritual. I have heard that when a guest comes to a superior man’s house and the host is away, the guest may not enter unless invited. Now that the superior man is here, how can I fail to receive him?” When Confucius heard this, he had the driver sit as his equal.

When they arrived in Chu, Nanrong Chu held a banquet for them. After several rounds Nanrong Chu asked: “Has the superior man been to Song?” Confucius said he had. “Do you know Mi Zisi?” “I know him.” “What manner of man is he?” Confucius said: “Mi Zisi has the virtue of a superior man without the looks, and the looks without the wisdom. Pure as cut and polished jade, compact as bound and twisted cord. Like a room not yet swept, like a vessel not yet carved—silent as if empty, speaking as if full; vacant as if without place, yet when filled seeming without limit.”

Commentary notes: “Dark complexion and deep gaze” describes a solemn, inward bearing, not necessarily physical beauty. The driver’s recognition of sagehood before Confucius does is a Liezi theme—that the humble sometimes see what the famous miss. Mi Zisi (grandson of Confucius) is praised for inner substance over outward show, in line with the chapter’s contrast between dream and waking, appearance and reality.

After the complications of the illness, there was a slight turn for the better. [Note] This chapter also shows that waking and dreaming are not fundamentally different, and that suffering and joy each fit its own situation: laborers toil by day and rest at night; Master Yin enjoyed rank and glory by day, yet at night was beset by worry and humiliation.

To fix on only one side is not enough to weigh the two against each other. [Explanation] When the body is worn out and the spirit is allowed to recover, one feels tired while awake yet at ease in sleep; when the spirit is strained and the body is driven by it, one feels happy while awake yet tormented in dreams. The spirit is what governs life, yet people do not know how to tend the spirit so as to settle the body; the body is what serves the spirit, yet people do not know how to maintain the body so as to give the spirit rest. Thus, when both body and spirit are overtaxed, each goes beyond what is fitting. When work and rest are properly balanced, the condition eases somewhat.

[Note] “Shaojian” indicates that the illness improved a little. “Kua” is read as kua, meaning “to compare.” Wording such as “ze yifu” (then the laborer…) varies slightly among editions.

In the state of Zheng, a man went to gather firewood in the wild. He accidentally startled a deer, went after it, and killed it. Afraid someone might see what he had done, he quickly hid the deer in a dried-up pool or ditch, covered it with brushwood, and was very pleased with himself. Before long he forgot where he had hidden it and began to think the whole thing had only been a dream. Later, as he walked along the road, he kept talking about it out loud. Someone who overheard him went where the words indicated, found the deer, and took it away.

When that man got home, he said to his wife, “That woodcutter dreamed he got a deer but didn’t know where he’d hidden it. I’ve found the deer now—so his dream was real.”

His wife said, “You dreamed that the woodcutter got a deer, didn’t you? Where is there any woodcutter? You really have the deer now—so was it your dream that came true, or his?”

The husband said, “I really did get the deer. Why should we bother to decide whether he was dreaming or I was?”

When the woodcutter came back and found the deer gone, he was deeply upset. Huang refers to a pool or ditch that has no water; in the text the deer is hidden in such a place and covered with brushwood. The story shows two people each treating dream and waking life differently, and through that it brings out how hard it is to draw a clear line between dream and reality.