Fantasy in the Chuang tzu

[wandelaar]

Is there a purely linguistic way to recognize those parts of the Chuang tzu that are not meant to be taken literally? This is relevant because the danger of considering anything as a flight of fantasy that doesn't immediately make sense, is that one misses part of the lessons contained in the Chuang tzu.

 

Edited November 4, 2018 by wandelaar

[Michael Sternbach]

I doubt that Chuang tzu would have cared about making that kind of distinction.

[Marblehead]

I have defined Chuang Tzu as a mystic.  I suppose fantasy is part of mysticism.

 

I don't know of any clearly defined way of discriminating between his fiction and non-fiction.

 

But then, for me, it's all about the concepts anyway.  Grasp the concepts and forget the words.

 

[OldDog]

The words of Chuang tzu ... or any other writer for that matter ... are expressions of understanding that are meant to invoke thought. Many linguistic devices are used. Sorting them out and deriving meaning from them is the task for each receiving mind. If they were all explicite then there would be no room ... or need ... for discussion. 

[wandelaar]

Yes - the ambiguity could be deliberate. I keep forgetting that precise formulations aren't universally appreciated.

[Stosh]

Anything spoken by characters other than Chuang himself should be considered suspect.  Since he is willing to have them speak for themselves their opinion , even if he thinks its philosophically wrong like the dao of  Confucius or Robber Chih.