Abstract

Chuang-tzu's free pursuit of Happy in the whole world, the Promise of the Wild, is established beyond the situation of real spiritual experience. Guo Xiang is content with the freedom of its sub-or self-sufficiency of the Happy, is content with the established reality of the situation of the state of mind. Happy with Guo Xiang Zhuang Zi are two representatives, but also the ancient Chinese tradition, the main representative of the liberal tradition. Chuang and Guo Xiang's this inner feeling of freedom of traditional and modern style, or a prominent individual autonomy Western tradition of freedom are fundamentally different. However, these two completely different tradition of freedom is not irrelevant, but the interface or can be transformed. Berlin's freedom in accordance with the theory, Chuang Tzu and Guo Xiang's Happy is the definition of freedom from the negative aspects, said limited qualitative or further development of the free. So, Happy Chinese ancient tradition and modern political freedom is the pursuit of human freedom in different regions of the spectrum. Both have irreplaceable practical and theoretical significance, and can be complementary. Chuang Tzu's philosophy features xiaoyao or "free and easy wandering," which denotes a spiritual journey beyond the earthly world and life and enlightening experience in union with Dao or the universe. Guo Xiang, the historically recognized commentator of the Chuang Tzu, however, re -directs the term xiaoyao to the everyday world based on individual nature and destiny. Thus, Chuang Tzu's theories represent the spiritual transcend freedom, and Guo's the worldly boundless feelings. Chuang and Guo together may be taken as typical philosophers who represent prevailing notion of personal freedom in traditional China. The positions of Chuang and Guo, with their traditional Eastern notion of freedom, seem to be in opposition to modern or Western concepts of freedom, which could be represented by Isaiah Berlin, who proposes the two well-known concepts of liberty, namely, negative freedom and positive freedom. Although negative freedom suggests a bound of freedom for an individual or a body of people, and the positive freedom suggests no such bound, they are both political and active liberty in social life. Thus, the two kinds of freedom are rather different from Chuang and Guo's xiaoyao. However, there is not an abyss between modern concepts of liberty and traditional notions of xiaoyao. According to Berlin, one must liberate oneself from desires that one knows one cannot realize. It is as if one had performed a strategic retreat into an inner citadel-one's own reason and soul. Thus, we can say that the two kinds of xiaoyao of Chuang and Guo are just a kind of retreat from true life and the miserable world. However, unlike what Berlin has said, the spiritual freedom proposed by Chuang and Guo is not so passive: it has deep insight and foresight into how we should face dangerous and uncontrollable situations.