A study of Balfour’s English translation of the Zhuangzi in light of comparative religion (2024)

The Zhuangzi, also known as Nanhua Zhenjing (南華真經), is an important Chinese philosophical and religious text from the pre-Qin period. Together with the Laozi, the Zhuangzi laid the foundation for the formation and development of Daoism in China. The pursuit of individual cultivation, natural wisdom, and transcendence from the mortal world, as advocated in the Zhuangzi, also influenced the beliefs and practices of Daoism in its later manifestations. As a result, the Zhuangzi has become one of the classics of Daoism and occupies an important position in the history of Chinese religious development. As a Daoist classic, the English translation of the Zhuangzi first appeared in the nineteenth century, and since then there have been thirteen full translations, and several abridged translations. It is widely acknowledged that, Balfour’s translation is the first English translation of the Zhuangzi and as a sinologist translating eleven Daoist scriptures^{Footnote 1} and also known as “the sinologist with the largest number of English translations of Daoist scriptures in the nineteenth century” (Yu, 2015: 194), he translated the Zhuangzi with a clear intention to contribute to the study of comparative religiosity.

Scholars have conducted extensive and in-depth research of the English translation of the Zhuangzi, mainly focusing on the following aspects: (1) Scholars have made detailed comparisons and analyses of the different versions of the English translations of the Zhuangzi, exploring the differences and characteristics of the various versions in understanding the original text, linguistic expression, and cultural transcription, etc. For example, Zhao (2023) reviewed Richard John Lynn’s English translation of the Zhuangzi; Richey (2009) commented Brook Ziporyn’s English translation of the Zhuangzi. (2) Under the heading of exploration of translation strategies and methodology scholars have carried out in-depth discussions on translation strategies, methodology, and cultural transduction of the English translation of the Zhuangzi, exploring how to effectively convey its ideological connotations while maintaining the meanings and spirit of the original text. To give an example, Yin (2021) updated our understanding of the historical context in which it was produced, the purpose it was meant to serve and the method of translation that Fung had adopted. (3) in terms of cultural background and understanding differences scholars have focused on the differences in the understanding of the Zhuangzi in the context of Chinese and English culture, exploring the cultural misinterpretation and interpretation ambiguities that may occur in the process of translation and proposing solutions accordingly. For instance, Zhao and Wu (2017) discussed how to translate proper nouns to help understand the cultural connotations in the Zhuangzi; Lin and Xu (2022) found that the paratexts in translated texts play an essential role in the reconstruction of Chuang Tzu’s overseas image. (4) and in the study of the dialogue between English translation of the Zhuangzi and contemporary philosophy scholars have placed the English translation of the Zhuangzi in the context of contemporary philosophical discussions, exploring its revelations and impact on contemporary thought and philosophical theory. By way of example, Chong (2022), in his edited volume Dao Companion to the Philosophy of the Zhuangzi, brings out the rich and deep philosophical resources of the Zhuangzi; Machek (2016) illustrated role-playing and unstructured self in the Zhuangzi.

Almost no studies have explored the translation of the Zhuangzi from the perspective of comparative religion, let alone Balfour’s first English translation of the Zhuangzi. In view of this, this study intends to explore the differences in understanding and dialogue between Chinese and Western religions in Balfour’s translation of the Zhuangzi from the perspective of comparative religion, as well as the significance of cross-cultural exchange in this translation, with a view to providing references for the development of Chinese religions, and the exchange of and mutual understanding between Chinese and Western religions.

Eric J. Sharpe, a scholar of comparative religion, argues that comparative religion did not arise suddenly, “It was not, however,created instantaneously at that time, as the result of a sudden blinding fash of insight on someone’s part. Rather its emergence represented the germination of seeds planted and watered over many centuries of Western history.” (Sharpe, 2000: 1) Its earliest beginnings can be traced back to the Greco-Roman period, although it was not until 1870 that Max Muller gave a series of lectures at the Royal College on “Introduction to Religion” which marked the birth of the discipline, Comparative Religion. In the late 1870s, the study of comparative religion became increasingly scientific and sophisticated. When it comes to the comparison of Chinese and Western religions, the Jesuits, represented by Matteo Ricci, were the preeminent contributors to the study of Comparative Religion between the East and the West. The Chinese texts they translated provided material for the development of religion in the Age of Reason in the West, and convinced European scholars during the Age of Enlightenment that Chinese religions were perfect examples of natural theism. (Sharpe, 2000: 19–21) By the nineteenth century, Western scholars’ interest in Eastern religions and philosophies gradually increased, and they began to study and translate many ancient texts, including the earliest Confucian classics, such as the Si Shu (The Four Books, 四书) and the Xiao Jing (The Book of Filial Piety, 孝经) and so on. It was not until the latter half of the 19th century that this situation began to change. “Confucianism had lost its earlier position of prestige”(Zürcher, 1992: 290), while Daoism received attention, they began to translate the Daoist texts, like the Daodejing and the Zhuangzi. Many sinologists’ extensive Daoist studies, including their translations, discussions and reviews, and some programs “consolidated the Victorian understanding of Taoism” (Girardot, 1999). Through the translation and study of these texts, Western scholars were not only able to better understand the core concepts and ideas of Chinese religions, but were also able to compare these ideas to Western religions and philosophies. This cross-cultural comparative study helped to promote the development of religious studies and provided an important basis for dialogue and understanding between the different cultures. It also provided a theoretical underpinning for the study of Comparative Religion from the English translations of nineteenth-century texts.

In his monograph Daojing Yingyi Shi (The History of the English Translation of the Daoist Scriptures, 道經英譯史), Yu Senlin refers to the English translation of the Daoist scriptures in the 19th century as a “goblet” (Yu, 2020: 31). In the 19th century following the work of Morrison, the first translator of the Daoist scriptures into English, there emerged the works of Chalmers, Watters, Balfour, Legge, Giles, Edkins, Carus, and Parker, among others. From 1812 with the first Daoist translated scriptures to 1899, there were a large number of translations, as shown in Table 1. As can be seen from the table, the number of English translations of Daoist scriptures gradually increased after the 1870s. The English translations of Daoist texts undoubtedly provided opportunities for the English-speaking world to understand Daoism, and the interpretation of China by using Western methods in the English translations of Daoist texts further promoted the development of the study of comparative religion. While considering the many English translations of Daoist scriptures in the 19th century, this study will take Balfour’s translation of the Zhuangzi, the translator with the largest number of English translations of Daoist scriptures, as the subject of study. The main reasons for this are: to this day, Balfour occupies an important place in the history of the English translation of Daoist scriptures, as he translated eleven Daoist scriptures and wrote a number of books related to Daoism and religion, and was the first person to translate Daoist scriptures into English in the nineteenth century; at the same time, he was also the first English translator of the Zhuangzi; and then, in combination with the current state of the research, the study will explore the innovativeness and the value of the research.

“The significance of Comparative Religion lies in the fact that by using comparison as a method of understanding and research, the different characteristics and similarities of two or more different religious systems can be accurately and clearly depicted, so as to correctly identify the specific conditions and reasons for the formation of these personalities and their commonalities, to grasp the laws of their development, to greatly broaden the horizons, to inspire the spirit of objectivity, and to give a convincing answer to the many ‘why’s. ” (Chen, 1987: 2) Therefore, this study intends to explore Balfour’s translation of the Zhuangzi from the perspective of comparative religion, and attempts to answer the following three questions: (1) How does Balfour’s translation of the Zhuangzi reflect the objective comparison between Chinese and Western religions? (2) What is the impact of this comparison? (3) What are the implications for the development of Chinese Daoism and the comparative study of Chinese and Western religions?

Balfour was born in 1846 in England and died in 1906 in Italy. Balfour had a rich life experience with multiple and complex identities. He was a businessman, an editor, an essayist, a novelist, and more importantly, he was an outstanding sinologist and religious scholar. He was not only a sinologist with the most translations of Daoist scriptures in the English-speaking world in the 19th century, but he was also a religious scholar who authored works related to Chinese and Western religions, such as Sermon Never Preached, Waifs and Strays from the Far East, Taoism among others. Balfour contributed to the international dissemination of Daoism and to the development of the study of comparative religion. At the same time, he was the first in the world to choose to translate the obscure and difficult to understand the Zhuangzi of the Daoist scriptures, which was published in Shanghai, Hong Kong, Japan and London in 1881. As the first English translation, it is now more than one hundred and forty years old, and its significance and research value are self-evident. The birth of this translation-The Divine Classic of Nan-Hua; Being the Works of Chuang Tsze, Taoist Philosopher is closely related to the arrival of Protestantism in China in the nineteenth century, the development of Sinology, and the development of the study of comparative religion, a prominent feature of which is the comparison of Chinese and Western religions.

To better understand the value of Balfour’s translation of the Zhuangzi, this study intends to conduct in-depth research into the translation from the perspective of comparative religion, combining the methods of textual close reading and textual analysis. By systematically sorting out the paratextual contents of Balfour’s Zhuangzi, summarising and outlining the translation of important keywords and the translation of key phrases in the chapters, the study discusses how the translation compares Chinese and Western religions. Then, it further analyses what impact such a comparison of Chinese and Western religions has had, and what implications it has for the development and dissemination of Daoism in the world, and for the development of the study of comparative religions between the East and the West to the present time.

Religious Comparisons in Paratexts

The concept of paratext was introduced by French scholar Gérard Genette in the 1970s, and is defined as “the verbal and non-verbal material used to present a work that plays a coordinating role between the text and the reader” (Genette, 1997: 1). Genette (1997: xviii) divides paratext into the peritext and the epitext according to their spatial location. The peritext mainly includes the title, subtitle, author’s name, publication information, dedication, preface, notes, illustrations, and afterword; the epitext mainly includes public or private information about the formation of the text, including publishers, author correspondence, interviews, diaries, reviews, etc. And later, different scholars supplemented and widened this concept. According to Pellatt’s definition, “we regard paratexts as any material additional to, appended to or external to the core text which has functions of explaining, defining, instructing, or supporting, adding background information, or relevant opinions and attitudes of scholars, translators and reviewers” (Pellatt, 2013: 1). In a nutshell, the paratext in the translated text supplements the generation of meaning in the main text and provides guidance or reference for readers to better read the translated text. From this we can see that the significance and value of paratexts cannot be ignored. Balfour’s translation involves a variety of paratexts, and this study intends to choose the more prominent features of the excursus, note, as well as the annotations in the translation for analysis. Through the presentation of three parts of the translation, it illustrates evidence for the comparisons between Chinese and Western religions, and tries to explain the reasons for and the impact of these comparisons.

The comparison of Chinese and Western religions begins with the excursus. Balfour’s translation of the Zhuangzi makes a clearer understanding of comparative religion and a clearer view of Chinese religion. In response to Confucianism and Daoism, Balfour developed a more specific comparison between them. In the case of Confucianism, Balfour, influenced by Samuel Johnson (1709–1784), regarded it as “the Socratic school of China” and called Confucianist Chinese rationalists (Balfour, 1881: i). This characterization is a testament to his attempt to frame Confucian thought within a framework that would be familiar to his Western readership. In the case of Daoism, Balfour identified with the view of the British Chinese scholar Thomas Watters that Daoist thought is characterised by a naturalistic philosophy: “Taoists would be ‘Naturalistic’ philosophers; for the essence of Taoism is an exaltation of, and a constant conformity to, Nature- in physics as well as metaphysics.” (Balfour, 1881: xxi) By likening Laozi, the foundational figure of Daoism, to the pre-Socratic Greek philosopher “Heraclitus” (Balfour, 1881: xiv-xxi), Balfour underscores the parallels between ancient Eastern and Western philosophies of nature. Between Confucianism and Daoism, Balfour favoured Daoist doctrine. The reason for this was that the naturalists were bolder and more original in their thinking than the rationalists; they were not bound by the servile worship of deceased emperors and clichés; their thoughts were free, their theories astonishing, and their practice pure. (Balfour, 1884: v-vi) This preference is evident in his translation work, where he aims to capture the essence of Daoist scriptures in a manner that reflects his understanding and appreciation of their purity and freedom of thought. The cultural differences between Chinese and Western religions are not only historical but also philosophical. Balfour’s excursus contributes to a richer, more nuanced appreciation of these differences and their implications for global religious and philosophical discourse.

After the excursus, for the pre-translation notes, Balfour not only introduced Zhuangzi and the Zhuangzi, but also explained the key words in the Zhuangzi from the perspective of comparative religion for the purpose of “paving the way to a clearer comprehension of it by European readers” (Balfour, 1881: xxxiii). Balfour explained the following key words in order for Western readers to better understand and read the translation of the Zhuangzi. For example, Balfour explicated critical terms such as Dao (道), Wuwei (无为), Zaohua (造化) and others, which are central to grasping the religious essence of the text. Although there were some European scholars who translated and interpreted the word “Dao,” Balfour argued that they are more like interpretations of “Dao” rather than true translations. Therefore, Balfour translated “道” into “Way,” “Reason,” “Doctrine,” “Nature” and so forth. Among them, the translation of “道” as “Doctrine” and “Nature” takes into account the contrast between Chinese and Western religions and Chinese and Western natural philosophies. Balfour specifically emphasises in this section that the translation “suggests our own expression, ‘Dame Nature’” (Balfour, 1881: xxxv), which not only demonstrates an awareness of the contrast between Chinese and Western religions and philosophies, but also provides a better understanding of “Dao”. This not only contrasted Chinese and Western religions, but also facilitated a better understanding of the connotations of the concept of the word “Dao”. Combining the keyword translations with Balfour’s translation of the Zhuangzi, this study finds that Balfour’s translation of the Daoist scriptures included comparative religious study, which provided a certain theoretical foundation. He explored the characteristics of “Dao” from the descriptions of these terms in the Chinese Daoist texts, compared them with the empirical world, and finally borrowed terminology of the Western philosophical and religious system to name and interpret them. At the early stage of the spread of Chinese culture to the West, for Western scholars, “interpreting China by using Western methods” was a natural and reasonable choice, which, to a certain extent, facilitated the spread of Chinese Daoism and Chinese culture in the West.

When it came to the annotations in the translations, this was s also a typical paratext, with a total of 556 entries. The annotations are an important part of the translation. The significance of the annotations is mainly reflected in the following aspects: the function of making up for the cultural deficiencies by the use proper nouns, the function of deepening the interpretation of the original text, the function of reshaping Chinese and Western images and the function of cultural exchange between Chinese and the Westerners. Among them, the in-depth interpretation of the original text more reflects the translator’s understanding and interpretation of the original text and highlights his interpretive perspective, especially about the comparison between Daoism and Western religions. For example, Balfour added annotations to the translation of “六合之外.” Balfour translated as “beyond the Six Points of Heaven” (Balfour, 1881: 22) and added “[viz., N., S., E., W., the zenith and the nadir]” (Balfour, 1881: 22). The word “Heaven” is more commonly understood in its capitalization as relating to Christianity; at the same time, the word “Heaven” can also be understood as “the abode of God and the angels,” that is to say, the word “Heaven” is itself religious in nature. Also, in his annotations, Balfour used the words ‘zenith” and nadir’ to translate the highest and lowest points. The basic meaning of both words is the highest and lowest point, as seen by an observer, but the word ‘nadir’ has a special meaning in astrology. At the same time, this view of the highest and lowest points is from where you are, which is not the same as the highest and lowest points of a person, thus giving it a mystical dimension. In essence, annotations in translations are more than mere footnotes; they are active participants in the intercultural and interreligious dialogue, shaping the readers’ understanding and perception of the text. Through such annotations, translations become dynamic platforms for the evolution of thought, belief, and understanding across Daoism and Western religions.

Religious Comparisons in Translation

The translator is an important factor in the translation process, and the translator’s motivation, translation strategy, cultural stance and personal aesthetics s have a significant impact on the appearance of the translated text. Balfour, as a religious scholar and as a sinologist with the most English translations of the Daoist scriptures in the 19th century, had a great influence on the translations, which implies a comparison between Chinese and Western religions, especially the translation of key words and key sentences in the chapters. In view of this, this part will focus on analysing the translation of key words in the translation and how the translation of key sentences in the chapters constitutes a comparison of religions.

1. (1)

   Translation of Keywords

   As early as 1976, R. H. Williams (1921–1988), a famous British cultural scholar, proposed the “keyword research method.” In his book Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society (1985), he mentioned that “One kind of semantics is the study of meaning as such; another kind is the study of formal systems of signification. The kind of semantics to which these notes and essays belong is one of the tendencies within historical semantics: a tendency that can be more precisely defined when it is added that the emphasis is not only on historical origins and developments but also on the present - present meanings, implications and relationships - as history.” (Raymond (1986): 23) This thesis emphasises that keywords are formed in a specific socio-historical context and are in the process of development, which has a high degree of condensation and summarisation of cultural connotations. This indicates that the translation of keywords is of great significance to the discovery of cultural connotations. “Dao” can be said to be one of the most important keywords in the Zhuangzi. Throughout the content of the book, Zhuangzi interprets the connotations of the word “Dao,” which constitutes the basic core of Daoist religious philosophy to convey the basic connotations of Daoist religious philosophy.

   According to the author’s statistics, the internal, external and miscellaneous chapters of the Zhuangzi contain the word Dao (道) total of 364 times, of which 326 are keywords of religious philosophy and “Dao” accounts for the largest proportion at 89.56% of them. In view of the limited space, below is s a case is selected for specific analysis.

   The original text: 何思何慮則知道, 何從何服則安道, 何從何道則得道? (from 莊子·知北遊).

   The translated text: How can one, by reflection and meditation, find out the dwelling-place of Nature? By having regard to Nature in the transaction of affairs one may maintain it in peace; but whence is Nature to be obtained in the first distance? (Balfour, 1881: 261).

   This sentence appears at the beginning of the Zhuangzi Zhibeiyou, the three questions Zhuangzi asks about “Dao,” making it mysterious and inscrutable, which inevitably endows “Dao” a religious mystical characteristic. The nihilistic Dao mentioned here is in fact “a ‘special’ religious theory” (Guo, 1983: 74). Dao Fa Ziran (道法自然) is also an important concept in Daoism. It underscores the importance of harmony with the natural order, a theme that is also present in many religious traditions. This harmony is not just a philosophical ideal but a practical guide for living in balance with the world, which is a common thread in religious teachings across cultures. This illustrates the philosophical and religious character of the key word “Dao”. In analysing Balfour’s translation of “Dao”, we have to understand Balfour’s translation of the keyword “Dao” in his pre-translation notes (Balfour, 1881: XXXV). He believed that “Dao” can be translated as “Nature”, “Way”, “Reason”, “Doctrine”, “Road”, etc. In the above example, Balfour translates the word “Dao” as “Nature”. According to Balfour, “Dao” is “The great principle or way of the Universe - Nature - is nameless; it cannot be designated; it can only be spoken as 道.” (Balfour, 1881: 324) He also considers “Nature” to be “It is that form which all Creation springs. When things lose its Principle, then will die; when they receive it, they are born.” (Balfour, 1881: 425) Balfour’s translation of “Dao” as nature reflects, on the one hand, the fact that “Dao” is the general law of the universe and that “Dao” cannot be named provides it with its mysterious character. On the other hand, such a translation reflects his understanding of “Dao”, that is, ‘“Dao” is both the force that creates all things and an abstract rule that all things must follow. This interpretation explains the connotations of the word “Dao” from the perspective of Daoism on the one hand, and is also related to the viewpoint of Western Christianity on the other, which is a principal manifestation of Chinese and Western religions. If we consult a philosophical dictionary, we also find that “Nature is also used to refer to the totality of things in the universe. Our knowledge of this natural world changes with the development of sciences.” (Bunnin, Yu. 2004: 460) The interpretation of “Nature” here is basically the same as that conveyed by “Dao” in the original text. The interpretation of “Nature” here is basically the same as the meaning conveyed by “Dao”’ in the original text, and Balfour, while conveying the meaning of the original text more accurately, also adopts philosophical terminology familiar to Western readers, which also reflects Balfour’s comparative thinking between China and the West in translating the Zhuangzi. This approach not only deepens our appreciation for Zhuangzi’s thought and Daoism, but also fosters a more inclusive and nuanced understanding of the world’s religious and philosophical traditions.

2. (2)

   Translation of Key Sentences in the Chapter

Balfour’s translation of the Zhuangzi plays a crucial role in reflecting the cultural connotations and the comparison between Chinese and Western cultures. Firstly, it needs to accurately convey the philosophical and religious ideas and linguistic style of the original text, while taking into account the cultural background of the target language and the readers’ receptivity. In the comparisons of Chinese and Western religions, Balfour tries to align Daoism with Christianity to present a form of Christianity in the translation. Balfour’s approach to translating key sentences related to Daoism is a strategic choice that aims to resonate with the Western readers’ understanding of nature and its role in philosophical and religious thought. For example,

The Original text: 道惡乎往而不存? 言惡乎存而不可? 道隱於小成, 言隱於榮華。 (from 莊子·齊物論).

The translated text: There is no place where this Nature does not penetrate: no place w here speech may not be uttered. Nature is only hidden from men of mean capacities; speech is concealed only in vainglorious boasting. (Balfour, 1881: 15).

This quote from the original text Zhuangzi shows that “Dao” exists everywhere, even in the smallest things, and that truth transcends worldly splendour and achievement. It is Zhuangzi’s basic idea that “Dao” is present in all things and “道惡乎往而不存? ” is a rhetorical question to show that “Dao” is everywhere. In the Zhibeiyou, Zhuangzi explicitly uses the words zhou (circumference, 周), bian (pervasive, 遍) to indicate that “Dao” has a universal existence. This phrase should be understood as the manifestation of “Dao”, and manifestation of “Dao” is like “Dao” itself. The manifestation of the body of “Dao”, like “Dao” itself, is true in all circumstances. If ‘“Dao” is truly grasped, and if “Dao” is revealed in its true form and not obscured, then this kind of manifestation will be true. If one truly grasps “Dao” and allows it to appear in its true form without being obscured, then this kind of appearance will be invincible, just as“Dao” is invincible. In his translation, Balfour treats the question in the original as a statement, and emphasises the ubiquity of “Dao” through the double negation of the affirmative. The example provided from the Zhuangzi, with its emphasis on the ubiquity of “Dao” and its presence in all things, can be compared to the Christian concept of God’s omnipresence. Balfour’s translation, by emphasizing the universality of “Nature,” invites Western readers to consider the Daoist philosophy and religion through a lens that is more culturally familiar, thus fostering a comparative religious understanding.

There are many other similar expressions, such as the Christian idea of “God” when the deities in Daoism are talked about; and when Christian missionaries are quoted when referring to their deity. All these demonstrate the obvious religious comparison between East and West intended in Balfour’s translation. And his translation also offers insights into how similar questions of existence and truth are explored within different cultural and religious frameworks. Through such translations, we gain a deeper appreciation for the diversity of human religious experience and the universal quest for meaning.

The Impact of Comparing Eastern and Western Religions in the Translation

As an important document of Daoist philosophy in ancient China, the Zhuangzi is profound in thought and far-reaching in influence. Balfour’s translation, as the first translation in the English-speaking world, has an important position in the spread of its influence of the Western world. The translation was produced in the late nineteenth century, a time when the rise of comparative religious studies at the time, the late Qing Dynasty saw “further understandings and systematic study of the native Chinese religion of Daoism by Western missionaries” (Li, 2014). It not only had an impact on the Western world, but also contributed to the development of Chinese religion and the diversity of world religions.

Specifically, Balfour’s translation of the Zhuangzi provided the Western world with a fresh perspective on Eastern philosophy. The translation also laid the groundwork for subsequent translations of Legge’s^{Footnote 2}Zhuangzi and others’. These provided opportunities for Western readers to engage with Daoism, the natural philosophy of Zhuangzi, and relativist thought. Through this translation, scholars in the English-speaking world were able to access Daoist thought, especially the natural philosophy and relativist thought of Zhuangzi, which can be seen in Wei’s (2016), Gier’s studies (2020) and other references. These thoughts contrast with certain ideas in the Western philosophical and religious tradition and promotes Western understanding and appreciation of Eastern philosophy and religion. In addition, Zhuangzi’s ideas resonate to some extent with certain philosophical schools in the West, such as existentialism and postmodernism (Hansen, 2024), providing scholars in the English-speaking world with new perspectives.

Balfour’s translation also had an impact on the development of religious thought in China. Firstly, it enabled Chinese scholars to look at indigenous religious and philosophical traditions from a new perspective. By comparing it with Western philosophy, Chinese scholars could gain a deeper understanding of the various connotations and values of Zhuangzi’s thought. Secondly, with the international dissemination of the Zhuangzi, Chinese religious and philosophical thought has gained wider recognition. This also enhances the international influence of Daoism and Chinese philosophy to a certain extent, and objectively promotes the development of Chinese religion and philosophy.(Duan, Wang, Yang, et al., 2023) That means it has facilitated a greater exchange of ideas and promoted the evolution of religious and philosophical discourse both within China and abroad.

The contribution of Balfour’s translation of the Zhuangzi has successfully carved a niche in the realm of world literature (Lin, Yu, Liu,et al., 2023), and has significantly impacted the diversity of world religions. More importantly, its contribution to religious diversity is primarily reflected in the promotion of dialogue and understanding among different cultures and religions. Through this translation, people can gain a deeper understanding of Chinese Daoist philosophy and religion, thus recognising the diversity and richness of world religions, especially in the 19th century. Such cross-cultural exchange helps to break down cultural barriers and enhance mutual respect and understanding among different religions and cultures.

The cross-cultural value embodied in Balfour’s translation of the Zhuangzi is particularly important in the context of today’s of globalisation. It reminds us that although different cultures and religions may have differences in their forms of expression and content of beliefs, they share common goals in the pursuit of fulfilment of the spiritual dimension of human beings and the search for the true knowledge of the universe. Through in-depth study and understanding of these differences and commonalities, we can better promote mutual respect and harmonious coexistence among different cultures and religions.

The development of Comparative Religion led to the English translation of the Daoist scriptures at the end of the nineteenth century, and the English translation of the Daoist scriptures played a catalytic role in the maturation of Comparative Religion. Balfour’s translation of the Zhuangzi was born in such an era. Balfour’s translation embodies a strong component of comparative religion and serves as a bridge connecting the religious and philosophical thoughts of the East and the West. It not only had an impact on the English-speaking world, but also promoted the development of Chinese religious philosophy and contributed to the understanding of and respect for the diversity of world religions.

In addition, Balfour’s translation of the Zhuangzi and its role in the comparison of Chinese and Western religions provides rich insights into the development of Daoism and comparative study of religions in contemporary China, including the balance between localisation and nationalisation of religions, the deepening of scholarship, the enhancing of the scope of the comparative study of religions, and interdisciplinary research. All these issues will be explored in future papers.

1. According to the author’s statistics, Balfour has translated a total of 11 Daoist scriptures, as shown in the table below.

   Chinese Names of Daoist Scriptures	English Names of Daoist Scriptures	Year of Publication
   “太上感應篇”	The Book of Recompences	1879
   “心印經”	The Imprint of Heart	1879
   “大通經”	The Classic of Universal Understanding	1879
   “赤文洞”	Classic of the Red-streaked Cave	1879
   “清靜經”	The Book of Purity and Rest	1880
   “素書”	The Su Shu, or Book of Plain Words	1880
   “南華真經”(“莊子”)	The Divine Classic of Nan-Hua; Being the Works of Chuang Tsze, Taoist Philosopher with an Excursus, and Copious Annotations in English and Chinese	1881
   “陰符經”	The Yin-Fu Classic; or, Clue to the Unseen	1881
   “胎息經”	The Tai-hsi King; or the Respiration of the Embryo	1881
   “<淮南鴻烈>第一段”	The Principle of Nature; A Chapter from the “History of Great Light,” by Huai-Nan-Tsze, Prince of Kiang-Ling	1881
   “道德經”	Taoist Texts: Ethical, Political, and Speculative	1884

2. Legge mentioned in his translation of Zhuangzi that “I made frequent reference to the volume of Mr. Balfour.”(James 1891, p. xix).

Authors and Affiliations

1. Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, China

   Ziqiang Zhao

Contributions

This paper was solely authored by Ziqiang Zhao. Ziqiang Zhao was responsible for the conception and design of the study, analysis, and writing of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ziqiang Zhao.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was not required as this article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

No consent was necessary for this study.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions