---
title: "道德真經集註雜說 – English Interpretation | Daozang"
url: "https://daozang.app/en/text/KR5c0097/"
canonical: "https://daozang.app/en/text/KR5c0097/"
lang: "en"
source: "Kanripo 漢籍リポジトリ（京都大学）"
license: "CC BY-SA 4.0"
---

# 《道德真經集註雜說》

Dongshen 洞神部 · 2 volumes · 20,858 characters

## Vol. 1

太上道德眞經集註雜說

宋鶴林彭耜纂集太祖征太原駐蹕鎭陽聞道士蘇澄隱五代之際屢聘不至召

見於行宫澄隱時年八十太祖問以養生對曰臣之養生不

過精思鍊炁爾帝王則異於是老子曰我無爲而民自化我

無欲而民自樸無爲無欲凝神太和昔黃帝唐堯享國永年

得此道也太祖說其言(見東都事略隱逸傳及高道傳)鴻濛子張無夢字靈隱好淸虛窮老易入華山與劉海蟾种放

結方外友事陳希夷先生無夢多得微旨久之入天台山眞

宗召對問以長久之策無夢曰臣野人也但於山中嘗誦老

子周易而已不知其他也除著作佐郞固辭還山賜金帛處

土號並不受(見高道傳)碧虛子陳景元師事張鴻濛嘗著道德經藏室纂微篇蓋采摭

古諸家注疏之精微而參以其師傳授之祕集而成書熙甯

中因召見進呈御筆奬諭又有所注南華經章句音義凡二

十餘卷今並入藏(見碧虛子傳并纂微篇序道藏目錄)

**Interpretation**

During the Song Dynasty, Peng Si of Helin compiled the *Collected Commentaries and Miscellaneous Sayings on the True Scripture of Dao and De*, which recorded the deeds of several eminent Daoist masters.

When Emperor Taizu of Song (Zhao Kuangyin) was campaigning against Taiyuan and stationed at Zhenyang, he heard of a Daoist named Su Chengyin who had repeatedly declined summons during the Five Dynasties period. The emperor summoned this eighty-year-old master to his temporary palace and inquired about methods for nurturing life. Su Chengyin replied: "My method of nurturing life is simply to concentrate the spirit (Shen) and refine the primordial Qi. But for an emperor, nurturing life is different. Laozi said, 'When I practice Wuwei (non-action), the people transform themselves; when I remain desireless, the people become simple.' Maintaining a mind of Wuwei and desirelessness, gathering the spirit in the state of supreme harmony—this is how the Yellow Emperor and Emperor Yao ruled the world enduringly." Emperor Taizu greatly appreciated his insight.

Another eminent master, Zhang Wumeng, whose Daoist name was Hongmengzi and courtesy name Lingyin, revered purity and emptiness, deeply studied the *Zhouyi (Book of Changes)*, and lived in seclusion on Mount Hua. He formed friendships beyond worldly concerns with Liu Haichan and Zhong Fang, and became a disciple of Chen Tuan (Master Xiyi), from whom he received the profound essentials of Daoist teachings. Later, while living in seclusion on Mount Tiantai, Emperor Zhenzong summoned him to inquire about the way of longevity. Zhang Wumeng said: "I am but a man of the mountains—I merely recite the *Laozi* and *Zhouyi* in my daily practice, knowing no other arts of immortality." When the court offered him the position of Assistant Editor in the Imperial Library, he firmly declined and returned to the mountains, refusing even the gold, silver, and silk bestowed upon him.

There was also Bixuzi (Master of Azure Emptiness) Chen Jingyuan, who became Zhang Wumeng's disciple. He composed the *Compendium of Subtleties from the Treasury Chamber on the Scripture of Dao and De*, which distilled essential commentaries from various schools through the ages while incorporating secret teachings transmitted by his master. During the Xining era of Emperor Shenzong's reign, he was summoned to the palace to present this work and received imperial commendation. He also annotated the *Nanhua Jing* (i.e., the *Zhuangzi*), producing over twenty scrolls of *Phonetic Glosses and Exegesis on the Nanhua Jing*. These works were later included in the *Daoist Canon (Daozang)*.

廣川董逌藏書志云唐元宗旣注老子始改定章句爲道德經

凡言道者類之上卷言德者類之下卷刻石渦口老子廟中

又云唐道士張道相集注道德經七卷凡三十家其名存者

河上公節解嚴遵王弼何晏郭象鍾會孫登羊祜鳩摩羅什

盧景裕劉仁會顧懽陶弘景松靈裴處思杜弼張憑張嗣臧

玄靜孟安期孟智周竇略宋文明褚柔劉進喜蔡子晃成玄

英車惠弼今考之新舊唐書藝文志則又有母邱望之湘(逸其

姓)程韶王尙蜀才袁眞釋惠嚴惠琳義盈梁曠樹鍾山傅奕

楊上善李允愿陳嗣古任眞子馮郭玄景先生楊上器韓杜

梁武帝梁簡文帝賈大隱辟閭仁諝劉仲融王肅戴詵元宗

盧藏用邢南和馮朝隱白履忠李播尹知章陸德明陳庭玉

陸希聲吳善經孫思邈李含光四十家而道相所集郭象劉

仁會松靈裴處思杜弼張嗣臧玄靜竇略宋文明褚柔劉進

喜蔡子晃車惠弼此十四家不著於志按志稱道相集注四

卷而董所收乃有七卷恐後人之所增也我朝崇甯中再校

定道藏經典此書藏中已不復見其餘諸家僅存元宗河上

**Interpretation**

According to the bibliographic records of Dong You of Guangchuan, after Emperor Xuanzong of Tang (also known as Emperor Yuanzong of Tang) annotated the *Laozi*, he was the first to reorganize this classic into the *Daode Jing* (Scripture of the Way and Virtue). He grouped the sections discussing the "Dao" (the Way) into the first volume and those discussing "De" (Virtue/Power) into the second volume, then had this version inscribed on stone steles at the Laozi Temple in Wokou.

The Tang dynasty Daoist Zhang Daoxiang once compiled a seven-volume *Collected Commentaries on the Daode Jing*, gathering annotations from thirty scholars. Among those still verifiable today are: the abridged commentary by Heshang Gong (a Han dynasty recluse), Yan Zun (a Western Han Daoist scholar), Wang Bi (a Wei-Jin period metaphysician), He Yan, Guo Xiang, Zhong Hui, Sun Deng, Yang Hu, Kumārajīva (a renowned monk from the Western Regions), Lu Jingyu, Liu Renhui, Gu Huan, Tao Hongjing (a Southern Dynasties Daoist master), Song Ling, Pei Chusi, Du Bi, Zhang Ping, Zhang Sicang, Xuanjing, Meng Anqi, Meng Zhizhou, Dou Lüe, Song Wenming, Chu Rou, Liu Jinxi, Cai Zihuang, Cheng Xuanying (a prominent Tang dynasty Daoist), Che Huibi, and others.

Consulting the "Bibliographical Records" of both the *Old* and *New Tang Histories*, we also find mention of forty additional commentators, including Muqiu Wangzhi, Xiang (surname lost), Cheng Shao, Wang Shang, Shu Cai, Yuan Zhen, the monks Huiyan and Huilin, Yi Ying, Liang Kuang, Shu Zhongshan, Fu Yi, Yang Shangshan, Li Yunyuan, Chen Sigu, Ren Zhenzi, Feng Guo, Master Xuanjing, Yang Shangqi, Han Du, Emperor Wu of Liang, Emperor Jianwen of Liang, Jia Dayin, Pili Renxu, Liu Zhongrong, Wang Su, Dai Shen, Emperor Xuanzong, Lu Zangyong, Xing Nanhe, Feng Chaoyin, Bai Lüzhong, Li Bo, Yin Zhizhang, Lu Deming, Chen Tingyu, Lu Xisheng, Wu Shanjing, Sun Simiao (the Tang dynasty "King of Medicine"), Li Hanguang, and others.

It is worth noting that Zhang Daoxiang's original compilation was likely in four volumes, while the seven-volume version seen by Dong You may have been expanded by later scholars. By the Chongning era (1102–1106) of the Northern Song dynasty, when the *Daoist Canon* was being revised, this collected commentary had already been lost. Only the annotations by Emperor Xuanzong and Heshang Gong survive to this day.

公嚴遵陸希聲四注及傅奕所傳古本道德經耳外李約李

榮賈淸夷各有注說王顧等奉元宗命撰所注經疏杜光庭

又從而爲廣聖義亦皆唐人並見藏室始知志所著錄猶有

未盡惜乎名存而書亡者十蓋八九也唐相陸希聲著道德經傳四卷其序略云夫老氏之術道以爲

體名以爲用無爲無不爲而格于皇極者也楊朱宗老氏之

體失於不及以至於貴身賤物莊周述老氏之用失於太過

故欲絕聖棄智申韓失老氏之名而獘於苛繳刻急王何失

老氏之道而流於虛無放誕此六子者皆老氏之罪人也乃

爲述傳以暢宗旨又云昔伏羲氏畫八卦象萬物窮性命之

理順道德之和老氏先天地本陰陽推性命之極原道德之

奥此與伏羲同其原也文王觀太易九六之動貴剛尙變而

要之以中老氏察太易七八之正致柔守靜而統之以大此

與文王通其宗也孔子祖述堯舜憲章文武導斯民以仁義

之教老氏擬議伏羲彌綸黃帝冒天下以道德之化此與孔

子合其權也此三君子者聖人之極也老氏皆變而通之反

而合之研至變之機探至精之歸斯可謂至神者矣唐兵部郞李約勉之子也注道德經四卷其說謂世傳此書爲

神仙虛無言不知六經乃黃老之枝葉爾

**Interpretation**

This passage primarily discusses the annotations and studies of the *Daode Jing* (Classic of the Way and Virtue) by several Tang dynasty scholars.

It first mentions the four commentaries by Yan Zun and Lu Xisheng, as well as the ancient version of the *Daode Jing* transmitted by Fu Yi. Additionally, it notes the individual annotations by Li Yue, Li Rong, Jia Qingyi, and others. Wang Gu and his team were commissioned by Emperor Xuanzong of Tang to compile authoritative commentaries, which Du Guangting later expanded with more detailed explanations—all these being Tang dynasty works. Unfortunately, most of these texts are now lost, with only titles surviving while the content has perished in eight or nine cases out of ten.

The passage then highlights *Daode Jing Zhuan* (Commentary on the Daode Jing) by the Tang chancellor Lu Xisheng. He regarded Laozi's teachings as rooted in the "Dao" (the Way) and applied through "names," advocating *wuwei* (non-action) that accomplishes all things, ultimately reaching the highest state. He criticized six scholars—Yang Zhu, Zhuangzi, Shen Buhai, Han Fei, Wang Bi, and He Yan—arguing they either strayed too far from Laozi's teachings or interpreted them too extremely, thus becoming "transgressors" against Laozi.

Lu Xisheng also paralleled Laozi with Fuxi, King Wen of Zhou, and Confucius: Fuxi's drawing of the *bagua* (Eight Trigrams) explored the nature of all things, while Laozi investigated the origin of Dao and De (Virtue), sharing the same source; King Wen emphasized the dynamic *yang* principles in the *Yijing* (Book of Changes), whereas Laozi focused on the receptive *yin* and stillness, complementing each other; Confucius taught the people through benevolence and righteousness, while Laozi transformed the world through Dao and De—different paths converging on the same goal. He considered these three as supreme sages, with Laozi synthesizing their insights and probing the profound, thus deserving the title of "ultimate divinity."

Lastly, the passage mentions *Daode Jing Zhu* (Annotations on the Daode Jing) by Li Yue (son of Li Mian), a Tang dynasty Minister of War. He argued that interpreting the *Daode Jing* as mere mystical discourse on immortality was a misunderstanding—in reality, the Confucian Six Classics were but branches of Huang-Lao thought. This view diverged sharply from mainstream opinions of his time.

唐太宗謂傅奕曰佛道玄妙卿獨不悟其理何也奕曰佛是胡

中桀黠初在西域漸流中國皆是模寫老莊玄言文飾之耳

於百姓無補於國家有害太宗頗然之臨終誡其子曰老子

玄一之篇周孔六經之說是爲名教汝宜習之妖胡亂華舉

時皆惑汝等勿學也(見舊唐書本傳)唐憲宗顧宰臣曰神仙之事信乎李藩對曰神仙之說出於道

家道家所宗老子五千文爲本老子指歸與經無異後代好

怪之流假託老子神仙之說故秦始皇漢武帝二主受惑卒

無所得上深然之(見舊唐書憲宗紀)仲長子光字不曜開皇末結菴河渚閒守令謁者辭以瘖人有

請道者則書老易二字示之文中子比之虞仲夷逸云(見王績仲

長先生傳及文中子注)東皋子王績字無功兄通隋末大儒也有田在河渚間仲長子

光結廬北渚績愛其眞徙與相近常以周易老子莊子置牀

頭他書罕讀也(見新唐書隱逸傳)盧鴻一字顥然隱於嵩山開元六年徵至東都謁見不拜宰相

遣通事舍人問其故奏曰臣聞老君言禮者忠信之薄不足

可依山臣鴻一敢以忠信奉見(見舊唐書隱逸傳)貞一先生司馬承禎字子微廬天台不出睿宗命其兄承褘就

起之旣至引入中掖廷問其術對曰爲道日損損之又損以

至於

**Interpretation**

Emperor Taizong of Tang once asked Fu Yi: "Buddhism is profound and sublime, why do you alone not believe in it?" Fu Yi replied: "Buddhism was originally created by cunning men among the western barbarians. After being transmitted to the Central Plains, it merely appropriated the profound teachings of Laozi and Zhuangzi as embellishment. It brings no benefit to the people and is harmful to the state." The emperor deeply agreed, and on his deathbed admonished his son: "You must study Laozi's *Dao De Jing* (Classic of the Way and Virtue) along with the Six Classics of the Duke of Zhou and Confucius—these represent the true path. The heretical teachings of barbarians delude the world—you must never emulate them."

Emperor Xianzong of Tang asked his chancellor Li Fan whether he believed in immortals. Li Fan responded: "Tales of immortals originate from Daoism, which takes Laozi's five-thousand-character *Dao De Jing* as its foundation. Laozi's original intent aligns with the classical teachings, but later opportunists fabricated immortal legends under Laozi's name. Both Emperor Qin Shi Huang and Emperor Wu of Han were deceived by these yet gained nothing." The emperor greatly approved of this perspective.

The recluse Zhongchang Ziguang (courtesy name Buyao) lived in seclusion by the river isles during the final years of the Sui dynasty's Kaihuang era. When local officials visited, he feigned muteness. When asked about Daoist teachings, he would simply write the two characters "Lao Yi" (referring to *Laozi* and the *Book of Changes*). The scholar Wenzhongzi compared him to ancient worthies like Yu Zhong and Yi Yi.

The recluse Wang Ji (sobriquet Donggaozi) was the younger brother of Wang Tong, a great Confucian scholar of the late Sui dynasty. Wang Ji owned farmland by the river isles and, admiring Zhongchang Ziguang's authentic nature, deliberately relocated his dwelling nearby. He often kept the *Zhouyi* (*Book of Changes*), *Laozi* and *Zhuangzi* by his bedside, seldom reading other texts.

The recluse Lu Hongyi (courtesy name Haoran) lived in seclusion on Mount Song. In the sixth year of Emperor Xuanzong's Kaiyuan era (718 CE), he was summoned to Luoyang but refused to perform the ceremonial kowtow. When the chancellor sent someone to inquire why, he answered: "Laozi said 'rites are the expression of thinning loyalty and trustworthiness'—they cannot be relied upon. I, Lu Hongyi, wish to meet the Son of Heaven with a heart of loyalty and trust."

The Daoist priest Sima Chengzhen (honorary title Master Zhenyi, courtesy name Ziwei) remained in seclusion on Mount Tiantai. Emperor Ruizong dispatched his elder brother Sima Chenghui to invite him to court. When asked about cultivation methods in the palace, he replied: "To cultivate the Dao (Way), one must daily diminish desires—diminish and diminish again, until reaching the state of wuwei (non-action)."

無爲夫心目所知見每損之尙不能已況攻異端而增

智慮哉帝曰治身則爾治國若何對曰國猶身也故游心於

淡合氣於漠與物自然而無私焉而天下治帝嗟嘆曰廣成

之言也開元中再召至都玄宗詔於王屋山置壇室以居善

篆隸帝命以三體寫老子刊正文句(見新唐書隱逸傳舊書本傳云元宗令以三體

寫老子經因刊正文句定著五千三百八十言爲眞本以奏上之)宗元先生吳筠魯中之儒士也入嵩山爲道士久之遊天台元

宗遣使徵之旣至問以道法對曰道法之精無如五千言其

諸枝詞蔓說徒費紙劄耳(見舊唐書隱逸傳新書本傳云帝嘗問道對曰深於道者無如老子

五千文其餘徒喪紙劄耳復問神仙治鍊法對曰此野人事積𡻕月求之非人主宜留意與舊書少異故併錄之)班固載老子鄰氏有傳傅氏徐氏劉向皆有說傅氏三十七篇

鄰氏四篇徐氏六篇劉向四篇惜乎其書之亡久矣今世所

傳老子道德經或總爲上下二篇或分八十一章或七十二

章(河上公分八十一章以上經法天天數奇故有三十七章下經法地地數偶故有四十四章嚴遵乃以陰道八陽道

九以八行九故七十二章上四十章下三十二章全與河上公不合)本旣各異說亦不同蓋莫

得而攷也

**Interpretation**

This passage discusses how several historical figures understood and applied the *Dao De Jing* (Classic of the Way and Virtue). It notes that human consciousness and sensory perception constantly deplete one's *Jing* (essence), let alone engaging with heterodox theories that further burden the mind. An emperor once asked: "If self-cultivation works this way, how should one govern a state?" The reply was: "Governing a state is like cultivating the self—maintain a serene mind, harmonize *Qi* (vital energy) with nature, follow the inherent nature of all things without selfish intent, and the world will naturally achieve great order." The emperor marveled that this was the wisdom of Guangchengzi, a legendary immortal.

During the Kaiyuan era of Emperor Xuanzong of Tang, practitioners were summoned to the capital, and a Daoist temple was built for them on Mount Wangwu. The emperor ordered the *Laozi* (another name for the *Dao De Jing*) to be transcribed in three scripts, standardizing the text (the *New Book of Tang* records 5,380 characters as the authoritative version). Master Wu Yun, originally a Confucian scholar from Shandong, later pursued Daoist cultivation at Mount Song and traveled to Mount Tiantai. When Emperor Xuanzong inquired about Daoist teachings, Wu replied that the most profound doctrine was the *Laozi's* five thousand words, while other texts were merely verbose distractions. Asked about *Neidan* (internal alchemy) and immortality practices, he stated these were pursuits for hermits, not rulers.

Ban Gu's records mention commentaries on Laozi's teachings by scholars like Lin, Fu, Xu, and Liu Xiang, though these works are now lost. Current editions of the *Dao De Jing* vary—some divide it into two parts, others into 81 chapters (e.g., the Heshang Gong version: 37 chapters in the upper section mirroring odd-numbered celestial patterns, 44 in the lower reflecting even-numbered earthly ones), or 72 chapters (e.g., Yan Zun's version: 40 upper, 32 lower). With divergent source texts and interpretations, the original form is now difficult to reconstruct.

漢桓譚曰昔老聃著虛無之言兩篇後世好之者以爲過於五

經自漢文景之君及司馬遷皆有是言(見楊雄傳)阮籍著通老論曰道者法自然而爲化侯王能守之萬物將自

化易謂之太極春秋謂之元老子謂之道(見太平御覽)王弼著道德經以夫佳兵民之飢二章疑非老子所作何晏注老子未畢見王弼自說注老子旨何意多短不復得作

聲但應諾遂不復注因作道德論一說何平叔注老子始成

詣王輔嗣見王注精奇乃拜伏曰若斯人可與論天人際矣

因以所注爲道德二論文章敘錄曰自儒者論以老子非聖

人絕禮棄學平叔說與聖人同著論行於世(見世說並注)阮瞻咸之子也見司徒王戎戎問曰聖人貴名教老莊明自然

其旨同異瞻曰將無同戎咨嗟良久卽命辟之時謂之三語

椽(見晉書本傳世書作阮修)陸元朗字德明以字行補太學博士高祖釋奠已召博士徐文

遠講孝經沙門惠乘講般若經道士劉進喜講老子德明難

此三人各因宗指隨端立義眾皆爲之屈帝大喜曰三人者

誠辯然德明一舉輒蔽可謂賢矣(見新舊唐書儒學傳)開元初詔中書令張說舉能治易老莊者集賢直學士侯行果

薦會稽康子元及平陽敬會眞於說說籍以聞並得侍讀俄

並兼

**Interpretation**

Huan Tan of the Han Dynasty once remarked that Laozi (Lao Dan) originally composed two essays on "emptiness and nothingness," which later admirers considered superior even to the Confucian Five Classics (the Book of Songs, Book of Documents, Book of Rites, Book of Changes, and Spring and Autumn Annals). From Emperor Wen and Emperor Jing of Han to Sima Qian, this view was widely held (as recorded in the Biography of Yang Xiong).

Ruan Ji wrote in his *Discourse on Penetrating Laozi*: The Dao (the Way) is that which follows nature to transform and nurture all things. If rulers can abide by this principle, all things will naturally flourish. The *Book of Changes* refers to it as "Taiji (Supreme Ultimate)," the *Spring and Autumn Annals* calls it the "Origin," while Laozi names it the "Dao" (as cited in the *Taiping Yulan*).

When Wang Bi annotated the *Daodejing*, he expressed doubts about the chapters "Fine weapons are instruments of misfortune" and "When the people are hungry," suspecting they might not have been written by Laozi himself.

He Yan had not yet completed his annotations on the *Laozi* when he encountered Wang Bi’s interpretations. Realizing his own understanding fell short in many places, he abandoned his annotations and instead composed the *Discourse on Dao and De*. Another account states: He Yan (styled Pingshu) had just finished annotating the *Laozi* when he visited Wang Bi (styled Fusi). Upon seeing the extraordinary depth of Wang Bi’s commentary, he sighed in admiration, saying, "Only someone like this is fit to discuss the relationship between heaven’s principles and human affairs!" He then revised his own annotations into the *Two Discourses on Dao and De*. The *Records of Literary Works* notes: At the time, Confucian scholars dismissed Laozi as no sage and advocated abandoning ritual teachings. He Yan, however, argued that Laozi’s thought aligned with Confucius’s and composed treatises to propagate this view (as recorded in *A New Account of the Tales of the World* and its commentaries).

Ruan Xian’s son, Ruan Zhan, once visited Minister Wang Rong, who asked him, "Confucianism emphasizes ritual teachings, while Laozi and Zhuangzi advocate following nature. Are their fundamental principles the same or different?" Ruan Zhan replied, "I suspect they are the same." Wang Rong pondered this at length and promptly recruited him for office. Contemporaries dubbed him the "Three-Word Clerk" (as recorded in Ruan Zhan’s biography in the *Book of Jin*, though *A New Account of the Tales of the World* attributes this exchange to Ruan Xiu).

Lu Deming (styled Yuanlang) was appointed as a Grand Academy erudite. When Emperor Gaozu of Tang conducted the *Shidian* ceremony, he summoned Erudite Xu Wenyuan to lecture on the *Classic of Filial Piety*, the monk Hui Cheng to expound the *Prajnaparamita Sutra*, and the Daoist priest Liu Jinxi to explain the *Laozi*. Lu Deming posed challenging questions to all three, refuting each according to the tenets of their respective traditions and leaving the audience convinced. The emperor, greatly pleased, remarked, "These three are indeed skilled debaters, yet Deming alone rendered them speechless—truly a man of talent!" (as recorded in the Confucian scholars’ biographies of the *New Book of Tang* and *Old Book of Tang*).

In the early Kaiyuan era of Emperor Xuanzong of Tang, an edict commanded Chief Minister Zhang Yue to recommend scholars well-versed in the *Book of Changes*, *Laozi*, and *Zhuangzi*. Hou Xingguo, an academician of the Jixian Institute, recommended Kang Ziyuan of Kuaiji and Jing Huizhen of Pingyang to Zhang Yue. Upon their recommendation, both were appointed as imperial lecturers and soon assumed additional duties.

集賢侍講學士始行果會眞及長樂馮朝隱同進講朝

隱能推索老莊祕義會眞亦善老子每啟篇先熏盥乃讀(見新

唐書儒學傳)張薦明少以儒學遊河朔後去爲道士通老子莊周之說晉高

祖召見問道家可以治國乎對曰道也者妙萬物而爲言得

其極者尸居袵席之間可以治天下高祖大其言延入内殿

講道德經拜以爲師賜號通玄先生後不知所終(見五代史一行傳)太宗聞汴水輦運卒有私質市者謂侍臣曰幸門如鼠穴何可

塞之但去其尤者可矣篙工楫師苟有販鬻但無妨公不必

究問冀官物之入無至損折可矣呂䝉正曰水至淸則無魚

人至察則無徒小人情僞在君子豈不知之若以大度兼容

則萬事兼濟曹參不擾獄市者以其兼受善惡窮之則奸慝

無所容謹勿擾也聖言所發正合黃老之道(見國朝事實)了齋陳忠肅公瓘嘗著書二十餘篇曰昭語其序略云玉淸昭

應宫使王曾請校三館道經上因言其書不如老氏五千言

淸靜而簡約張知白曰陛下留意於此乃治國無爲之術臣

伏讀神考聖訓曰漢之文景唐之太宗孔子所謂吾無間然

者臣因考三君之行事知漢文之術得於老子而仁祖之政

多似漢文今摭其說十數篇錄於后

**Interpretation**

The Academician of the Jixian Academy began lecturing in the imperial palace alongside the Daoist priest Guo Huizhen and Feng Chaoyin of Changle. Feng excelled in expounding the profound principles within the works of Laozi and Zhuangzi, while Guo Huizhen was also well-versed in Laozi's teachings. Before each lecture, they would reverently burn incense and purify themselves through ritual bathing (as recorded in the "New Book of Tang: Biographies of Confucian Scholars").

In his youth, Zhang Jianming studied Confucianism while traveling north of the Yellow River before becoming a Daoist priest, mastering the thought of Laozi and Zhuang Zhou. When summoned by Emperor Gaozu of Later Jin, he was asked: "Can Daoist teachings be used to govern a state?" He replied: "The so-called 'Dao' describes the supreme truth underlying all things. Those who truly comprehend its ultimate expression can govern all under heaven while remaining at home." The emperor admired this response, inviting him to the inner palace to expound the "Daode Jing" and honoring him as a teacher with the title "Master of Profound Understanding." He later disappeared without trace (recorded in the "History of the Five Dynasties: Biographies of Exceptional Individuals").

Emperor Taizong of Song, upon hearing that some canal transport soldiers were engaged in private trade, told his ministers: "Corruption is like rat holes—how can they all be stopped? Just eliminate the most egregious cases. These boatmen occasionally engage in small trade—if it doesn't hinder official duties, don't investigate too deeply. Just ensure no loss to government supplies." Lü Mengzheng added: "Water too clear breeds no fish; people too discerning find few followers. Are gentlemen unaware of petty men's deceit? Tolerance achieves all things. Recall how Cao Can left prisons and markets undisturbed precisely because they contain both good and evil. Overzealous prosecution leaves no room for villainy—better to follow natural patterns." The emperor sighed: "These words capture the essence of Huang-Lao thought." (Recorded in "Facts of Our Dynasty")

Master Liaozhai (posthumously titled Loyal and Reverent) Chen Guan composed over twenty essays collectively titled "Illuminating Sayings." In the preface, he noted that Wang Zeng, the Jade Clarity Illuminated Response Palace supervisor tasked with collating Daoist scriptures from the Three Institutes, advised the emperor that none matched the purity and simplicity of Laozi's five-thousand-character "Daode Jing." Upon hearing this, Zhang Zhibai told the emperor: "Your Majesty's attention to these ideas shows understanding of governing through wuwei (non-action). When studying ancestral instructions, I observed that Emperors Wen and Jing of Han and Taizong of Tang exemplified Confucius's praise: 'I find no fault with them.'" Examining their governance, Chen found Han Wendi's policies rooted in Laozi's teachings, while Song Renzong's edicts closely resembled Wendi's. He thus compiled over ten relevant discourses into this work.

漢文卽位之始先報平勃後封宋昌以有功於社稷爲先以有

德於我身爲後此所謂後其身也故天下莫得先焉(老子曰後其身

而身先)漢文每朝郞從官上書疏未嘗不止輦受其言言不可用置之

言可用釆之未嘗不稱善言之可用者稱善不可用者亦稱

善此所謂善者吾善之不善者吾亦善之故德善也漢文初登虎圈嗇夫口對無窮拜爲上林令釋之曰周勃張相

如陛下稱爲長者此兩人言事曾不出口豈效此嗇夫喋喋

利口㨗給哉且秦以任刀筆之吏爭以亟疾苛察相高其獘

徒文具而無實不聞其過陵遲至於敗亂今以嗇夫口辯而

超遷之臣恐天下隨風而靡爭爲口辯而無其實夫下之化

上疾於影響舉錯不可不審也帝曰善乃不拜嗇夫蓋知辯

者不善而多言之數窮也(老子曰知者不言言者不知又曰善者不辯辯者不善又曰多言數

窮不如守中)漢文詔曰朝有誹謗之本所以通治道而來諫也今法有誹謗

妖言之罪是使眾臣不敢盡情而上無由聞過也其除之故

賈誼上書至於引廟諱爲言而文帝嘉納可謂無忌諱矣民

之所以富庶而不貧其以此乎(老子曰天下多忌諱而民彌貧)

**Interpretation**

When Emperor Wen of Han first ascended the throne, he first rewarded Zhou Bo and Chen Ping for quelling the Lü clan rebellion, and only afterwards rewarded Song Chang who had supported his accession. This demonstrated putting those who served the state first and those who personally benefited him second—embodying Laozi's teaching that "by placing oneself last, one actually comes to the fore."

Whenever Emperor Wen held court and encountered palace attendants presenting memorials, he would invariably halt his carriage to listen. Suggestions deemed impractical were set aside while viable ones were adopted, yet he praised the speaker in either case. This exemplified Laozi's wisdom: "To the good I am good, and to the not-good I am also good—thus all attain goodness."

During an inspection of the tiger enclosure in Shanglin Park, the minor official in charge answered so fluently that the emperor considered promoting him exceptionally. However, Chief Commandant Zhang Shizhi remonstrated: "Ministers like Zhou Bo and Zhang Xiangru, whom Your Majesty praises as virtuous elders, report matters with simple speech. The Qin dynasty collapsed precisely because it promoted glib clerks, causing officials to compete in empty rhetoric until governance became superficial and corrupt. If we reward mere eloquence, the whole empire might emulate this hollow practice." The enlightened emperor canceled the promotion, validating Laozi's teachings: "The wise don't speak much; the verbose lack true wisdom," "The disputatious aren't virtuous; the virtuous don't dispute," and "Excessive words exhaust reason—moderation is best."

Emperor Wen also decreed: "The 'slander posts' (wooden pillars for public petitions) were established to encourage frank counsel. Yet current laws punish so-called 'slander' and 'heresy,' making ministers afraid to speak freely and rulers deaf to their faults." He abolished these charges. When Jia Yi later memorialized using the imperial ancestors' tabooed names unflinchingly, the emperor not only forgave but commended him. Such openness created prosperity, confirming Laozi's observation: "The more taboos and prohibitions in the world, the poorer the people become."

孝文爲尉它親冢在眞定者置守邑𡻕時奉祀召其昆弟尊官

厚賜以寵之尉它於是下令國中奉詔改號不敢爲帝此卽

强之弱之與之奪之在我而已矣吳王詐病不朝賜以几丈

張武等受賂更加賞賜以愧其心蓋亦取諸此也(老子曰將欲歙之必

固張之將欲弱之必固强之將欲廢之必固興之將與奪之必固與之)袁盎卻愼夫人坐文帝改怒爲喜厚賞袁盎可謂自勝而不自

是矣德之所以彰而國之所以强也(老子曰不自是故彰又曰自勝者張)文帝納賈誼譏切之言養臣下以節不辱大臣於是堂陛愈高

而基本愈固易曰以貴下賤大得民也何以異乎此哉(老子曰貴

以賤爲本高以下爲基)臣嘗謂自三代以降善治天下者無如孝文然

其術出於老子故仁祖於老氏也取其簡約而神考之於漢

文也謂無閒然蓋老異於孔而其本則同漢劣於周而善亦

可取此二聖之所以垂訓也仁祖皇祐四年謂輔臣曰朕臨

御以來命參知政事多矣其間忠純可紀者蔡齊魯宗道薛

奎而已宰相王曾張知白皆履行忠謹雖時有小失而終無

大過李廸亦樸忠自守第言多輕發耳龐籍對曰才難自古

然也上復曰朕記其大不記其小臣三復聖訓因考王曾知

白之所以見重於仁祖者蓋能以清靜之術著無爲之化所

**Interpretation**

Emperor Wen of Han, in order to pacify Zhao Tuo (also known as Wei Tuo), the King of Nanyue, took special measures to protect Zhao Tuo's ancestral tombs in Zhending (present-day Zhengding, Hebei). He appointed dedicated tomb guardians and conducted annual rituals at the site. The emperor also summoned Zhao Tuo's brothers, bestowing upon them high-ranking positions and generous stipends as gestures of favor. In response, Zhao Tuo ordered the entire Nanyue kingdom to comply with Han decrees, relinquishing his imperial title and refraining from claiming emperorship. This exemplifies the principle from the *Laozi*: "If you want to contract it, you must first expand it; if you want to weaken it, you must first strengthen it."

When Liu Bi, the King of Wu, feigned illness to avoid court attendance, Emperor Wen instead presented him with a ceremonial staff and seat (honorary gifts for elders). Officials like Zhang Wu who had accepted bribes were not punished but rather rewarded, making them feel ashamed. When Yuan Ang advised against letting Empress Shen share the emperor's elevated seat, Emperor Wen transformed his initial anger into delight and richly rewarded Yuan Ang. These actions embody the *Laozi*'s teachings: "Not presuming to know brings clarity" and "He who conquers himself is truly strong." Thus, Emperor Wen's virtue (De) shone brightly, and the state prospered.

By adopting Jia Yi's admonitions to govern ministers through ritual propriety rather than humiliation, Emperor Wen enhanced imperial dignity while solidifying his rule's foundation. The *Book of Changes* states, "The noble who humbles himself wins the people," resonating with the *Laozi*'s "The noble takes the humble as root, the high takes the low as foundation." Among post-Three Dynasties rulers, none surpassed Emperor Wen in statecraft rooted in Laozi's philosophy. Though Laozi and Confucius differed in form, they shared fundamental principles; though the Han fell short of Zhou perfection, its merits remain noteworthy.

In the fourth year of the Huangyou era (1052), Emperor Renzong of Song remarked to his ministers: "Since my accession, I've appointed many privy councilors, but only Cai Qi, Lu Zongdao, and Xue Kui proved truly loyal and worthy of record. Chancellors Wang Zeng and Zhang Zhibai were both prudent and conscientious—minor flaws notwithstanding. Li Di was honest but overly blunt." Pang Ji responded, "Talent has always been rare." The emperor added, "I remember great virtues, not petty faults." Wang Zeng and Zhang Zhibai earned Renzong's esteem precisely because they governed through the Daoist principle of Wuwei (non-action), realizing Laozi's ideal of "governing through non-interference."

謂大而可紀者其在茲乎審刑院斷絕公案仁宗喜曰天下至廣而斷刑若此有以知刑

訟之簡有司無稽遲也乃下詔奬法官而付其事于史官臣

竊見元豐中開封府獄空神考大喜擢知府王安禮爲右丞

下至胥吏悉獲賚賞自是内外有司皆以獄空爲悅蓋仁祖

以訟簡賞法官而神考以獄空擢府尹所以示仁民之意一

也老子曰民常不畏死奈何以死懼之若使民常畏死而爲

奇者吾得執而殺之孰敢祖宗不以刑威懼民蓋有得於老

氏講詩至匪風曰誰能烹魚溉之釜鬵上曰老子謂治大國

若烹小鮮其義類此侍讀丁度對曰烹魚煩則碎治民煩則

散非聖學之深何以見古人求治之意臣曰古之聖君當大

有爲之時或創業或革獘不免有所煩也仁祖以清靜無爲

之道持盈守成四十二年終始如一蓋得烹鮮之說而躬行

之耳臣故曰漢文之術出於老子而仁祖之治多似漢文神

考謂漢文吾無閒然則紹述之意可知也韓絳言林獻可遣其子以書抵臣多斥中外

**Interpretation**

This passage records several instances of Song Dynasty emperors applying Daoist principles in state governance. During Emperor Renzong's reign, the Judicial Review Court handled cases with remarkable efficiency. Pleased, Renzong remarked: "Though our empire is vast, cases are resolved so swiftly—this shows litigation is rare and officials aren't procrastinating." He then issued edicts rewarding judges and ordered historians to document this achievement.

The text describes how during the Yuanfeng era, the Kaifeng prefectural prison stood completely empty, delighting Emperor Shenzong so much that he promoted Prefect Wang Anli to Right Executive and rewarded even minor clerks. Subsequently, officials at all levels took pride in maintaining empty prisons. While Renzong rewarded judges for reducing litigation, Shenzong promoted officials for empty prisons—both approaches embodied the Confucian-Daoist ideal of benevolent governance.

The author then quotes Laozi: "If people do not fear death, what use is threatening them with execution? But if they value life, when we execute those who disrupt order, who would dare rebel?" The Song ancestors' refusal to govern through punitive deterrence demonstrates their profound understanding of Laozi's wisdom.

When discussing the Book of Songs' metaphor "Who can cook fish well?", Emperor Renzong observed: "Laozi's saying 'Governing a great state is like cooking small fish' conveys similar wisdom." Court lecturer Ding Du added: "Over-stirring fish breaks the flesh; over-governing people fractures their hearts." The author marvels that only those deeply versed in sagely learning could grasp such ancient governance principles.

The passage concludes by noting how ancient sage-kings inevitably toiled when founding dynasties or reforming institutions. Yet Renzong maintained the empire for forty-two years through Wuwei (non-action), consistently applying the "cooking small fish" approach. His governance resembled Emperor Wen of Han's Daoist-inspired methods—so much so that Shenzong praised Han Wen's rule as "beyond reproach." This illustrates the continuity of Daoist statecraft across dynasties.

The final anecdote mentions Han Jiang receiving a critical memorial from Lin Xianke's son, demonstrating how Daoist concepts like "governing through non-action" and "handling state affairs like cooking delicate fish" were practically applied in Song politics. Through concrete examples, the text reveals the living tradition of Daoist political philosophy during China's medieval golden age.

大臣過失臣不敢

不以聞上曰朕不欲留中恐開陰訐之路可持歸焚之臣曰

老子云俗人昭昭我獨若昏俗人察察我獨悶悶又曰其政

悶悶其民湻湻其政察察其民缺缺韓絳以獻可之言聞於

上一白一黑何其昭昭也仁祖恐開陰訐之路拒而不受聖

人之慮深矣遠矣昏昏然不可見悶悶然不可識此聖人之

所以爲聖人而其民之所以湻湻也通判並州司馬光上疏請於宗室中擇人攝居儲貳臣曰唐中

葉以來人主惡聞立嗣以爲不祥之語故天下之士於國家

安危之本不敢正言司馬光以疏遠之臣言此而不隱仁祖

春秋高矣受此言而不諱老子曰受國不祥是爲天下王仁

祖有之又曰信言不美司馬光有之陳忠肅公曰老子言天下神器不可爲也爲者敗之又言治大

國若烹小鮮夫烹魚者無所事於煩之也制水火之齊以熟

之而已舜無爲而治其不以此歟又曰武帝黜黃老而用儒

術未嘗不本於仁義而觀其實效則不異於始皇者幾希當

此之時天下不一日而無事思慕文景不可復得然則黃老

亦何負於天下哉又曰疏廣謂受曰知足不辱知止不殆宦

成名立而不去懼有後悔於是父子相隨移病而歸當時賢

之後世追誦然其知止之意發於老氏(並見了齋集)

**Interpretation**

When a high official committed an error but I dared not report it, the emperor said, "I have no wish to pursue this matter," fearing it might encourage a culture of denunciation. "You may take it back and burn it." This reminds me of Laozi's words: The people of the world are all sharp and calculating, while I alone appear dull and confused; the world is clear and discerning, while I alone seem muddled and ignorant. Laozi also said: When governance is lenient, the people remain simple; when governance is strict, the people become cunning. Han Jiang once presented a memorial to the emperor, laying out right and wrong too explicitly. Emperor Renzong, concerned it might provoke mutual accusations, refused to accept it. The foresight of sages is truly profound—what seems like muddled confusion is in fact great wisdom disguised as foolishness. This is why they are sages, and why the people can preserve their simple nature.

Sima Guang, the assistant prefect of Bingzhou, submitted a memorial proposing the selection of an heir from the imperial clan. After the mid-Tang period, emperors avoided discussing succession, considering it inauspicious. Thus, scholar-officials dared not speak frankly on matters vital to the nation's stability. Yet Sima Guang, as a distant official, spoke without reservation. Emperor Renzong, though advanced in years, did not shy away from such words. Laozi said, "To bear the misfortunes of the state is to be the ruler of the world"—this, Renzong achieved. He also said, "Honest words are harsh to the ear"—this, Sima Guang achieved.

Chen Zhongsu (Chen Guan) commented: Laozi said, "The world is a sacred vessel; it cannot be forcibly altered, for those who try will fail." He also said, "Governing a great state is like cooking a small fish"—one should not stir it excessively but simply regulate the heat. Was not Emperor Shun's practice of Wuwei (non-action) governance precisely this principle? Emperor Wu of Han abolished the Huang-Lao teachings in favor of Confucianism, ostensibly promoting benevolence and righteousness, yet the results were scarcely different from those of Qin Shi Huang. In those days, the world knew not a single day of peace, and people longed for the governance of Emperors Wen and Jing, though it could not be regained. From this perspective, what fault lay with the Huang-Lao teachings for the world? Shu Guang said to his nephew Shu Shou, "He who knows contentment avoids disgrace; he who knows when to stop avoids danger." Having reached high office, they should retreat at the height of their success—so uncle and nephew both resigned on grounds of illness. Later generations praised their wisdom, but this understanding of moderation and restraint originated in Laozi's thought.

(Recorded in the *Liaozhai Ji*)

歐陽文忠公修曰前後之相隨長短之相形推而廣之萬物之

理皆然也然老子爲書其言雖若虛無而於治人之術至矣

又曰道家者流本清虛去健羡泊然自守故曰我無爲而民

自化我好靜而民自正雖聖人南面之治不可易也(並見本集)頴濱蘇文定公曰得姪邁等所編先公手澤其一曰昨日子由

寄老子新解讀之不盡卷廢卷而嘆使戰國有此書則孔老

爲一使晉宋間有此書則佛老不爲二不意老年見此奇特

然後知此書當子瞻意(見道德經解後序)又曰孔子以仁義禮樂治

天下老子絕而棄之或者以爲不同易曰形而上者謂之道

形而下者謂之器孔子之慮後世也深故示人以器而晦其

道使中人以下守其器而不爲道之所眩以不失爲君子而

中人以上自是而上達也老子則不然志於明道而急於開

人心故示人以道而薄於器以爲學者惟器之知則道隱矣

故絕仁義棄禮樂以明道二聖人者皆不得已也合於此必

略於彼矣(見經注)又曰韓非明老子而以刑名游說諸侯李斯

師孫卿

**Interpretation**

Ouyang Xiu (posthumously titled Duke Wenzhong) observed: The principles of things following one another and lengths being measured comparatively, when extended, reveal universal patterns governing all phenomena. Though Laozi's writings may appear to discuss abstract and elusive truths, they contain profound wisdom for governing the people.

He further remarked: The Daoist school fundamentally emphasizes clarity, stillness, and emptiness (qingjing xuwu), eliminating forced striving and covetous desires while maintaining simple self-restraint. Hence Laozi states, "When I practice Wuwei (non-action), the people transform themselves; when I love stillness, the people rectify themselves" — even the sage-kings employing the most orthodox southern-facing governance (the traditional imperial method) could not alter this principle.

Su Zhe (styled Yingbin, posthumously titled Wending) recorded while compiling his father's manuscripts: Upon receiving the handwritten drafts compiled by nephews Su Mai and others, I found this note: "Yesterday I received Ziyou's [Su Zhe's courtesy name] newly annotated edition of the Laozi. I couldn't put it down while reading and couldn't help exclaiming: Had such interpretations existed during the Warring States period, Confucian and Daoist teachings could have been unified; had such insights appeared during the Jin-Song era, Buddhism and Daoism wouldn't have diverged. Never imagined I'd encounter such exquisite commentary in my later years — now I understand this work perfectly matches Zizhan's [Su Shi's courtesy name] intentions."

Su Zhe elaborated: Confucius governed the world through benevolence, righteousness, rites, and music, while Laozi advocated completely abandoning these. Some consider them diametrically opposed, but the Yijing states, "What is above form is called Dao (the Way); what is within form is called qi (vessel)." Confucius, with profound foresight, displayed concrete "vessels" (ritual systems) to the world while concealing the profound "Dao," allowing those of average intelligence to maintain practical norms without being confused by metaphysical principles — at least becoming gentlemen; those above average would naturally comprehend higher truths through these. Laozi differed — his aim was clarifying the Great Dao and urgently awakening human minds, thus directly revealing the "Dao" while de-emphasizing concrete "vessels," believing scholars who rigidly clung to forms would obscure the Great Dao. Hence the need to "abolish benevolence and discard righteousness" to manifest the Great Dao — both sages acted out of necessity, emphasizing one aspect inevitably meant neglecting the other.

Su Zhe also noted: Though Han Fei expounded Laozi's thought, he advised feudal lords using punishment, names, and statecraft; Li Si studied under Xun Qing (Xunzi)...

而以詐力事秦至於焚詩書殺儒士其終皆䧟於大

戮原其所學皆本於聖人而其所施設則鄕黨之士所不忍

爲夫豈其所學有以致之歟蓋老子孫卿其教之善雖獘不

至於敗亂天下然則二子之學其所以失之而至此者何也

學之不詳毫釐之差或致千里(見欒城集)陸陶山農師曰自秦以來性命之學不講於世而道德之裂久

矣世之學者不幸蔽於不該不偏一曲之書而日汨於傳注

之卑以自失其性命之情不復知天地之大醇古人之大體

也予深悲之以爲道德者關尹之所以誠心而問老子之所

以誠意而言精微之義要妙之理多有之而可以啟學之蔽

使之復性命之情不幸亂於傳注之卑千有餘年尙昧故爲

作傳以發其旣昧之意雖然聖人之在下多矣其著書以道

德之意非獨老子也蓋約而爲老子詳而爲列子又其詳爲

莊子故予之解述列莊之詳合而論之庶幾不失道德之意

(見經注)延平先生羅從彥仲素曰老子之書孔子未嘗譽亦未嘗毁蓋

以謂譽之則後世之士溺其和光同塵之說而流入於不覊

毁之則淸靜爲天下正之論其可毁乎旣不譽又不毁其可

不略言故止謂竊比於我老彭(見羅先生語錄)或問龜山楊文靖公時曰說者謂老彭乃老氏與彭籛非謂彭

**Interpretation**

This passage compiles discussions by multiple scholars on Laozi's teachings, focusing on three key perspectives:

First, the author observes that while the Qin dynasty's notorious book burnings and scholar burials ostensibly venerated the wisdom of sages, their actions were more brutal than what even common villagers would commit. This wasn't a flaw in the sages' teachings themselves, but rather stemmed from misinterpretations that led to grave distortions. Just as neither Laozi's nor Xunzi's doctrines—despite their imperfections—would cause societal collapse, the real problem lay in later scholars' one-sided interpretations.

Lu Taoshan (also known as Nongshi), a Song dynasty scholar, lamented that since the Qin era, genuine inquiry into life's essence had gradually vanished, with the Dao-De (Virtue/Power) system remaining fragmented for too long. Many scholars unfortunately became trapped by narrow commentaries, losing the capacity to explore life's fundamental nature and forgetting the essence of ancient wisdom. He believed the dialogue between Guan Yinzi and Laozi in the *Daode Jing* contained profound subtleties capable of dispelling such obscurations. For this purpose, he specifically composed a commentary on the *Daode Jing* to recover its original meaning.

Mr. Yanping (Luo Congyan, styled Zhongsu) noted that Confucius neither praised nor criticized Laozi's works. Excessive praise might lead people to become engrossed in the notion of "harmonizing the light and merging with the dust" (blending with worldly conventions) and lose restraint, yet Laozi's assertion that "clarity and stillness set the standard for the world" was indeed commendable. Therefore, Confucius cautiously remarked that he "privately compared myself to our Lao Peng."

Finally, someone inquired of Mr. Guishan (Yang Shi, posthumously titled Wenjing) about the interpretation of "Lao Peng." At the time, there were two scholarly views: one held that "Lao Peng" referred to two individuals—Laozi and Pengzu—while the other maintained it denoted only Pengzu. This discussion reflects the meticulous textual analysis Song dynasty scholars applied to the transmission of Laozi's teachings.

之夀而謂之老彭也然老氏之書果述而不作信而好古乎

答曰老氏以自然爲宗謂之不作可也(見龜山集)龜山曰私意去

盡然後可以應世老子曰公乃王(見語錄)榮陽呂公希哲嘗大書治人事天莫若嗇於前坐壁上云修養

家以此爲養生要術然事事保謹常令有餘持身保家安邦

之道不越於此不止養生也(見呂氏雜錄)王子韶聖美言莊子不能窺測列子列子不能窺測老子榮陽

公答云莊子而不能窺測列子則孰能窺測列子列子而不

能窺測老子則孰能窺測老子故善窺測列子者莫如莊子

善窺測老子者莫如列子(見呂氏師友雜志)司馬温公與王介甫書云光昔者從介甫遊介甫於諸書無不

觀而特好孟子與老子之言今得君得位而行其道是宜先

其所美必不先其所不美也孟子曰仁義而已矣何必曰利

又曰爲民父母使民盻盻然將終𡻕勤動不得以養其父母

又稱貸而益之惡在其爲民父母也今介甫爲政首

**Interpretation**

Laozi (the founder of Daoism) took the natural Dao as his fundamental principle, so it's understandable that he didn't deliberately compose works. Master Guishan (Yang Shi of the Song Dynasty) once said: Only by completely eliminating selfish thoughts can one truly respond to worldly affairs. Laozi also stated: Only through impartiality can one become a true king.

Lü Gong of Rongyang (Lü Xizhe) inscribed the maxim "In governing people and serving Heaven, nothing surpasses frugality" in large characters as his personal motto. While practitioners regard this as an essential technique for nurturing life (yangsheng), its significance extends far beyond—maintaining prudence, moderation, and reserve is fundamental whether for self-cultivation, household management, or state governance.

Wang Zishao (styled Shengmei) remarked: Zhuangzi's attainment didn't reach Liezi's level, nor did Liezi attain Laozi's height. Lü Xizhe responded: If even Zhuangzi couldn't comprehend Liezi, then who could? If Liezi couldn't understand Laozi, then who possibly could? Therefore, Zhuangzi remains Liezi's truest interpreter, just as Liezi is Laozi's most authentic expositor.

Sima Guang (Duke Wen) wrote in his letter to Wang Anshi (Jiefu): When we associated in earlier years, I observed your extensive learning with particular admiration for Mencius and Laozi's teachings. Now that you implement new policies from high office, you should prioritize practicing their essential wisdom. Mencius emphasized "discuss only benevolence and righteousness—why mention profit?" while condemning those rulers who "as parents of the people, yet make them labor year-round without means to support their parents, even forcing them into debt—how can this be called parental governance?" Your current administration's primary measures...

建制置

條例司大講財利之事又命薛向行均輸法於江淮欲盡奪

商賈之利又分遣使者散靑苗錢於天下而收其息使人愁

痛父子不相見兄弟妻子離散此豈孟子之志乎老子曰天

下神器不可爲也爲者敗之執者失之又曰我無爲而民自

化我好靜而民自正我無事而民自富我無欲而民自樸又

曰治大國若烹小鮮今介甫爲政盡變更祖宗舊法先者後

之上者下之右者左之左者右之成者毁之矻矻焉窮日力

繼之以夜而不得息使上自朝廷下及田野無一人得襲故

而守常者紛紛擾擾莫安其居此豈老氏之志乎温公自號

迂叟常著書曰迂書内老釋一章云或問老釋有取乎迂叟

曰有或曰何取曰釋取其空老取其無爲自然又云學黃老

者以心如死灰形如槁木爲無爲迂叟以爲不然作無爲贊

治心以正保躬以靜進退有義得失有命守道在已成功則

天夫復何爲莫非自然(並見温公傳家集)李衞公德裕諫敬宗搜訪道士疏曰臣聞道之高者莫若廣成

**Interpretation**

This passage primarily critiques the economic policies of Wang Anshi's reforms during the Northern Song Dynasty, while invoking Laozi's and Sima Guang's perspectives to elucidate the Daoist political philosophy of "governing through non-action (Wuwei)."

The imperial court established a Bureau of Regulations to study fiscal policies and taxation, dispatching Xue Xiang to implement the "Equal Transportation System" (a government monopoly on commodity trade) in the Jianghuai region, attempting to completely strip merchants of their profits. Officials were also sent nationwide to distribute "Green Sprouts Loans" (government credit) and collect interest, plunging commoners into hardship and tearing families apart. The author questions: Is this the benevolent governance Mencius advocated?

Laozi stated: "The world is a sacred vessel that cannot be manipulated. Those who act upon it will fail; those who grasp it will lose." He further said: "When rulers refrain from unnecessary action, the people naturally transform; when rulers cherish tranquility, the people naturally correct themselves; when rulers avoid disturbance, the people naturally prosper; when rulers lack greed, the people naturally return to simplicity." Governing a great state is like cooking small fish (one shouldn't stir constantly). Yet Wang Anshi's administration completely overturned ancestral laws, creating chaos where priorities were reversed and hierarchies disordered, keeping the entire nation in constant upheaval where no one could live normally. Is this what Laozi intended?

Sima Guang (styled "Old Recluse") discussed Laozi's and Buddhist thought extensively in his *Writings of a Recluse*. He considered Buddhism's valuable insight to be "emptiness," while Daoism's was "non-action and naturalness (Wuwei Ziran)." Some believed practicing Huang-Lao techniques required making one's heart like dead ashes and body like withered wood to achieve non-action—a view Sima Guang rejected. He maintained that true natural non-action means: cultivating the mind with uprightness, maintaining the body with serenity, acting with proper timing, accepting gain and loss as destiny, upholding the Dao (Way) through personal commitment, and leaving success to heaven's will.

The passage concludes by mentioning Li Deyu (Duke of Wei) of the Tang Dynasty, who advised Emperor Jingzong against excessive searches for Daoist adepts, arguing that true masters of the Dao should transcend worldly affairs like Guangchengzi (the legendary immortal from Emperor Huangdi's era).

玄元人之聖者莫若軒皇孔子昔軒皇問廣成子理身之要

廣成子云無視無聽抱神以靜形將自正神將自淸無勞子

形無揺子精乃可長生又云得吾道者上爲皇下爲王玄元

語孔子云去子之驕氣與多慾多色與淫志是皆無益於子

之身吾所告子者是已故軒皇發謂天之歎孔子興猶龍之

感前聖於道不其至乎若使廣成玄元混迹而至語陛下之

道以臣度思無出於此(見李文饒集)香山白文公居易曰夫欲使人情儉樸時俗淸和莫先於體黃

老之道也其道在乎尙寛儉務儉素不眩聰察不役智能而

已蓋善用之者雖一邑一郡一國至於天下皆可以致淸靜

之理焉昔宓賤得之故不下堂而單父之民化汲黯得之故

不出閣而東海之政成曹參得之故獄市勿擾齊國大和漢

文得之故刑罰不用而天下大理其故無他淸靜之所致耳

(見白氏長慶集)

**Interpretation**

Among sages like Laozi (the Mysterious Origin) and Confucius, none surpasses the Yellow Emperor (Xuanyuan Huangdi). When the Yellow Emperor sought advice from Guangchengzi (a legendary immortal) on cultivating body and mind, Guangchengzi told him: Do not overuse your eyes to see or your ears to listen. Keep your spirit (Shen) inwardly guarded and your mind tranquil, and your body will naturally become upright while your heart-mind grows clear. Do not exhaust your body with labor, nor disturb your essence (Jing), vital energy (Qi), and spirit (Shen)—only then can you attain longevity. He further said: Those who comprehend my Dao can become sage rulers above and virtuous kings below. Laozi once told Confucius: You must rid yourself of arrogance, excessive desires, attachment to sensual pleasures, and overly ambitious aspirations—these are harmful and bring no benefit. This is the wisdom I impart to you. Thus, the Yellow Emperor later sighed, "The Dao of Heaven is unfathomable," while Confucius marveled, "Laozi is as profound as a dragon." Did the ancient sages not reach the pinnacle in their understanding of the great Dao? If Guangchengzi and Laozi were to appear before Your Majesty to expound the Dao, I believe their teachings would not go beyond these principles.

Bai Juyi (the Lay Buddhist of Fragrant Mountain) remarked: To foster simplicity in customs and social harmony, the best approach lies in practicing the Daoist teachings of the Yellow Emperor and Laozi. At its core, this philosophy emphasizes tolerance, frugality, and preserving one’s innate simplicity—eschewing displays of cleverness and avoiding excessive cunning. Those skilled in applying these principles, whether governing a county, a province, or the entire realm, can achieve the effects of effortless action (Wuwei). In the past, Mizijian (a disciple of Confucius) grasped this truth and transformed the people of Shanfu County without leaving his hall; Ji An (a renowned Han minister) mastered this essence and brought peace to Donghai Commandery without stepping beyond his gate; Cao Can (a Han chancellor) applied this method, refraining from interfering in lawsuits and markets, yet secured stability in Qi; Emperor Wen of Han adhered to this principle, governing the realm without harsh punishments yet achieving great order. There is no other reason for this—it is all the result of serene non-action (Wuwei).

東坡蘇文忠公軾奉詔撰上淸儲祥宫碑云臣謹按道家者流

本出於黃帝老子其道以淸靜無爲爲宗以虛明應物爲用

以慈儉不爭爲行合於易何思何慮論語仁者靜夀之說自

秦漢以來始用方士言乃有飛仙變化之術黃庭大洞之法

太上天眞木公金母之號天皇太乙紫微北極之祀下至於

丹藥奇技符錄小數皆歸於道家嘗竊論之黃帝老子之道

本也方士之言末也又蓋公堂記云曹參爲齊相聞膠西蓋

公善治黃老言使人請之用其言而齊大治其後以其所以

治齊者治天下天下至今稱賢焉吾爲膠西守知公之爲邦

人也求其墳墓子孫而不可得慨然懷之師其言想見其爲

人夫曹參爲漢宗臣而蓋公爲之師可謂盛矣而史不記其

所終豈非古之至人得道而不死者歟(並見本集)眉山唐庚子西曰世疑老子西遊以謂有慈有儉有不爲天下

先持是道以遊於世何所不容而猶有所去就邪是大不然

惟其無往而不容則雖蠻貊之邦行矣此所以爲老氏(見眉山集)張右史耒老子義曰夫人之生不殺之於袵席飲食之疾病則

**Interpretation**

When Su Shi was commissioned by the emperor to compose the "Stele Inscription for the Shangqing Chuxiang Palace," he noted: The Daoist school traces its origins to the Yellow Emperor (Huangdi) and Laozi. Their core philosophy takes serenity and non-action (Wuwei) as its fundamental tenet, embraces open-mindedness and harmony with all things as its practice, and upholds compassion, frugality, and non-contention as guiding principles. These ideas resonate with the Yi Jing's concept of "no excessive thought or worry" and the Analects' description of "the benevolent being tranquil and long-lived."

From the Qin and Han dynasties onward, the teachings of fangshi (esoteric practitioners) gradually became incorporated into Daoism, giving rise to techniques for celestial ascension, shape-shifting, and cultivation methods recorded in scriptures like the Huangting Jing and Dadong Jing. Deities such as the Most High Lord Lao (Taishang Laojun), the Wood Lord (Dongwanggong, King Father of the East), and the Metal Mother (Xiwangmu, Queen Mother of the West) emerged, along with worship of celestial rulers like Tianhuang, Taiyi, Ziwei, and Beiji. Later, even alchemical practices (Waidan) and minor talismanic arts (Fulu) were absorbed into the Daoist tradition.

Su Shi maintained that Huangdi and Laozi's teachings represented Daoism's essence, while fangshi techniques were merely peripheral branches. In his "Record of Master Gai's Hall," he further recounted: When Chancellor Cao Can governed the Qi state during the Han dynasty, he adopted the Huang-Lao statecraft taught by Master Gai of Jiaoxi, bringing great prosperity to Qi. Later applying the same methods to govern the empire, Cao achieved remarkable success. While serving in Jiaoxi, Su Shi searched in vain for Master Gai's tomb and descendants, lamenting how this sage—worthy of being Cao Can's teacher—left no recorded fate in histories, perhaps being a perfected one who attained the Dao and transcended death.

Tang Geng (style name Zixi), a scholar from Meishan, countered skeptics of Laozi's westward journey: Laozi advocated compassion, frugality, and not presuming precedence over all under heaven. Wandering the world with this great Dao (Daode), what place could reject him? The notion that Laozi made selective choices is mistaken. Precisely because he could dwell anywhere without obstruction—even among barbarian lands—reflects Laozi's true realm.

Zhang Lei observed in his "Exposition on Laozi's Meaning": Were human life not harmed by bedridden illnesses, dietary toxins, or medical errors, one could naturally live to a hundred years.

殺之盜賊刑戮者過半矣則人之於死實未嘗知畏也而世

之馭物者而欲物之畏不過示之以死亦惑矣故曰民不畏

死奈何以死懼之苟畏死邪則吾取爲奇者而殺之宜民之

不復爲奇也天下未嘗無刑而爲奇者不止則死之不足以

懼物也明矣故曰若使人畏死而爲奇者吾得執而殺之孰

敢也夫物不患無殺之者也萬物泯泯必歸於滅盡而後止

則常有司殺者殺矣竊司殺者之常理而移之以行其畏非

徒不足以懼物而亦有所不及者也故曰常有司殺者殺夫

代有司殺是代大匠斵希有不傷其手矣然則操政刑死生

之柄驅一世之民使從之殆非也又曰惟其無私邪故能成

其私而惟私之求則天下去之夫惟公以得天下之情者天

下之所歸也天下之所歸而有不能得其所欲者乎又送固

始山人張堅序曰至柔教余以養性之妙其言曰大道甚簡

守心而已守心無他守一而已靜一之極則玄通四達眞氣

應之茲非意之所能測言之所能盡惟得者知之眞氣來降

則百疾除而永年矣老子曰虛其心實其腹弱其志强其骨

心虛志弱而腹自實骨自强矣是道也智者得之而爲止觀

司馬子微得之而爲坐忘皆一道也此皆眞人修身之要而

今人忽之乃苦其形骸妄想

**Interpretation**

This passage conveys two main ideas: contemplation on the deterrent effect of punishment, and essential Daoist cultivation techniques for self-refinement.

First, regarding punishment. The text observes that even when capital punishment is used against thieves, more than half of people still commit crimes, demonstrating that humans don't truly fear death. Rulers who attempt to intimidate people with death are fundamentally misguided. If people genuinely feared death, executing the ringleaders would deter others from wrongdoing. Yet in reality, despite persistent enforcement of punishments, troublemakers never cease, proving death cannot truly restrain human behavior. The text offers an analogy: all things must eventually perish—this is the natural order (the "executioner" refers to natural law). When rulers forcibly usurp nature's role in executing life, it's like an amateur trying to replace a master carpenter—they'll likely injure their own hand.

The second part discusses self-cultivation. Zhang Jian, the mountain hermit of Gushi, taught this essential principle: The great Dao (the Way) is profoundly simple—the key lies in maintaining one's fundamental mind. The method for this is focused concentration on unity (referring to single-minded focus on the Dao's origin). When stillness reaches its ultimate state, one becomes interconnected with heaven and earth, and genuine primordial Qi (vital energy) naturally descends. This cannot be understood through intellectual reasoning or fully expressed in words—only those who personally experience it can truly know. When authentic Qi arrives, all ailments vanish, and longevity follows naturally. Laozi said, "Empty the mind, fill the abdomen; weaken the will, strengthen the bones," meaning to maintain mental clarity, replenish the Dantian (energy center), cultivate flexible determination, and fortify physical vitality. Wise men who comprehend this principle practice "cessation and contemplation" (a Buddhist meditation method), while Sima Zian (a Tang dynasty Daoist) practiced "sitting in forgetfulness" (the Daoist meditation technique of self-oblivion)—yet both approaches embody the same truth. These were the essential self-cultivation methods of ancient perfected beings. Sadly, modern people neglect these principles, needlessly tormenting their bodies while vainly fantasizing about immortality.

變怪吞餌金石去道遠矣(見本集)王無咎補之嘗解老子道經四章今取其二篇其一云聖人處

無爲之事行不言之教彼無心於爲與言者順萬物性命之

理而已則萬物之作也吾亦與之作而不辭萬物之生也吾

亦與之生而不有萬物之爲也吾亦與之爲而不恃萬物之成也吾亦與之成而不居蓋其作也生也爲也成也皆順性

命自然之理因物與時而非我也則吾亦何必辭何必有何

必恃何必居故曰萬物並作而不辭生而不有爲而不恃功

成而不居作然後生生然後爲爲然後成此其序也又云老

子專惡夫多言何也老氏之所明者道也道常無言然而常

有言者迫不得已也以其迫不得已也故可以言以其常無

言也故言之少者去道爲猶近而言之多者去道爲猶遠故

專惡夫多言也(見本集)淮海秦觀曰班固贊司馬遷以爲是非頗謬於聖人論大道則

先黃老而後六經孰謂

**Interpretation**

This passage explains that those who cultivate the Dao should follow the principles of nature, rather than deliberately pursuing strange practices or ingesting mineral-based elixirs (referring to Daoist Waidan external alchemy), as such actions would only distance them from the true Dao.

Wang Wujiu (style name Buzhi) once commented on Chapter 4 of the Laozi, noting: The sage handles affairs with an attitude of Wuwei (non-action) and teaches through "wordless instruction." They neither act deliberately nor preach intentionally, but simply follow the natural patterns inherent in all things. When all beings arise, the sage arises with them without refusal; when all beings grow, the sage grows with them without possession; when all beings act, the sage acts with them without self-importance; when all beings achieve, the sage achieves with them without claiming merit. For all this occurs by conforming to natural laws, unfolding spontaneously with the development of circumstances and changes in timing—none of it is forced. Why then should the sage refuse, possess, assert, or claim merit? As the Laozi states: "All things arise together without refusal, grow without possession, act without self-importance, and achieve without claiming merit"—this precisely captures the principle.

The commentary then explains why Laozi particularly opposes excessive speech: because what Laozi elucidates is the Dao, and the Dao itself is wordless. The reason speech is used at all is out of necessity. Precisely because the Dao is fundamentally silent, those who speak less remain closer to it, while those who speak more drift further away.

Finally, it cites Qin Guan (literary name Huaihai): Ban Gu, in the Book of Han, criticized Sima Qian, saying his judgments of right and wrong contradicted those of the sages, and that when discussing the great Dao, he placed the teachings of the Yellow Emperor and Laozi before the Six Classics.

遷之高才博洽而至於是乎以臣觀

之不然彼實有見而發耳孟子曰仁者人也合而言之道也

楊子亦曰道以導之德以得之仁以人之義以宜之禮以體

之天也合則渾離則散蓋道德者仁義禮之大全而仁義禮

者道德之一偏黃老之學貴合而賤離故以道爲本六經之

教於渾者略於散者詳故以仁義禮爲用遷之論大道也先

黃老而後六經豈非有見於此而發哉又曰史稱崔浩自比

張良謂稽古過之以臣觀之浩曾不及荀賈何敢望子房乎

夫以其精治身以緒餘治天下功成事遂奉身而退道家之

流也觀天文察時變以輔人事明於末而不知本陰陽家之

流也子房始遊下邳受書於圯上老人終曰願棄人間事從

赤松遊則其術蓋出於道家也浩精於術數之學其言熒惑

之入秦彗星之滅晉與夫兔出後宫姚興獻女之事尤異及

黜莊老乃以爲矯誣之言則其術蓋出於陰陽而已此其所

以不同也(並見淮海集)田諫議錫尺木賛序曰龍之興也階於木也君之起也人爲階

也抑有無位之聖韜光之賢以名迹相參以材能相濟如邱

明之才乃仲尼之尺木乎故能發揮春秋以垂聲教也尹喜

之賢乃老聃之尺木乎故能詢謀道德以貽後世也(見咸平集)

**Interpretation**

This passage examines the relationship between several historical figures and Daoist thought. While Sima Qian (Qian) possessed vast erudition, the author argues his assessments were never arbitrary but always substantiated. Mencius stated "Humaneness is humanity; combined they constitute the Dao," while Yang Zhu (Yangzi) maintained that the Dao guides, De (Virtue) is attained, humaneness treats others, righteousness suits circumstances, and ritual manifests form—all being expressions of heavenly Dao. United, they form the complete Dao; divided, they dissipate. The Dao and De encompass the totality of humaneness, righteousness and ritual, whereas these latter represent only partial aspects of Dao-De.

The Huang-Lao school (teachings of the Yellow Emperor and Laozi) valued holistic unity over fragmentation, thus taking the Dao as fundamental. The Six Classics (Book of Songs, Documents, Rites, Music, Changes, and Spring and Autumn Annals) provided terse instruction about wholeness but detailed explanations about parts, hence prioritizing humaneness, righteousness and ritual as practical applications. When Sima Qian discussed the Great Dao, placing Huang-Lao before the Six Classics, he precisely recognized this distinction.

The author then evaluates Cui Hao, whom historical records claim compared himself to Zhang Liang (styled Zifang). The author contends Cui Hao couldn't match even Xunzi or Jia Yi, let alone Zhang Liang. Zhang Liang mastered self-cultivation, governing the world with surplus energy before withdrawing after accomplishing his task—clearly belonging to the Daoist lineage. He observed celestial phenomena and discerned temporal shifts to assist human affairs, understanding manifestations without grasping their roots—characteristics of the Yin-Yang school. Zhang Liang initially wandered in Xiapi, received military texts from the old man on the bridge, and ultimately declared his intention to abandon worldly affairs to follow the immortal Chisongzi—all demonstrating his learning derived from Daoism.

Cui Hao excelled in divination techniques (shushu), discussing portents like Mars entering Qin or comets extinguishing Jin, along with strange occurrences such as hares appearing in the imperial harem or Yao Xing presenting women. Yet later he disparaged Zhuangzi and Laozi as purveyors of empty talk, revealing his knowledge stemmed solely from the Yin-Yang tradition—completely unlike Zhang Liang.

Finally, citing Tian Xi's "Preface to the Ruler of Dragons Praise," the passage notes: A dragon's ascent requires wood for leverage; a ruler's rise needs talent as his stepping-stone. The world still harbors sages without position and worthies concealing their abilities—they corroborate each other through reputation and deeds, supporting one another with their talents. Was not Zuo Qiuming's (Qiuming) literary brilliance Confucius's (Zhongni) "measuring ruler"? Thus he could elucidate the Spring and Autumn Annals to propagate teachings. Was not Yin Xi (the border official who encountered Laozi) Lao Dan's "measuring ruler"? Thus he could explore Dao-De to transmit them to posterity.

范忠文公鎭曰老子著書二篇言先天至陰陽相與之際文簡

而理備(見蜀公集)晁文元公廻曰古今名賢多好讀老莊之書以其無爲無事之

中有至美至樂之理也又曰老子曰五色令人目盲五音令

人耳聾五味令人口爽雖聖人矯激太過而善利之心極於

深切人能不耽耳目之娛不縱口腹之美勿問有得決定無

失(並見昭德新編)又曰老子曰知常曰明處世之人止知晝夜是常

而人如故出世之人以生死爲晝夜又知生死是常而性如

故是以明心坦然視生死而無怖(見耄智餘書)旴江李泰伯曰韓退之有言老者曰孔子吾師之弟子也佛者

曰孔子吾師之弟子也爲孔子者習聞其說樂其誕而自小

也亦曰吾師亦嘗云爾佛之說吾不能詳曾子問老子列傳

則有問禮之事史未足盡信禮記經之屬也亦有妄乎(見退居類藳)嵩生景迃生晁說之曰伏羲文王周公賛易之後惟老氏得易

之變通屈伸知柔而貴虛務應而不得殷勤以立言幸乎此

書之存也又曰王弼注老子道德經一篇眞得老子之學歟

蓋嚴君平指歸之流也其言仁義與禮不能自用必待道以

用之天地萬物各得其一豈特有功於老子哉凡百學者蓋

**Interpretation**

Fan Zhongyan (posthumously titled Loyal and Cultured) wrote in the Collected Works of Duke Shu that Laozi's two-part Dao De Jing (Classic of the Way and Virtue) elucidates the mystery of Yin-Yang interaction before the formation of the cosmos. Though concise in wording, its principles are complete.

Chao Buzhi (posthumously titled Literary Origin) observed that since ancient times, many sages have delighted in studying the works of Laozi and Zhuangzi because their philosophy of "governing through Wuwei (non-action)" contains the highest form of beauty and joy. He particularly referenced Laozi's teaching that "the five colors blind the eyes, the five tones deafen the ears, and the five flavors dull the palate," noting that while the sage's words may seem extreme, their intention to guide people toward goodness is profoundly earnest. If one can avoid indulgence in sensual pleasures and gluttony, even without seeking reward, they will naturally avoid transgressions (from New Compilation of Illustrious Virtue).

Chao further explained Laozi's statement that "understanding the eternal law is enlightenment." Ordinary people only recognize the alternation of day and night as constant, while cultivators view life and death as day and night, understanding both as natural manifestations of the Dao. Thus they maintain serene minds, facing mortality without fear (from Wisdom in Advanced Age).

Li Gou (courtesy name Taibo) cited Han Yu's remark: "Daoists claim Confucius was our master's disciple, and Buddhists say the same. Yet students of Confucianism, credulously accepting these claims, disparage their own patriarch." Setting aside Buddhism, while the Records of the Grand Historian mentions Zengzi learning rituals from Laozi, historical accounts aren't infallible. As for the Book of Rites being canonical—can we assume it contains no errors? (from Drafts from Retirement).

Chao Yuezhi (sobriquet Jingyusheng) argued that after Fuxi, King Wen, and the Duke of Zhou interpreted the Yi Jing (Classic of Changes), only Laozi truly grasped its essence of adaptability, appreciating the value of softness and the importance of emptiness and stillness. He painstakingly recorded these principles in writing, and fortunately, this classic survived. Chao particularly praised Wang Bi's Commentary on Laozi's Dao De Jing as genuinely comprehending Laozi's thought, belonging to the interpretive lineage of Yan Junping's Laozi's Purpose. Its discussions on how benevolence, righteousness, and ritual cannot stand alone but must be applied through the Dao, along with its vision of all things finding their proper place in heaven and earth, contribute not only to understanding Laozi but enlighten all scholars.

不可不知乎此也又曰弼知佳兵者不祥之器至於戰勝以

喪禮處之非老子之言乃不知常善救人故無棄人常善救

物故無棄物獨得諸河上公而古本無有也賴傅奕能辨之

爾(見本集)李昭玘曰鬼谷韓非之書推本道德時近玄旨二子安足知老

子哉其言適中爾(見樂靜先生集)西臺畢仲游曰老子曰失道而後德失德而後仁失仁而後禮

禮者道之華而亂之首也夫謂禮爲道之華而亂之首則某

所未學然禮者固仁義之次而道德之下也後人不能以禮

治天下一寓之於法則法者又禮之次而仁義之下也(見

**Interpretation**

This passage compiles various scholars' commentaries and discussions on the *Daode Jing*. It first mentions Wang Bi (a renowned Neo-Daoist scholar of the Wei-Jin period) interpreting the phrase "arms are instruments of ill omen" to mean that victorious warfare should be treated with funeral rites. However, the author points out this isn't Laozi's original wording but derives from the commentary by Heshang Gong (a Han dynasty recluse who annotated *Laozi*), as ancient versions of the text lack this phrase—a distinction preserved thanks to Tang scholar Fu Yi's textual discernment.

Li Zhaoqi (a Song dynasty scholar) observes that while works by Guiguzi and Han Feizi probe the origins of Dao (the Way) and De (Virtue/Power), approaching profound mysteries, these thinkers didn't truly grasp Laozi's thought. Their insights merely stumbled upon partial truths by coincidence.

Bi Zhongyou (a Song official) cites Laozi's view: "When Dao (the Way) is lost, there is De (Virtue); when De is lost, there is humaneness; when humaneness is lost, there is ritual." He argues ritual constitutes the superficial ornamentation of morality, becoming instead a source of chaos. Though ritual ranks below humaneness and righteousness, it remains subordinate to Dao and De. Later generations, failing to govern through ritual, resorted to laws—an even lower tier beneath the hierarchy of humaneness and righteousness. This discussion traces Laozi's depiction of moral degeneration: the gradual decline from the primal purity of Dao to the need for external regulations (rituals and laws) to constrain human nature.

本集)

## Vol. 2

眉山蘇籕頴濱文定公之孫也記其遺言曰公爲籕講老子數

篇曰高於孟子二三等矣又曰言至道無如五千文又曰公

老年作詩云近存八十一章注從道老聃門下人蓋老而所

造益妙錄錄者莫測矣(並見遺言)唐高宗乾封元年二月已未次亳州幸老君廟追號曰太上玄

元皇帝玄宗天寶二年正月景辰追號玄元皇帝爲大聖祖聖祖父周

上御史大夫敬曰先天太上皇母益夀氏號先天太后又天

寶十四載十月甲午頒御注老子并議疏於天下又天寶中

加號老子玄通道德經世不稱之(見新唐書藝文志)大中祥符六年

八月庚午詔加老君號曰太上老君混元上德皇帝次年春

正月壬寅上發東京丙午至眞源縣戊申命宰臣王旦奉上

册寶己酉朝謁太淸宫(見九廟通略)景德二年二月國子監直講

孫奭言諸子之書老莊稱首其道淸虛以自守卑弱以自持

逍遥無爲養生濟物皆聖人南面之術也故先儒論撰以次

諸經唐陸德明撰經典釋文三十卷內老子釋文三卷今諸

經及老子釋文共二十七卷並已雕印頒行惟闕莊子釋文

三卷欲

**Interpretation**

Su You of Meishan, grandson of Duke Wending (Su Zhe), recorded his grandfather's final teachings. Su Zhe once explained several chapters of the Laozi (Daode Jing) to Su You, remarking: "Laozi's philosophical vision surpasses Mencius by two or three levels." He further stated: "Among all writings expounding the supreme truth, none surpass these five thousand characters of the Daode Jing (Classic of the Way and Virtue)." In his later years, he composed a self-reflective poem: "Recently completed commentaries on all eighty-one chapters, now counted among Lao Dan's disciples." This reveals how his late-life comprehension of the Daode Jing had attained such profundity that ordinary minds could scarcely fathom it.

In the second month of 666 CE (Qianfeng 1st year of Emperor Gaozong's reign), the Tang emperor visited the Laozi Temple in Bozhou, posthumously honoring Laozi as "Supreme Mysterious Primordial Emperor." In the first month of 743 CE (Tianbao 2nd year of Emperor Xuanzong), the title was elevated to "Great Sagely Ancestor Mysterious Primordial Emperor," with his father honored as "Precelestial Supreme Emperor" and mother Yishou Shi as "Precelestial Empress." In the tenth month of 755 CE (Tianbao 14th year), Emperor Xuanzong promulgated his personal commentary and sub-commentary on the Laozi throughout the empire. During the Tianbao era, the Daode Jing was additionally honored as "Mystically Penetrating Classic of the Way and Virtue," though this designation saw little subsequent usage.

In the eighth month of 1013 CE (Dazhong Xiangfu 6th year of Emperor Zhenzong's reign), an imperial decree honored Laozi as "Supreme Lao Jun Hunyuan Shangde Emperor." The following first month, Emperor Zhenzong journeyed from the Eastern Capital to personally visit the Taiqing Palace in Zhenyuan County, commanding Chancellor Wang Dan to present ceremonial tablets and treasures during the grand court audience ritual.

In the second month of 1005 CE (Jingde 2nd year), Sun Shi, Lecturer of the National University, memorialized: Among the Hundred Schools of Thought, the works of Laozi and Zhuangzi hold paramount importance. Their teachings advocate cultivating the self through clarity and stillness (qingjing) and emptiness (xu), maintaining one's nature through humility and pliancy, while benefiting the world through carefree non-action (wuwei) — all essential methods for imperial governance. Thus throughout history Confucian scholars have studied them alongside the Confucian classics. When Lu Deming of the Tang Dynasty compiled the thirty-volume Jingdian Shiwen (Exegesis of Classics), three volumes were devoted to Laozi Shiwen. Presently, commentaries on all classics including the Laozi Shiwen totaling twenty-seven volumes have been carved and promulgated, with only the three volumes of Zhuangzi Shiwen remaining unpublished.

請依道德經例差官校定雕印詔可(見國朝會要)天禧三

年天書降乾祐山中知兗州孫奭上疏曰朱能小人妄言符

瑞昔唐明皇得靈寶上淸護國經寶券皆王鉷田同秀等所

爲夫老君聖人降語固宜不妄而唐自安史亂離兩都盪覆

豈天下太平乎明皇僅得歸闕復爲輔國刧遷卒以餒死豈

聖夀無疆長生久視乎明皇旣惑左道卽紊政經民心用離

變起倉卒願陛下鑒明皇之召禍庶幾災害不生禍亂不作

也(見九朝通略)方臘亂浙右聲揺京師中書舍人程振謂太宰王黼言宜乘此

時言天下獘事庶幾少革以順人心黼不悅時振兼太子舍

人至東宫太子問焉振曰周公作鴟鴞之詩孔子以爲知道

其言不過迨天之未陰雨綢繆牖戸而已老子亦曰爲之於

未有治之於未亂蓋老氏與孔子合者如此今不固根本於

無事之時而徒爭目前之功非二聖人意也(見九朝通略并東都事略本傳)

**Interpretation**

This passage records two historical anecdotes, both illustrating the governing principles found in the *Daode Jing* (Classic of the Way and Virtue):

The first incident occurred in the third year of the Tianxi era (1019 CE) during the Song dynasty, when officials reported discovering "celestial writings" on Qianyou Mountain. Sun Shi, the prefect of Yanzhou, submitted a memorial of remonstrance citing Emperor Xuanzong of Tang as an example: the Tang emperor had obtained what were claimed to be the *Lingbao Shangqing Huguo Jing* (Numinous Treasure Supreme Clarity Scripture for Protecting the State) and precious talismans, which were actually forgeries by Wang Hong, Tian Tongxiu, and others. Sun Shi pointed out that if Lord Lao (Taishang Laojun, the supreme Daoist deity) had truly descended to deliver a message, it would never be false. Yet later, the An Lushan Rebellion broke out, both capitals fell—where was the promised "great peace under heaven"? Though Emperor Xuanzong eventually returned to Chang'an, he was forced by Li Fuguo to relocate palaces and ultimately starved to death—how could this be called "boundless sacred longevity and eternal vision"? This demonstrated how the emperor's superstition in heterodox practices led to political chaos, loss of popular support, and sudden calamity. Sun Shi urged the ruler to learn from Emperor Xuanzong's mistakes.

The second incident occurred during Fang La's rebellion in western Zhejiang, which shook the capital. Secretariat Drafter Cheng Zhen told Chancellor Wang Fu they should seize this opportunity to address government abuses and implement reforms to align with popular sentiment. Wang Fu took offense. As Cheng Zhen concurrently served as tutor to the crown prince, the heir apparent asked for his view. Cheng Zhen cited a classical reference: when the Duke of Zhou wrote the "Owl" poem, Confucius recognized it as embodying governance principles—the verses simply advised repairing doors and windows before the rain came. Laozi similarly said, "Deal with things before they arise; bring order before confusion begins." This showed the shared governing philosophy between Laozi and Confucius. To focus on immediate gains while neglecting foundational consolidation during peacetime, he argued, betrayed the sages' true intent.

Both stories exemplify the Daoist political wisdom of "preventing trouble before it arises," emphasizing the need for precautionary measures during times of stability rather than makeshift remedies after chaos erupts.

李忠定公綱政和六年時爲比部員外郞因奏對乞解易劄子

略曰恭惟陛下天縱睿智輔之以緝熙光明之學體元用妙

該極象數萬幾之暇訓釋老莊之書以開悟天下之學者辭

旨高妙足以發難言之意而道德性命之理燦如也夫易無

思也無爲也寂然不動感而遂通天下之故實與老莊之書

相爲終始臣愚伏望斷自宸衷爲之訓釋以通神明之德以

發乾坤之藴又題李伯時畫老子出關圖詩云請說常無眾

妙門當時關尹意何勤靑牛西去連沙漠紫氣東來見瑞氛

妙用不離三十輻至言都在五千文世人不解宗慈儉只欲

長生躡白雲(並見梁谿集)伊川先生程頤曰道家之說更没可闢唯釋氏之說衍蔓迷溺

至深又曰莊生形容道體之語儘有好處老氏谷神不死一

章最佳(並見程氏遺書)胡文定公安國曰老氏五千言如我無事我好靜我有三寶之

說亦皆至論也(見語錄)谿堂謝逸夀亭記曰孔子所謂仁者夀老子所謂死而不亡者

夀釋氏所謂無量夀三聖人者其言雖異其意則同蓋仁者

盡性盡性則死而不亡死而不亡則其夀豈有量哉彼徒見

髮毛爪齒歸於地涕唾津液歸於水暖氣歸火動轉歸風而

以爲其人眞死矣然不知湛然常存未嘗死也(見谿堂集)

**Interpretation**

Li Gang (posthumously titled Duke Zhongding), while serving as Vice Director of the Bureau of Evaluation during Emperor Huizong's Zhenghe era (1116), submitted a memorial requesting imperial permission to annotate the Book of Changes (Yijing). In his petition, he wrote: "Your Majesty, endowed with celestial wisdom and diligently cultivating sagely learning, profoundly comprehends the mysteries of heaven and earth. Amidst managing myriad state affairs, you personally annotated the Laozi and Zhuangzi, using sublime language to elucidate their subtle principles, thereby illuminating the doctrines of Dao (the Way), De (Virtue), and the nature of life. The Book of Changes advocates thoughtless non-action (Wuwei) and tranquil resonance - this fundamentally aligns with Lao-Zhuang philosophy. Humbly beseeching Your Majesty to continue expounding these classics to reveal heaven and earth's profound secrets."

Li Gang also composed a poem for Li Gonglin's (courtesy name Boshi) painting "Laozi Departing the Pass": "The state of 'constant nothingness' (referring to Dao's formless nature) Laozi described is the mysterious gate - why did Guardian Yin (Yin Xi of Hangu Pass) so earnestly invite him? We only see the blue ox vanishing westward into desert sands, while purple vapors (auspicious qi) arrive from the east. The Dao's marvelous function resembles thirty spokes converging in a wheel's hub (metaphor for Dao's formless yet infinite efficacy), its ultimate truth fully contained in the Five Thousand Character Classic (Daodejing). Alas, people fail to understand compassion and frugality as fundamental, vainly dreaming of treading clouds to attain immortality."

Neo-Confucian scholar Cheng Yi (known as Master Yichuan) remarked: "Daoist teachings offer little to criticize, unlike Buddhism's overly complex and misleading theories. Zhuangzi's descriptions of Dao's essence are exquisitely phrased, while Laozi's chapter on 'the valley spirit never dying' (Chapter 6 concerning the eternal feminine) represents the Daodejing's finest passage."

Scholar Hu Anguo (posthumously titled Wending) observed: "The Daodejing's assertions - 'I practice non-action and the people transform themselves,' 'clarity and stillness rectify the world,' and 'I possess three treasures (compassion, frugality, and not daring to lead the world)' - all represent supremely enlightened insights."

Xie Yi wrote in his "Record of Longevity Pavilion": "Confucius spoke of benevolent persons attaining longevity, Laozi taught that while the physical body perishes, the indestructible spirit constitutes true longevity, and Buddhists speak of immeasurable lifespan - though the three sages' expressions differ, their essence coincides. For benevolent persons who fully realize their innate nature, the spirit becomes eternally deathless. Ordinary people see hair returning to earth, bodily fluids becoming water, warmth dispersing as fire, and breath transforming into wind (Buddhism's four elements theory), mistakenly believing in actual death - yet the true nature remains perpetually serene and enduring."

道鄕鄒忠公浩曰玄牝之門取諸吾身則鼻也鼻者息之所由

以出入綿綿若存用之不勤則其息深矣孫叔敖鼻間栩栩

然是已莊子曰眞人之息以踵眾人之息以喉屈服者其嗌

言若哇其嗜慾深者其天機淺素問曰非出入則無以生長

壯老已非升降則無以生長化收藏升降出入無器不有四

者之有而貴常守知此然後知谷神之所以不死又曰虛其

心則腹自實弱其志則骨自强(並見道鄕集)康節先生邵雍曰皇帝王伯者易之體也意言象數者易之用

也三皇同意而異化五帝同言而異教三王同象而異觀五

伯同數而異率同意而異化者必以道以道化民者民亦以

道歸之故尙自然夫自然者無爲無有之謂也無爲者非不

爲也不固爲者也故能廣無有者非不有也不固有者也故

能大廣大悉備而不固爲固有者其惟三皇乎是故知能以

道化天下者天下亦以道歸焉所以有言曰我無爲而民自

化我無事而民自富我好靜而民自正我無欲而民自樸其

斯之謂歟(見本集觀物篇)邵伯温曰康節先公以老子爲知易之體以孟子爲知易之用

論文中子謂佛爲西方之聖人不以爲過(見邵氏聞見錄)東坡書上淸宮碑云道家者流本於黃帝老子其道以淸靜無

**Interpretation**

Zou Hao (Daoist Master Zou Zhonggong) explains that the "Gate of the Mysterious Feminine" corresponds to the nose in the human body. The nose serves as the passage for breath, where Qi (vital energy) enters and exits. The phrase "continuous as if existing, used without exhaustion" refers to a state of deep, prolonged breathing—like that of Sun Shu'ao, who breathed with natural ease. Zhuangzi once remarked: those who have attained the Dao breathe all the way to their heels, while ordinary people breathe only as far as their throats. Those enslaved by desires emit discordant sounds in their throats when speaking; the deeper their desires, the shallower their innate spiritual clarity. The *Suwen* also states: without breathing, there is no growth of life; without the rise and fall of Qi, there is no life activity. These four movements—rising, falling, entering, and exiting—are present in all living beings. Only by understanding this principle can one grasp the mystery of "the valley spirit never dying." It further says: when the mind is empty and tranquil, the Dantian (energy center) naturally becomes full; when the will is pliant, the bones and muscles naturally grow strong.

Shao Yong (Master Kangjie) believed that the historical periods of the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors, as well as the Three Kings and Five Hegemons, reflect different manifestations of the *Book of Changes*. Although the Three Sovereigns shared the same governance philosophy, their methods of teaching differed. To teach the people with the Dao is to receive the Dao in return—this is what it means to revere nature. Nature here does not mean doing nothing, but rather not forcing anything; it does not mean possessing nothing, but rather not clinging to anything. The era of the Three Sovereigns achieved this expansive and inclusive state. Thus, the *Daodejing* says: "I practice Wuwei (non-action), and the people transform themselves; I remain free of desires, and the people become simple of their own accord."

Shao Bowen records that Master Kangjie regarded Laozi as deeply versed in the essence of the *Book of Changes*, while Mencius excelled in its practical application. He also remarked that Wang Tong (Master Wenzhong) was not exaggerating when he called the Buddha a sage of the West.

Su Shi wrote in his *Stele of the Shangqing Palace*: Daoist thought originates from the Yellow Emperor and Laozi, and its core teaching lies in clarity, stillness, and Wuwei (non-action).

爲爲宗以虛明應物爲用以慈儉不爭爲行合於周易何思

何慮論語仁者靜夀之說如是而已謝顯道親見程伊川誦

此數語以爲古今論仁最有妙理(見邵博聞見後錄謝氏語錄亦載)西塘鄭俠曰俠聞之老子曰知足不辱知止不殆易曰亢之爲

言也知進而不知退知存而不知亡知得而不知喪知進退

存亡而不失其正者其惟聖人乎然則進退存亡得喪之理

其不一致乎何其知退知亡知足知止之難而聖人丁甯讃

歎之深乎曰是皆一也進退有道則進不易而退不難存亡

有道則存不喜而亡不憂進退存亡一歸於道時止則止時

行則行孰不一致哉又曰上士聞道勤而行之中士聞道若

存若亡下士聞道大笑之不笑不足以爲道又曰惟道大故

似不肖若肖久矣其細也夫肖也者以所養者小故也俗之

所養無非小是以大者爲不肖然則欲爲道正得俗之所謂

不肖者而俗之所不以爲不肖是皆未足與語夫道又曰道

大而物小人之營營而卒乎小者累於物也元者善之長而

至於大之謂也至而不知其爲大則同乎道而與世俗不相

似故天下皆謂我道大似不肖蓋眾方察察髮較而錐競我

獨悶悶以天下爲不足爲者宜乎其不相似故能成其大大

而有之其去世俗

**Interpretation**

Laozi believed the key to cultivating the Dao (the Way) lies in responding to the external world with a mind as clear and still as empty space (xuming yingwu), while upholding compassion, frugality, and non-contention as behavioral principles. This resonates with the state of "no excessive deliberation" (hesi helv) described in the Zhouyi (Book of Changes) and aligns with the Confucian Analects' teaching that "the benevolent remain tranquil"—a path to self-cultivation and longevity. Xie Xiandao once heard Cheng Yi (Cheng Yichuan) recite these very words, considering them the most profound interpretation of "benevolence" across all ages.

Zheng Xia (Master Xitang) understood Laozi's wisdom this way: "Knowing contentment prevents disgrace; understanding limits avoids danger" (zhi zu bu ru, zhi zhi bu dai). The Yijing (Book of Changes) similarly warns that excessive pursuit of high status leads to regret. Ordinary people often know only advancement, not retreat, focusing solely on gain without considering loss. Only sages maintain the balance between advancing and withdrawing, surviving and perishing, while steadfastly upholding the true path. These principles share the same essence—when following the great Dao, one neither becomes arrogant in success nor struggles in retreat; neither exults in survival nor grieves over demise. All actions flow with natural law, moving when appropriate and stopping when necessary.

Laozi also described three levels of awakening to the Dao: Those of superior capacity practice diligently upon hearing it; those of middling capacity waver between belief and doubt; while those of inferior capacity mock it—yet if the Dao weren't mocked, it wouldn't be the true Dao. For the vastness of the Dao often appears incompatible with worldly norms (si bu xiao). People habitually pursue trivialities, mistaking superficiality for normality while dismissing the true Dao as unconventional. Paradoxically, genuine cultivation requires transcending worldly perspectives—when others deem you "unconventional," you may be nearing the Dao. People bustle about yet remain insignificant because they're shackled by material concerns. The true Dao is supremely good and boundless, reaching ultimate greatness without self-importance, thus fundamentally differing from worldly standards. When everyone declares my cultivated path "too vast to resemble anything," it precisely signifies my transcendence beyond petty calculations. This very "unconventionality" forms the foundation of boundless achievement—attaining such a state naturally liberates one from worldly constraints.

不能以寸矣故卒之不肖下士聞之笑而

後庶幾夫道不笑則不足以爲道也又曰老子曰水善利萬

物又不爭處眾人之所惡故幾於道然則汨之隨變則臭腐

濁穢不可以濯足亦其自取不幾於惡乎思復性者以是爲

鑒知夫淸且明者自我性而濁且亂者亦自我之有以來之

也去其汨且惑者而淸明在躬然後揚波淈泥與之偕而莫

吾能化也以其莫吾能化彼將寖寖以明潔而莫之知予力

焉又曰水之性淸以其出於土也而土汨之是以如是其濁

也徐而淸之可以鑒毛髮人之識明以其出於物也而物惑

之是以如是其亂也徐而明之可以燭日月夫曏也淸汨之

則濁濁而徐之復淸曏也明惑之則亂亂而徐之復明也是

濁且亂者常自外加我而淸且明者在我而已經曰天地相

合以降甘露人莫之令而自均夫雨露之在天地細故也而

猶平均如是況於人之靈識乎又曰三代而上無有孔孟老

莊釋氏之教遇帝而帝遇王而王而衰周以降乃有三氏之

教其實憂世之溺而致所以濟之者云耳又嘗自作大慶居

士序曰居士本儒學以孔氏爲宗得老氏之說以明(以上並見西塘

集)

**Interpretation**

This passage uses the properties of water as a metaphor for human nature, expounding the Daoist idea of returning to one’s original authenticity. Water is originally clear and pure, but when stirred up by mud it becomes turbid; human innate spiritual nature is originally clear and bright, but when deluded by external things it falls into confusion. Yet turbid water, if left still, will become clear again, and a disturbed mind, through cultivation, can also restore its brightness.

The key is that turbidity and confusion often come from external interference, while clarity and brightness already exist within our nature. Just as heaven and earth naturally send down rain and dew to nourish the myriad things, human spiritual awareness (innate wisdom) also inherently possesses the capacity for self-regulation.

Reviewing history, the author points out that before the Three Dynasties of Xia, Shang, and Zhou, although there were no teachings from sages such as Confucius, Mencius, Laozi, and Zhuangzi, people could still accord with the Heavenly Dao. Only when the Zhou declined did the doctrines of the Hundred Schools of Thought arise; in fact, their founders established these teachings to save people because they saw the world sunk in delusion and lostness. Finally, the author mentions that although he himself takes Confucius’s Confucian teachings as his foundation, through the thought of the Daoist Laozi he has come to understand more clearly the true meaning of life.

(Note: In the text, the term rendered “to stir up” means to confuse or disturb; “stirring the mud” means agitating silt; “illuminating the sun and moon” describes the brightness of mind-nature that can illuminate all things; and “Great Celebration Layman” (Daqing Jushi) is the author’s self-chosen sobriquet.)

葉夢得曰删書斷自堯舜而易獨及伏羲神農黃帝然後知堯

而上蓋有其人六經存而不論嘗試會之以心則其說曰易

無思也無爲也寂然不動感而遂通天下之故非天下之至

神孰能與於此然後知伏羲神農黃帝至於堯舜世世相傳

者皆不出乎易退而質諸老氏則與易異者無幾又曰論語

記竊比我於老彭後孔子者孟子孟子之於儒蓋秋毫不以

少亂也其拒揚墨排儀秦過於桀紂終不及老氏乃其言盡

心知性以至於命則老氏之所深致意也然後知老氏之書

孔孟所未嘗廢又曰老氏之書其與孔子異者皆矯世之辭而所同者皆合於易後老氏數百年復有佛氏者出其辭益

荒遠深妙不近人情而要其至道與老氏殆相爲表裏(並見經注)

又曰老氏論氣欲專氣致柔如嬰兒孟子論氣以至大至剛

直養而無害充塞乎天地之間二者正相反從老氏則廢孟

子從孟子則廢老氏以吾觀之二說正不相反人氣㪚之則

與物敵而剛專之則反於已而柔剛不可以勝剛勝剛者必

以柔則專氣者乃所以爲直也直養而無害於外則所謂持

其志毋暴其氣當如曾子之守約約之至積而反於微則直

養者乃所以爲柔也故知道之至者本自無二(見石林巖下放言)

**Interpretation**

Ye Mengde, a Song dynasty scholar, observed in his discussion of classical transmission: The Book of Documents begins with Yao and Shun, while the Book of Changes traces back to the earlier eras of Fuxi, Shennong, and the Yellow Emperor. This indicates the existence of sages even more ancient than Yao. Although the Six Classics preserve these records, they lack detailed discussion. Through careful contemplation, we realize the state described in the Book of Changes as "no thought, no action, perfectly still yet capable of comprehending all under heaven" could only be achieved by those who attained supreme spiritual clarity. Thus we understand that from Fuxi to Yao and Shun, the core teachings of sage-kings never departed from the Book of Changes.

Examining Laozi's thought reveals minimal divergence from the Book of Changes. The Analects record Confucius comparing himself to "Lao-Peng" (referring to Laozi and Pengzu). Later, Mencius, while uncompromising in Confucian doctrine—vehemently criticizing Yang Zhu and Mohism, condemning Zhang Yi and Qin policies as worse than Jie and Zhou—never criticized Laozi. When Mencius spoke of "exhausting the heart-mind to know human nature and thus comprehend destiny," he was precisely addressing what Laozi particularly emphasized. This shows Laozi's teachings were actually assimilated by Confucius and Mencius, albeit implicitly.

Where Laozi's writings differ from Confucius, these are mostly corrective statements addressing contemporary ills; where they converge, both align with the Book of Changes' essence. Buddhism, emerging centuries after Laozi, presented even more abstruse theories, yet its fundamental principles formed complementary counterparts with Laozi's thought.

Regarding discussions of Qi (vital energy): Laozi advocates "concentrating Qi to become soft like an infant," while Mencius emphasizes "the supremely great and supremely strong, nourished directly without harm, filling heaven and earth." Superficially opposite, these views actually complement each other. When human Qi scatters chaotically, it clashes with external forces appearing strong; when concentrated internally, it returns to its source appearing soft. Strength cannot overcome strength—only softness conquers strength through concentrated Qi cultivation. Mencius' "direct nourishment without harm" resembles Zengzi's discipline of "holding one's will without dissipating Qi." At its ultimate refinement, directly nourished Qi transforms into softness. Thus those truly enlightened understand the supreme truth fundamentally transcends duality.

北山程俱老子論曰可道之道以之制行可名之名以之立言

至於不可道之常道不可名之常名則聖人未之敢以示人

非藏於密而不以示人也不可得而示人焉耳故西方之聖

人其所示見設爲乘者三演爲分者十二命之曰教若夫傳

於教外者則其不可道與不可名者也中國之聖人祖唐虞

憲文武以訂詩書禮樂之文命之曰經若夫其所以言猶履

之非迹者則其不可道與不可名者也故老子著五千之文

將以示天下廸後世蓋非退於道冥而獨於已者故其發言

之首以謂可道之道可名之名者五千文之所具也若夫千

聖之所不傳者不可得而言也又曰天地人一原耳天之所

以爲天地之所以爲地人之所以爲人者固同而天地之能

長且久而人獨不然何哉天不知其爲天地不知其爲地今

一受其形而爲人則認以爲已曰人耳人耳謂其養生不可

以無物也則騁無益之求謂其有身不可以不愛也而營分

表之事厚其生而生愈傷養其軀而身愈病其不爲中道夭

者亦幸矣老氏之旨如此而未之思者以謂黃老之徒率畏

**Interpretation**

In his "Discourse on Laozi," Cheng Ju of Beishan proposed: The principles that can be articulated in words serve to guide action; the things that can be clearly named serve to establish discourse. As for the eternal Dao (Changdao) that transcends speech and the ultimate truth (Changming) that defies naming, even sages dare not casually reveal them. This is not because sages deliberately conceal secrets, but because this supreme truth fundamentally eludes verbal transmission.

The Western sage (referring to the Buddha) transmitted teachings through the Three Vehicles (Sravakayana, Pratyekabuddhayana, Bodhisattvayana) and the twelve divisions of Buddhist scriptures, all belonging to the category of teachable doctrines. What lies beyond these doctrines is precisely that ineffable, nameless truth. The Chinese sages (Confucian sages) modeled themselves after Yao and Shun (Tangyu), followed the examples of King Wen and King Wu of Zhou, and compiled classics like the Book of Songs, Book of Documents, Book of Rites, and Book of Music—all belonging to the realm of transmissible wisdom. Yet the true spirit behind these classical texts, like footprints that cannot fully capture the act of walking itself, similarly belongs to the ineffable realm.

When Laozi composed the five-thousand-character Dao De Jing, his original intent was to enlighten people and guide posterity, not to withdraw into mysterious doctrines for personal cultivation. He states at the outset: the principles expressible in language and nameable phenomena are all contained within these five thousand characters; while the ultimate truth that sages throughout history could not transmit lies beyond the reach of words.

Heaven, earth, and humanity share the same origin: why heaven is heaven, why earth is earth, and why humans are human—their essence is identical. Yet why can heaven and earth endure eternally while humans struggle to do so? Because heaven does not deliberately strive to be heaven, nor does earth cling to being earth. Once humans acquire physical form, however, they become attached to the identity of "human," pursuing useless objects to satisfy insatiable material desires, and while cherishing their bodies, they become entangled in fame and profit. Excessive pursuit of nurturing life ironically harms vitality; overprotection of the body damages health—for such people, avoiding premature death would be fortunate indeed. This encapsulates Laozi's essential teaching. Unfortunately, those who fail to contemplate deeply often mistakenly assume that practitioners of the Huang-Lao school (a Daoist tradition) are all passive recluses.

死而求長生者豈不惑哉夫人而無生道安所載然世之喪

其生者蓋反以有其生爲累有其生者且猶老氏之深戒而

謂其外於道而求長生乎未之思也又曰萬物之變莫大乎

死生人之爲道超然於生之際則無餘事耳生果來乎死果

往乎以生爲實來則吾之所從來者宜可知矣南北耶東西

耶上下耶審不可以言也而謂之實來可乎以死爲實往則

吾之所從往者宜可知矣心耶物耶人耶天耶審不可以言

也而謂之實往可乎然則吾之生也前不知其所起後不知

其所斷貫萬古而常存者湛然也然後曉然知我之未嘗生

未嘗死也將以奚爲死地哉又曰眾人之見易遣聖賢之疵

難除營欲𢦤性取舍淆心眾人之過也眾人之過大而有迹

故其遣之也易以覺爲礙以解爲縛聖賢之疵也微而難知

故其除之也難事之過顯理之過微以物爲病顯以法爲病

微然則理障法病可勝疵乎滌除元覽蓋謂是也元覽聖人

之所謂獨見者也人之有是元妙之見而不除之是爲解縛

滌除元覽而卽非滌除則無疵矣滌除元覽而存滌除之見

是爲覺礙又曰聖人不傷民固也而能使鬼神亦不傷人何

哉蓋人之在道道之在人猶魚之在水水之在魚也亦何生

死之

**Interpretation**

To seek immortality after death—isn't this the height of delusion? If one loses the very root of "life," how can the Dao sustain it? Yet people forfeit their vital essence precisely because they treat life itself as a burden. Laozi long ago warned profoundly that possessing life is inherently a form of entanglement—how much more so for those who abandon the Dao in their pursuit of longevity? This is truly a failure to understand.

Moreover, among all the transformations in the world, none is greater than life and death. If a cultivator can transcend the boundaries of life and death, there is nothing left to cling to. Does life truly arrive? Does death truly depart? If we regard birth as real existence, then we should be able to pinpoint where we came from—was it the south or the north? The east or the west? Or perhaps heaven above or earth below? Since we cannot say for certain, how can we call it real existence? If we regard death as a real departure, then we ought to know where we are going—do we become consciousness? Return to matter? Reincarnate as humans? Merge back into the Dao? Again, since this cannot be clarified, how can we call it a real departure?

From this perspective, our lives neither have a discernible beginning nor a definite end. They span past and present in eternal continuity, their essence pure and unchanging. Understanding this, we realize we were never truly born and will never truly die—so where is there any "land of death" to go to?

Furthermore, the mistakes of ordinary people are easy to correct, but the flaws of sages are difficult to eradicate. Desires harm our innate nature; gains and losses disturb the spirit (Shen)—these are the errors of ordinary people. Their faults are obvious and traceable, making them easy to amend. But the flaws of sages are subtle and hard to detect, making them stubborn. The faults of concrete things are visible, while the faults of principles are hidden. Attachment to external objects is a visible ailment; attachment to doctrines is a concealed ailment. Can such clinging to principles and rigid adherence to teachings ever be fully eliminated? This is what "cleansing the mysterious mirror" (dichu xuanlan) refers to. The "mysterious mirror" is the unique insight of sages—yet if one attains this profound vision without relinquishing attachments, it merely becomes another shackle. True cleansing of the mysterious mirror means not even retaining the thought of "cleansing"—only then is it flawless. If after cleansing, one still holds the notion that "I am cleansing," this becomes a new obstruction.

Finally, it is not only that sages refrain from harming the people—they also ensure that ghosts and spirits do no harm. Why is this? Because the relationship between humans and the Dao is like that of fish and water: the fish is in the water, the water is in the fish—where is there any separation between life and death?

辨乎方其以道蒞天下天下之民其生也泊焉所以善

其生也其死也寂然所以善其死也寂然而已鬼安得而神

乎生也如彼死也如此尙安復有靈響祟厲之爲哉又惟常

善也故能救人無棄人救物無棄物有爲之善其能爾乎唯

無積也故能爲人已愈有與人已愈多住相之施其能爾乎

推是道以濟天下而度羣生亦何儒釋老之分哉(並見北山集)栟櫚鄧肅曰嘗考道教之所自來其源出於黃帝其道盛於老

聃其末流詭異有眞可駭者其爲家三十有七其爲書九百

九十有三篇凡有天下者必崇其道論其尤者有三帝焉秦

曰始皇漢曰武帝唐曰明皇是三帝者才智絕人蔑視一世

窮六合之大不足以厭其欲於是浩然有御風騎氣之志煉

丹飛符雜以左道自謂其法可配天地殊不知飛騰之術卒

不能濟反禍其國眞可痛哉雖然漢高祖之取天下也則張

良爲最其治天下也則以曹參爲最良

**Interpretation**

This passage discusses Daoist thought from two perspectives: first, elucidating the essential characteristics of the Dao (the Way), and second, reflecting on the historical successes and failures of Daoism's development.

The text begins by explaining the nature of the Dao: When the world is governed by the Dao, people's lives become naturally simple and genuine. They live with serene contentment and die in peaceful stillness. Since death is so tranquil, how could ghosts possibly manifest to cause disturbances? Birth and death are natural processes—what supernatural calamities could there be? True goodness (referring to the Dao's nature) can save all people without abandoning anyone, cherishing all things without discarding anything. This selfless virtue (De) can only be achieved by giving without deliberate accumulation or attachment to appearances—the more one gives to others, the more one's own abundance grows. Using such Dao to aid the world and deliver all beings, why should we distinguish between the sectarian boundaries of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism?

The latter part, through the research of Deng Su from Binlü (a place name), reviews Daoism's historical origins: Daoism traces back to the Yellow Emperor's era and reached its zenith during Laozi's (Lao Dan) time. However, it later split into thirty-seven schools with 993 texts, some of which became bizarre and frightening. Historically, three emperors were particularly devoted to Daoism: Qin Shi Huang, Emperor Wu of Han, and Emperor Xuanzong of Tang. These ambitious rulers, in their pursuit of immortality, became obsessed with alchemical practices (Waidan and Neidan), talismans (Fulu), and delusions of flying like immortals. Far from achieving their goals, they brought disaster to their nations and people. In contrast, Emperor Gaozu of Han conquered the empire through the strategies of Zhang Liang (who mastered Huang-Lao techniques) and governed it with Cao Can's policies (implementing Daoist Wuwei, or non-action governance)—this was the true Dao.

The passage particularly emphasizes: The pursuit of immortality and ascension through esoteric arts ultimately harms both state and self, while genuine success in statecraft lies in applying the Daoist wisdom of clarity, stillness, and Wuwei.

之道蓋慕赤松子而

參之居則避正室以舍蓋公是則道家之術又若無負於天

下者蓋漢高祖所以取參與良者在道之本不過於清靜恭

儉無爲與民息肩而已矣而始皇武帝明皇之所尙者區區

竭力以事其末故妄誕不經者得以行其志此治亂賢否所

以相絕不可同日而語也夫末流滋蔓變怪百出可以惑人

主而禍天下者皆非黃帝老聃氏之道(見栟櫚集)嚴谷山人江袤曰夫道窅然難言哉謂之道者蓋假以名道而

實非道也五經之所言言其略老聃列禦㓂莊周之所言言

其詳詳略雖殊皆有以明道之本(問道)又曰或問老子著書有

道德篇當時所述歟後人詮次歟余曰此不得而知也余昔

於藏書家見古文老子其言與今所傳大同而小異考其義

一也唯次序先後與今篇章不倫亦頗疑後人析之也曰道

無所不該而五千文所紀者可道之道耳又離而爲德恐無

是義余曰道德實同而名異曰道曰德亦何所不可也曰惡

有是言哉吾嘗讀五經諸子凡言道德皆有小大後先之辨不可槪舉可考而知也余曰莊周言一曲之士判天地之美

析萬物之理本於道德之不一重歎後之學者爲不幸子亦

欲蹈之乎曰願聞其旨曰聞之無乎不在之謂道自其所得

**Interpretation**

This passage primarily discusses the essence and evolution of Daoist thought. The true meaning of Daoism as represented by legendary immortals like Chisongzi and Huang-Lao scholars like Gaigong from the early Han Dynasty lies in the governing philosophy of clarity, stillness, and wuwei (non-action), allowing the people to rest and recuperate. Emperor Gaozu of Han's employment of Cao Shen and Zhang Liang exemplified grasping the root of Daoism, whereas Emperor Qin Shi Huang, Emperor Wu of Han, and Emperor Xuanzong of Tang's pursuit of surface-level practices like longevity led to the proliferation of supernatural phenomena—a fundamental departure from the original intent of the Yellow Emperor and Laozi.

Yan'gu Mountain Hermit Jiang Mao (a Song Dynasty scholar) proposed that the true Dao is ineffable, and what is now called "Dao" has deviated from its essence. While the Five Classics discuss it briefly, Laozi, Liezi, and Zhuangzi elaborate in detail, yet all illuminate the root of the Dao. When asked whether the *Daode Jing* was truly written by Laozi himself, Jiang Mao mentioned having seen ancient versions that largely matched modern editions in content but differed in sequence, leading him to suspect later alterations.

He believed the Dao encompasses all things, and the five thousand characters of the *Daode Jing* record only what can be expressed. While separating "Dao" from "De" (Virtue/Power) may not be entirely appropriate, using different terms to describe the same essence is permissible. Classical texts distinguish between greater and lesser, prior and subsequent discussions of Dao and De—these cannot be treated uniformly. Zhuangzi criticized later scholars for fragmenting the holistic nature of heaven, earth, and all things, tracing this error to the forced separation of Dao and De. The true Dao is omnipresent; what individuals comprehend of it is called De. Just as rivers may divide but ultimately return to the sea, Dao and De are ultimately two aspects of one unity.

之謂德道者人之所共由德者人之所自得也試以水爲喻

夫湖海之涵浸與㘭堂之所畜固不同也其爲水有異乎江

河之傾注與溝澮之湍激固不同也其爲水有異乎水猶道

也無乎不之而湖海㘭堂江河溝澮自其所得如是也謂之

實同名異詎不信然學者之於道會之以心視之以神斟酌

飽滿使自足則德成而有立進德者至於德兼於道則同於

初矣由是觀之道非有餘於德也道散而德彰德非不足於

道也德成而道隱故聖人則備道全美君子則明道全德茲

所以爲異也曰道妙無形德審有所覩乎曰道無方體德有

成虧有成虧者昭昭於心目之間豈無所覩耶合乎道則無

德之可名別於德則有名之可辨故曰道無常名德有定體

老子之出當道術之變其立言皆以明至當之歸言雖不一

如首有尾稽其至也何彼此之辨(問德)又曰生於心者不窮是以命於身者無已死而復生生而復死始終之端如循環無

窮老氏言出生入死生之徒十有三死之徒十有三動之死

地十有三三三而九自十言之則出乎生死者一而已一者

謂何意復命之人乎士之志於

**Interpretation**

This passage employs the metaphor of water to explain the relationship between the Dao (the Way) and De (Virtue/Power): The Dao is like water that exists everywhere, yet takes different forms in various containers. The water accumulated in lakes and oceans differs in volume from that in small puddles under eaves, though both are water; the rushing currents of rivers differ in momentum from the turbulent flows in ditches, yet both remain water.

Those who cultivate the Dao must use their heart to experience it and their spirit (Shen) to contemplate it, gradually absorbing and enriching themselves until their De is fully developed. When one's cultivation of De reaches harmony with the Dao, they return to the original source. The Dao is not more abundant than De—when the Dao manifests dispersedly, it becomes De; nor is De deficient compared to the Dao—when De is fully cultivated, the Dao is concealed within it. Thus, sages can fully grasp the mysteries of the Dao, while noble persons comprehend its principles and perfect their De.

The Dao itself is mysterious and formless, while De has concrete manifestations. De may be complete or lacking, and these states can be clearly perceived in human consciousness. When in harmony with the Dao, one transcends the conceptual distinctions of De; viewed from the perspective of De, distinctions and names become apparent. Hence it is said that "the Dao has no fixed name," while De has definite expressions.

Laozi lived during an era of transformation in Daoist practice, and his teachings aimed to elucidate the most fundamental truths. Though his expressions varied, they are like things having both heads and tails—when traced to their source, no distinctions remain. The thoughts arising from the mind are endless, manifesting in the body through ceaseless cycles of life and death. Laozi speaks of "emerging into life and entering death," where three-tenths pertain to life, three-tenths to death, and three-tenths exist between life and death. These three sets of three make nine, leaving the remaining one-tenth as the state transcending life and death—this "one" refers to those who can return to their original authenticity. Scholars who resolve to cultivate the Dao seek precisely this state beyond life and death.

道者能修身以俟之直而推

之曲而任之庶幾乎可以語此(問命)又曰或問老聃列禦㓂莊

周孟軻皆古之得道者也其立言各欲取信後世何自相詆

忤如此聃曰吾有大患爲吾有身禦㓂曰內觀者取信於身

周曰吾身非吾有軻則曰萬物皆備於我反身而誠樂莫大

焉或厭其身之爲患而非其有或貴其身之皆備而取之足

豈不詆忤耶余曰子未之思也子得其言而未得其所以言

且四肢百骸五臟六腑該而存焉者謂之身視聽言貌思性

所有也亦謂之身身之名則一而所以爲身者殊有所謂體

有所謂性老聃莊周蓋卽體而言之者禦㓂孟軻蓋卽性而

言之者卽體言之則四肢百骸五臟六腑有之則有患無之

則無患故不可使之有也而所謂無者非亡夫其身之謂凡

動作語默不見而已卽性言之則視聽言貌思一理所該萬

物皆備苟內觀焉可以取足高之於天卑之於地俯仰洞鑒

孰有不備於我者乎孰有

**Interpretation**

This scripture discusses various ancient sages' differing understandings of the "body." Laozi (Lao Dan), Liezi (Lie Yukou), Zhuangzi (Zhuang Zhou), and Mencius (Meng Ke) were all enlightened individuals who attained the Dao, yet their perspectives on the body appear contradictory at first glance.

Laozi said, "My greatest affliction is having this body." Liezi believed, "Through inner observation (neiguan) practice, one can attain true knowledge from the body." Zhuangzi declared, "This body does not truly belong to me." Yet Mencius asserted, "All things are complete within me. Turning inward to reflect on oneself and achieving sincerity is the greatest joy."

In truth, these statements are not contradictory but simply approach the subject from different angles. The body can be understood on two levels: first, as a material form (limbs, bones, and internal organs), and second, as a vessel for spiritual nature (seeing, hearing, speaking, moving, thought, and disposition). Laozi and Zhuangzi spoke from the perspective of the physical form, recognizing that the tangible body brings suffering. Liezi and Mencius, however, approached it from the perspective of intrinsic nature, teaching that through inner observation, one can realize the truth that all things are complete within oneself.

The scripture clarifies that, from the perspective of form, the physical body indeed brings troubles—hence Laozi's advice to be "without a body" (wushen). This does not mean destroying the body but rather acting without attachment to physical form. From the perspective of intrinsic nature, human perception, speech, and movement all embody the principles of heaven (tianli). Through inner cultivation, one can realize that heaven, earth, and all things are fully present within one's own nature.

不足於身者乎以是言之老聃莊

周之言身不得不使之無列禦㓂孟軻之言身不得不使之

觀(問身)又曰或問何者爲息余曰循陰陽以左右隨子午以消

長者是也其運如未嘗止之輪其旋如不可盡之環與元氣

交通晝夜不息老子列禦㓂所謂沖氣者也子知所以守息

則知所以養氣知所以養氣則知所以入道知所以入道則

抱一禪定固無殊致也老子曰綿綿若存用之不勤子歸而

求之斯有得也(問息)又曰莊周言養形之士吹呴呼吸此特其

淺淺者爾形神俱妙蓋本於襲氣母老子曰玄牝之門是爲

天地根不死之道本於是乎(問氣)又曰孔子曰毋意毋我老氏

曰及吾無身吾有何患瞿曇曰毋眼耳鼻舌身意人之有生

形色外具心意内知必使之無者何哉蓋無者萬善之所歸

萬法之所宗人能外息諸緣㝠心於無則與道俱矣其歸一

致若所謂坐忘息氣面壁果殊途哉袤字仲長三衢人嚴谷

山人則其自號也養素邱園以經術教諸生紹興間大臣薦

于朝召對竟力辭還里士論高之(並見嚴谷集)

**Interpretation**

The teachings of Laozi and Zhuangzi (Zhuang Zhou) hold that the human body should naturally follow the Dao (the Way) without being constrained by external forces. The theories of Lie Yukou (Liezi) and Mencius similarly emphasize that the body must adhere to the laws of nature.

Someone once asked what true "breath regulation" (tiaoxi) entails. The answer is: it must align with the movement of Yin-Yang energies, adjusting respiration according to the cyclical changes of the day and night. This circulation of Qi (vital energy) is like an endlessly turning wheel or an infinite loop, connecting with the primordial Qi of heaven and earth, ceaselessly flowing day and night. This is what Laozi and Lie Yukou referred to as "chongqi" (the harmonious interplay of Yin and Yang energies). Understanding how to regulate the breath leads to grasping the essentials of nurturing Qi; grasping the essentials of nurturing Qi leads to comprehending the methods of entering the Dao; and comprehending the methods of entering the Dao leads to attaining the state of "embracing oneness in meditation" (holding fast to unity in stillness). Laozi said, "Soft and gentle, as if barely there, yet inexhaustible in its use." With mindful practice, one can attain this realization.

Zhuangzi mentioned those who focus solely on physical cultivation, using breath regulation for health—this is merely the most superficial practice. To truly reach the state where both form and Shen (spirit) are perfected, the key lies in mastering the "mother of Qi" (the source of primordial energy). Laozi’s "mysterious gate of the feminine" refers to the root of heaven and earth, the origin of the path to immortality.

Confucius said, "Do not cling to fixed views." Laozi said, "When I have no attachment to the body, what troubles can I have?" The Buddha (Gautama) said, "Transcend the constraints of the senses and the mind." In life, we have external forms and internal consciousness—why then seek the state of "nothingness"? Because "nothingness" is the destination of all goodness and the source of all principles. If one can let go of external entanglements and return the mind to emptiness, they will unite with the Dao. Whether through Daoist practices like "sitting in forgetfulness" (meditative absorption) and "regulating the breath," or Buddhist methods like "facing the wall" (deep meditation), all ultimately lead to the same destination.

Yan Gu Shanren (a self-styled name), originally named Mao, styled Zhongchang, was from Sanqu. He lived in seclusion in the mountains, teaching the classics for a living. During the Shaoxing era of the Southern Song Dynasty, a high-ranking official recommended him for a government position, but he firmly declined and returned to his rural retreat, earning the admiration of scholars of his time. (This account is recorded in the *Yan Gu Collection*.)

楊文安公椿紹興間以從橐侍經筵有進讀老子講義一篇曰

老子曰我有三寶寶而持之一曰慈二曰儉三曰不敢爲天

下先夫慈故能勇儉故能廣不敢爲天下先故能成器長臣

聞求道於聰明智力之所及則心勞而道愈不明舍聰明智

力而求諸日用之間則簡易至當道庶幾乎可見矣任聰明

役智力是獘精神於蹇淺者之所爲以此應物殆有未能釋

然忘情者存焉故欲慈焉則失於姑息欲儉焉則失於鄙吝

不敢爲天下先則失於怯懦是心勞而道愈不明也審矣有

道者則不然生知之妙渾然天成物之來干我者初無容心

隨所遇而應之我無忮心故能慈我無欲心故能儉我無爭

心故不敢爲天下先其所以日用者簡易自當果非由聰明

智力之所能成就非天下之至聖其孰能與於此易之乾卦

曰體仁足以長人坤卦曰坤至柔而動也剛則得乎仁者有

勇之說故曰慈故能勇節卦曰節以制度不傷財不害民則

得乎儉以足用之說故曰儉故能廣謙卦曰謙尊而光卑而

不可踰則得乎一謙而四益具之說故曰不可爲天下先故

**Interpretation**

During the Shaoxing era of the Southern Song Dynasty, when Lord Yang Wen'an (Yang Chun) served as the imperial lecturer, he once explained the essence of the *Laozi* to the emperor. He interpreted Laozi's "Three Treasures": first is compassion, second is frugality, and third is daring not to be at the forefront of the world.

The intrinsic connection among these three lies in this: a heart filled with compassion paradoxically gives rise to true courage; maintaining frugality unexpectedly enables great achievements; and refraining from vying for precedence ultimately makes one a leader among people. Lord Yang pointed out that relying solely on intelligence and talent to seek the Dao (the Way) only exhausts the mind and drives one further from it. Conversely, letting go of cleverness and returning to everyday life allows the Dao to manifest in simple, ordinary moments.

Those who exhaust their spirit (Shen) pursuing shallow cleverness often struggle to handle worldly affairs. Deliberately chasing the "Three Treasures" can lead to their opposites: forced compassion becomes indulgence, rigid frugality turns into miserliness, and feigned humility appears as cowardice. True Dao attainers differ—they naturally understand these principles and respond to things without artifice. Without jealousy, compassion arises spontaneously; without greed, frugality comes effortlessly; without contention, humility emerges naturally. This unforced state in daily life cannot be achieved through mere intelligence.

Finally, the *Yijing* (Book of Changes) is cited for corroboration: the Qian hexagram states, "Embracing benevolence (De) suffices to lead others," and the Kun hexagram says, "The softest things, when in motion, become strong"—illustrating that only the benevolent possess true courage. The Jie hexagram explains, "Regulating with measures prevents waste and harm to the people," clarifying how frugality brings abundance. The Qian hexagram (modesty) declares, "The humble, though exalted, still shine; though lowly, remain unassailable," showing how yielding unexpectedly yields manifold benefits.

能成器長大易老氏之言若合符節帝不得不帝王不得不

王至仁好生神武不殺非慈耶茅茨土階惡衣卑服非儉耶

不矜不伐不競不絿非不敢爲天下先耶下至兩漢寬仁大

度如高祖幾於慈以德化民如文帝幾於儉以柔道理天下

如光武幾於不敢爲天下先是則有天下者寶其慈且勇寶

其儉且廣寶其後且先雖二帝三王可以追蹤而並美區區

兩漢之主不足進也又曰道家者流其來最遠爰自黃帝氏

作至周有老聃得其傳戰國時列御㓂䝉莊之徒和其說逮

秦漢間遂名曰黃老之學其道以虛無自然爲宗以淸靜澹

泊爲事其眞以治身其緒餘以治天下中古以來蓋嘗與堯

舜周孔之道並行於世而不相戾異乎所謂浮屠氏之學者

也浮屠氏本出西方至漢始入中國霍去病擊匈奴獲休屠

王祭天金人顏師古曰金人卽今佛像明帝夢見金人飛空

而下傅毅以爲西方之聖人遣使於天竺訪之以歸自是佛

法始流傳於時究厥所由其與道家之學本原不同而塗轍

各異曷不取道德經五千文考之其言微其旨遠其文簡而

嚴其義宏以肆殆與六經相表裏非若冰炭枘鑿之不相入

後世學者猥曰佛老佛老云者吁可怪哉(並見芸室集)

**Interpretation**

The text unfolds its discussion from two perspectives: first, by demonstrating the value of Daoist thought through historical figures, and second, by clarifying the fundamental differences between Daoism and Buddhism.

The first part cites several emperors who embodied core Daoist principles: Emperor Gaozu of Han (Liu Bang) educated the people with benevolent De (Virtue), Emperor Wen of Han (Liu Heng) governed through frugality and gentle strategies, while Emperor Guangwu (Liu Xiu) exemplified the humble attitude of "daring not be first in the world." The author argues that these rulers achieved greatness precisely because they upheld the Daoist virtues of compassion, frugality, and humility. True statecraft lies in harmonizing seemingly contradictory yet complementary qualities—kindness with courage, thrift with generosity, yielding with initiative.

The second part traces Daoism's origins to the Yellow Emperor, transmitted through Laozi and further developed during the Warring States period by Liezi and Zhuangzi. With "emptiness and naturalness" (xuwu ziran) as its fundamental tenet, Daoism advocates clarity, stillness, and Wuwei (non-action), applicable to both personal cultivation and state governance. The author emphasizes that Daoist thought runs parallel to Confucian sagehood without conflict, yet differs entirely from later-introduced Buddhism. Originating from the Western Regions and introduced during the Han dynasty (as referenced by Huo Qubing's captured golden ritual objects and Emperor Ming's dream of a golden figure), Buddhism diverges from Daoism in both foundational principles and developmental paths.

Concluding with an exhortation to study the Daode Jing seriously, the author notes this scripture's precise language, profound meaning, and concise style containing vast implications—complementing rather than opposing the Confucian Six Classics. The author expresses bewilderment and opposition toward later generations' conflation of Buddhist and Daoist teachings.

光廟在潛邸程文簡公大昌時爲宮僚嘗索其所著易老通言

大昌以劄子繳納其略曰夫老子之可重者何也秉執樞要

而能以道御物是其長也貴無賤有而罕言世故者亦非其

或短於此也故師老子而得者爲漢文帝蓋其爲治大抵淸

心寡欲而淵默樸厚以涵養天下其非不事事之謂也則漢

以大治而基業綿固者得其要用其長故也至於西晉則聞

其言常以無爲爲治本而不知無爲者如何其無爲也意謂

解縱法度拱手無營可以坐治無何紀綱大壞而天下因以

大亂故王通論之曰淸虛長而晉室亂非老子之罪也蓋不

得其要而昧其所長也區區之意深望殿下採其秉要之理

而以西漢爲法鑒其談治之略而以西晉不事事爲戒則老

子之精言妙道皆在殿下運用之中矣又嘗著潛藩盛德錄

內一篇曰某舊得侍談凡及大道常取易繫道器與孔子下

學上達之語而參言蓋道器學達可從上下立爲形容正如

燒火薪能生熖是上形之道必資下形之器學乎下可以達

乎上是薪雖粗實而其英華能炎能上者也六經論孟說器

**Interpretation**

When Emperor Guangzong of Song was still crown prince, his minister Cheng Dachang (posthumously titled Wenzian) served as an official in the Eastern Palace. The prince once requested Cheng's work *Connecting the Yi and Lao*, to which Cheng submitted a memorial explaining its essence:

The value of Laozi's philosophy lies in grasping fundamental principles (the pivot), enabling the Dao (the Way) to govern all things—this is its strength. While it exalts "non-being" (wu) over "being" (you) and seldom discusses concrete affairs, this is not necessarily a flaw. The true exemplar of successfully applying Laozi's teachings was Emperor Wen of Han, whose governance emphasized purifying the mind and reducing desires, nurturing the realm through deep stillness and unadorned simplicity—not through inaction (wuwei). Precisely because he grasped the essence and utilized its strengths, the Han dynasty achieved great order and stable foundations.

In contrast, the Western Jin dynasty also proclaimed "governing through non-action," yet fundamentally misunderstood true wuwei. They mistakenly believed that merely relaxing laws and folding their hands would bring peace, resulting in collapsed discipline and widespread chaos. Thus Wang Tong remarked: "The Jin's decline came from indulging in abstract discussions—this was not Laozi's fault, but later generations' failure to grasp the essence and misapply its strengths." I beseech Your Highness to absorb Laozi's wisdom of grasping fundamentals, taking the Western Han as model and the Western Jin as warning, thereby truly mastering Laozi's essence.

Cheng Dachang further recorded in *Chronicles of Virtuous Conduct in the Princely Domain*: During past lectures on the great Dao (the Way), I often cited the *Book of Changes*: "What is above form is called Dao; what is within form is called vessel," combining it with Confucius' teaching "study the lower to comprehend the higher." This resembles fire emerging from burning wood—the formless Dao must rely on tangible vessels to manifest, just as studying concrete things ("lower learning") leads to comprehending heavenly principles ("higher attainment"). Like coarse wood containing fiery essence, seemingly crude classics like the Six Scriptures, *Analects*, and *Mencius* are precisely the concrete vessels bearing the great Dao.

(Note: "Pivot" refers to fundamental principles; "study the lower to comprehend the higher" comes from the *Analects*, meaning progressing from basic learning to profound understanding; "Dao and vessel" are key philosophical concepts in the *Book of Changes*—Dao signifies abstract laws while vessel denotes concrete phenomena.)

多而說道少是蓄薪以求生熖者也老莊之書說無多於說

有是謂六經說薪已多不必贅言者也儒者之於求道自有

六經宜若無籍於老莊矣然老莊之書言微趣深助發道祕

尤爲精要苟能博取當大有補特不可如晉人談虛直謂棄

捐禮樂刑政而天下可以自治焉耳天下嘗有無薪而能自

起火熖者耶又曰今道士修老子教者舍道本不言而及方

藥祈禳等事其譌失本意又益太遠惟唐人白居易詩語能

明其確曰何況元元黃帝道德五千言不言藥不言仙不言

白日升靑天元元皇帝卽老子也道家以老子爲教祖而八

十一章自淸靜寡欲之外别無一語他及如何鑿空妄云有

藥有仙及祈禳騰厭等事耶恭䝉聖諭以某言爲是且明誦

白詩上語全文益深嘉居易之談老子能得要妙也(並見本集)又

曰世之尊老氏而謂上乎五三六經疑老氏而誚其空虛無

用皆不得爲知老氏者乃若老氏之高致則有在矣知道之

奥而談無曲盡其妙運器以道而在有不局於有凡六經主

於紀迹而不暇究言者此書實皆竭告也則論孟之所務明

者於此乎加詳矣是故其書得與六經並行也(見易老通言)沈莊仲問晦菴先生朱文公曰常有欲以觀

**Interpretation**

This passage discusses the relationship between Lao-Zhuang thought and Confucian classics, along with common misunderstandings of Daoist philosophy in later periods:

The works of Laozi and Zhuangzi primarily explore the concept of "non-being" (wu), while the Confucian Six Classics (The Book of Songs, Documents, Rites, Music, Changes, and Spring and Autumn Annals) focus on "being" (you), resembling a pile of gathered firewood. Confucian scholars might seek the Dao through these classics alone, seemingly without needing Lao-Zhuang teachings. Yet Laozi and Zhuangzi's writings contain refined language and profound implications, uniquely revealing the Dao's mysteries. When studied broadly, they greatly assist in comprehending the Great Dao. However, one shouldn't imitate Jin dynasty scholars who indulged in empty metaphysical discussions, foolishly believing society could govern itself by abandoning rituals, music, and laws—like expecting fire without kindling.

Contemporary Daoist practitioners who follow Laozi's teachings often neglect the fundamental Dao, instead obsessing over techniques, elixirs, and ritual blessings—completely distorting Laozi's original intent. As Tang poet Bai Juyi clearly stated: The 5,000-character Dao De Jing by the Yellow Emperor and Laozi never mentions drugs, immortals, or celestial ascension. Though Daoism venerates Laozi as its founder, beyond advocating purity and desirelessness, his eighty-one chapters contain nothing about these later inventions. How could posterity fabricate drugs, immortals, and ritual magic from thin air?

People either elevate Laozi above the Six Classics or dismiss his philosophy as impractical—both views misunderstand him. Laozi's brilliance lies in his mastery of the Dao's profundity: when discussing "non-being," he exhausts its subtleties; when applying concrete things, he remains unconstrained by "being." The Six Classics mainly record historical events without deeply exploring principles, whereas the Dao De Jing elucidates them thoroughly. Thus, the philosophical points explained in the Analects and Mencius appear more detailed in the Dao De Jing, earning it equal standing with the Confucian classics.

The passage concludes with Shen Zhuangzhong consulting Zhu Xi (Master Huian) about the line "Constantly having desires, one observes their manifestations," demonstrating how Song dynasty Confucian scholars seriously engaged with Laozi's thought.

其徼是如何文公

曰徼是邊徼如邊界相似是說那應接處向來人皆作常無

常有點不若只作常無欲常有欲看又問道可道如何解文

公曰道而可道則非常道名而可名則非常名又問玄之義

文公曰玄只是深遠而至於黑卒卒地便是眾妙所在

張以道問載營魄抱一能無離乎之義文公曰魄是一魂是

二一是水二是火二抱一火守水魂載魄動守靜也

文公曰多藏必厚亡老子說得也是好

陳仲亨問周書曰將欲敗之必姑輔之將欲取之必姑與之

今周書何緣無之文公曰此便是老子裏數句是周時有這

般書老子爲柱下史故多見之孔子所以適周問禮之屬也

黃義剛問原壤看來也是學那老子文公曰他也不似老子

老子卻不恁地莊仲曰卻似莊子曰是便是夫子時已自有

這樣人了莊仲曰莊子雖以老子爲宗然老子之學卻尙要

出來應世莊子卻不如此曰莊子說得較開闊較高遠然卻

較虛走了那老子意思若在老子當時看來也不甚喜他如

此說

或問老子之道曹參文帝用之皆有效何故以王謝之力量

反做不成文公曰王導謝安又何曾得老子妙處

文公曰如漢文帝曹參便是用老子之效然他又只得老子

皮膚凡事只是包容因循將去

**Interpretation**

This passage records a dialogue between Zhu Xi (Wengong) and his disciples on the Daodejing, centering on several core concepts.

On the explanation of “jiao,” Zhu Xi said that the character means boundary, referring to the critical point where things meet and connect. He suggested that “constant non-being” and “constant being” are better interpreted as “constant freedom from desire” and “constant having of desire.”

In explaining “The Dao that can be spoken is not the constant Dao,” Zhu Xi stressed that a Dao that can be expressed in words is not the eternal Dao, and a name that can be defined is not the eternal name. As for the word “xuan,” he explained it as a profound and obscure state, holding that this is precisely where the mystery of all things lies.

When his disciple Zhang Yidao asked about the meaning of “carrying the Hun and Po and embracing the One,” Zhu Xi explained it through Yin-Yang and the Five Phases: the Po belongs to Water and is one; the Hun belongs to Fire and is two. This is using the dynamic quality of Fire to guard the stillness of Water, embodying the principle that Yin and Yang guard each other.

Turning to the strategy “when one wishes to take, one must first give,” Zhu Xi pointed out that ideas of this kind were already recorded in Zhou dynasty texts. Laozi, as the Zhou court’s Keeper of the Archives—in effect, director of the state library—would naturally have been familiar with these documents; Confucius too had gone specially to Zhou to inquire about ritual institutions.

On the difference between Laozi and Zhuangzi, Zhu Xi held that although Zhuangzi took Laozi as his master, Laozi’s learning laid greater stress on practical statecraft and benefiting the world, whereas Zhuangzi’s theories were more expansive and metaphysical, departing from Laozi’s original intent. He gave the example of Yuan Rang, a figure of Confucius’s time, whose conduct seemed to imitate Laozi but in fact did not.

Finally, regarding the effects of historical figures who applied Laozi’s thought, Zhu Xi believed that Emperor Wen of Han and Cao Shen truly grasped Laozi’s wisdom of accommodation and following along in handling affairs, whereas the Eastern Jin worthies Wang Dao and Xie An and others did not truly comprehend the essence of Laozi’s thought. He pointed out that Laozi’s true meaning lies in an attitude of according with nature and being inclusive and magnanimous.

郭德元問老子云夫禮忠信之薄而亂之首孔子又卻問禮

於他不知何故文公曰他曉得禮之曲折某初間疑有兩箇

老聃橫渠亦意其如此今看得來不是如此他曾爲柱下史

於禮自是理會得所以與孔子說得如此好只是他又說這

箇物事不用得亦可一似聖人用禮時反若多事所以如此

說禮運中謀用是作而兵由此起等語便自有這箇意思

文公曰老子之術沖嗇不肯役精神又曰老氏初只是淸靜

無爲淸靜無爲卻帶得長生不死後來卻只說得長生不死

一項如今恰成箇巫祝專只理會厭禱祈禳這自經兩節變

了又曰伯夷微似老子又曰子房深於老子之學曹參學之

有體而無用又曰孟子以後人物止有子房與孔明子房之

學出於黃老若以比王仲淹則不似其細密又曰楊子雲作

太玄亦自莊老來惟寂惟寞可見又曰文中有志於天下亦

識得三代制度較之房魏諸公又稍有些本領若究其議論

本原處亦只自莊老中來

或問晉宋時人多說莊老然恐其亦未足以盡莊老之實處

文公曰當時諸公只是借他言語來蓋覆那滅棄禮法之行

耳據其心下汙濁紛擾如何理會得莊老底意思

**Interpretation**

Guo Deyuan once questioned Laozi about the concept of "ritual propriety" (li): Laozi had stated that ritual propriety was a sign of fading loyalty and sincerity, the beginning of chaos, yet Confucius specifically sought Laozi's advice on ritual systems—this seemed contradictory. Zhu Xi (Master Wen) explained: Laozi was actually deeply versed in the intricate procedures of ritual systems. Having served as the Zhou dynasty's Pillar Historian (a position overseeing archival records), he was thoroughly familiar with ritual propriety, which allowed him to engage Confucius in such profound discussions. However, Laozi believed ritual systems were unnecessary, much like how the sages' promotion of rituals seemed excessive. Passages such as "schemes arise from this, armed conflicts begin from this" in the *Book of Rites* (*Liji*), chapter "The Conveyance of Rites" (*Liyun*), reflect this perspective.

Zhu Xi further analyzed Laozi's teachings: Laozi's philosophy emphasized emptiness, stillness, frugality, and restraint, discouraging the wasteful expenditure of spirit (shen). Initially, Laozi spoke only of clarity, stillness, and non-action (wuwei), but gradually his focus shifted toward theories of immortality, eventually devolving into the practices of shamans (wuzhu)—rituals for averting disasters and seeking blessings. This represented two major transformations. He cited examples: the demeanor of Boyi (a recluse from the late Shang dynasty) somewhat resembled Laozi's; Zhang Liang (styled Zifang) grasped the essence of Laozi's teachings, while Cao Shen (a Han dynasty chancellor) only understood its superficial form. Among figures after Mencius, only Zhang Liang and Zhuge Liang truly inherited Laozi's doctrine.

Regarding later interpretations of Laozi and Zhuangzi's teachings, Zhu Xi noted: Yang Xiong's (styled Ziyun) *Classic of Supreme Mystery* (*Taixuan Jing*) was clearly influenced by Zhuangzi and Laozi; Wang Tong's (styled Zhongyan) theories, though meticulous, were less aligned with Laozi's original intent compared to Zhang Liang's understanding. During the Jin and Liu-Song dynasties, many discussed Zhuangzi and Laozi, but in truth, they merely used their names to justify abandoning ritual norms. These individuals, with their turbid and disordered minds, were utterly incapable of grasping the true essence of Lao-Zhuang thought.

文公曰康節嘗言老氏得易之體孟子得易之用非也老子

自有老子之體用孟子自有孟子之體用將欲取之必固與

之此老子之體用也存心養性充廣其四端此孟子之體用

也又曰康節之學似老子只是自要尋箇寬閑快活處人皆

害他不得張子房亦是如此方眾人紛拏擾擾時它自在背

處萬人傑因問擊壤集序以道觀道等說果爲無病否曰謂

之無病不可謂之有病亦不可渠自是一樣意思如以天下

觀天下其說出於老子

陳器之問孟子平旦之氣甚微小如何會養得完全文公曰

不能存得夜氣皆是旦晝所爲壞了所謂好惡與人相近者

幾希因舉云老子言治人事天莫若嗇夫惟嗇是謂早復早

復謂之重積德重積德則無不克大意也與孟子意相似但

它是就養精神處其意自好平旦之氣便是旦晝做工夫底

樣子日用間只要此心在這裏

李敬子問神仙之說有之乎文公曰誰人說無誠有此理只

是他那工夫大段難做除非百事棄下辦得那般工夫方做

得

蔡季通云道士有箇莊老在上卻不會去理會文公曰如今

秀才讀多少書理會自家道理不出他又那得心情去理會

莊老蔡云列子亦好曰列子固好但說得困弱不如莊子問

老子如何曰老子又較深厚

**Interpretation**

Zhu Xi (Master Wen) remarked that Shao Yong (Kangjie) once claimed Laozi grasped the ontological aspect of the "Book of Changes" while Mencius developed its functional application—a view Zhu Xi considered incorrect. Laozi had his own complete system of ontology and function, just as Mencius possessed his distinct framework. For instance, Laozi's principle that "to receive, one must first give" exemplifies the unity of his ontological and functional thought. Conversely, Mencius advocated "preserving the original mind, cultivating inherent nature, and expanding the four moral sprouts of benevolence, righteousness, propriety, and wisdom," which manifests his unique system.

Zhu Xi further commented that Shao Yong's scholarship resembled Laozi's in its pursuit of personal transcendence and unshakable inner freedom—a state impervious to external disturbances. Zhang Liang (Zifang) similarly maintained this detached composure amidst worldly conflicts. When student Wan Renjie questioned whether Shao Yong's preface to the "Jirang Collection," with phrases like "observing the Dao through the Dao," was appropriate, Zhu Xi replied: It would be inaccurate to deem it entirely correct or wholly flawed—it simply reflected Shao Yong's distinctive mode of thought, much like how "observing the world through the world" originated from Laozi.

Student Chen Qizhi inquired: Mencius spoke of the morning's pure Qi (vital energy) as being exceedingly faint—how can one nurture it to completion? Zhu Xi explained: The inability to preserve the "night Qi" (the mental clarity cultivated at night) stems from its dissipation by daytime activities. As Mencius noted, humanity's innate goodness is inherently scarce. He illustrated this with Laozi's teaching: "In governing human affairs and serving the Dao of Heaven, nothing surpasses moderation"—this restraint means returning promptly to one's authentic nature and accumulating De (Virtue) continuously until all obstacles are overcome. While this aligns with Mencian thought, Laozi emphasized spiritual cultivation, where the morning's Qi forms the foundation for daytime practice, requiring constant mindfulness in daily life.

When Li Jingzi questioned the validity of Daoist immortal lore, Zhu Xi responded: Who dares claim it nonexistent? There is truth to it, though such cultivation demands extraordinary effort—achievable only by renouncing all worldly concerns for dedicated practice.

Cai Yuanding (Jitong) observed that while Daoist priests revered Zhuangzi and Laozi, they seldom studied their teachings seriously. Zhu Xi retorted: Contemporary scholars read extensively yet fail to comprehend even their own principles—how could they spare energy for Zhuang-Lao studies? Cai praised Liezi as commendable, but Zhu Xi countered: Liezi is indeed admirable, yet his thought appears passive and yielding, lacking Zhuangzi's profundity. When asked about Laozi, he affirmed: Laozi's philosophy runs deeper and weightier.

文公曰佛徒其初只是以老莊之言駕說耳如遠法師文字

肇論之類皆成片用老莊之意然他只是說都不行至達磨

來方始教人自去做所以後來有禪(以上並見文公語錄)象山陸九淵曰異端之說出於孔子今人鹵莽專指佛老爲異

端孔子之時中國不聞有佛雖有老氏其說未甚彰著夫子

之惡鄕原論孟中皆見之獨未見其排老氏則所謂異端者

非指佛老明矣(見象山集)茗溪劉一止行簡曰竊惟天下之事下合人心上合天意中合

大道者唯有一言曰公而已矣老子曰容乃公公乃王王乃

天天乃道蓋混而爲一非容不能公王公之稱謂其容而能

公也王訓大王者之稱謂其公而能大也則是公不可不與

王同德王不可不與天同道此天下之至理也(見茗溪集)永嘉鄭伯熊景望曰蓋公治黃老曹相國參用於齊而稱治儒

家多訾黃老言何哉吾嘗杜門終日默坐謹動作薄滋味而

心和氣平百病不侵節以備其無推以散其有不妄求不過

憂而老者穉者安於恬淡嘗意此理推之天下有餘地何獨

數百里之齊孔孟之術豈有外是者而訾黃老言何哉蓋今

道家所談淸淨者捨此而趨誕也(見鄭先生戇語)劉淸源曰老子之言道德偶從關令之請矢

**Interpretation**

Zhu Xi (Master Wen) observed that early Buddhists initially borrowed theories from Laozi and Zhuangzi to propagate their teachings. Works like those of Master Huiyuan and Sengzhao’s *Zhao Lun* extensively adopted Lao-Zhuang philosophy in whole passages. However, they remained at the level of abstract discussion. It was only after Bodhidharma came to the East that people were taught to personally practice cultivation, giving rise to what later became Chan (Zen) Buddhism (from *Zhuzi Yulei*).

Lu Jiuyang (Master Xiangshan) offered a different perspective: Confucius first introduced the concept of "heterodoxy" (*yiduan*), yet people today hastily single out Buddhism and Daoism as such. In Confucius’s time, Central Plains culture had not yet encountered Buddhism, and while Laozi’s teachings existed, their influence was minimal. The *Analects* and *Mencius* record Confucius’s disdain for hypocrites (*xiangyuan*), but never show him rejecting Laozi’s philosophy. This clearly demonstrates that so-called "heterodoxy" was never meant to refer to Buddhism or Daoism (from *Xiangshan Ji*).

Liu Yizhi (styled Mingxi) argued: All affairs under heaven must align with human hearts, celestial will, and the Dao (the Way), with the core principle being "impartiality" (*gong*). Laozi said that only through inclusiveness can one achieve impartiality, only through impartiality can one become a true ruler, and the kingly way (*wangdao*) aligns with the heavenly way (*tiandao*), which is itself the Dao. These realms form an inseparable unity—without an inclusive mind, impartiality is impossible. The title "Duke-King" (*wanggong*) refers to one who is both inclusive and impartial. The character *wang* (king) originally means "greatness"; a king is called such precisely because of his impartiality and magnanimity. Thus, impartiality must share virtue (*de*) with the kingly way, and the kingly way must share its origin with the heavenly way—this is the most fundamental principle governing all under heaven (from *Mingxi Ji*).

Zheng Boxiong (courtesy name Jingwang) illustrated with historical examples: When Cao Shen governed Qi by applying the Huang-Lao methods (the governing principles of the Yellow Emperor and Laozi), it brought great order, yet Confucian scholars often criticized Huang-Lao teachings. He shared his personal experience: having once secluded himself in quiet sitting, moderating speech, action, and diet, he attained a state of serene equilibrium free from illness. By regulating to prevent problems and channeling to resolve stagnation—neither excessively grasping nor over-worrying—both young and old could find contentment in simple living. He believed this principle, when expanded, applied equally to statecraft. Why then did it only prove effective in Qi? The ways of Confucius and Mencius fundamentally did not conflict with Huang-Lao. Yet contemporary Daoists speak of purity while straying from this root, veering into absurdity (from *Zheng Xiansheng Gangyu*).

Liu Qingyuan pointed out: Laozi expounded his teachings on the Dao (the Way) and *De* (Virtue/Power) in response to the request of the Guardian of the Pass, Yin Xi (referring to the origin story of the *Daode Jing*).

口而言肆筆而成

書未嘗分爲九九章也後人分爲上下二卷以象兩儀之妙

用九九八十一章以應太陽之極數(見道德經通論序)黃茂材曰道與德雖有二名實相爲用不可離也今世學者乃

分上經爲道下經爲德甚非作書之旨又曰易六十四卦八

八之數也老子之書八十一章九九之數也老子與易相爲

表裏其後楊子雲作太玄以準易亦有八十一首蓋得於此

(見經注)林東曰夫子與老氏垂教蓋亦互相發明夫子以仁義禮樂爲

治天下之具老子以虛無恬淡明大道之所從出要之仁義

禮樂非出於大道而何而虛無恬淡乃大道之本旨也特後

世之不善用老氏者或純尙淸虛恬淡而至於廢務有以累

夫老氏也且以道心惟微無爲而治吾儒未嘗不用老子如

所謂我有三寶一曰慈二曰儉三曰不敢爲天下先以道佐

人主者不以兵强天下老子未嘗不用吾儒也以是而推則

大道之與道一而已矣特不無本末先後爾蓋所以互相發

明俱爲憂世而作也或謂老氏有絕仁棄義禮爲亂首得非

與夫子背馳蓋推尊道原之所從出以仁義禮樂非不可以

爲治不如以道化民而相忘於吾道之中爲上也(見經解發題)劉師立自號眞靜子紹熙間人著道德經節解十六篇今取其

五於右

**Interpretation**

The original *Dao De Jing* was not explicitly divided into 81 chapters. Later scholars segmented it into two volumes to correspond with the profound principles of Yin-Yang (the fundamental cosmic duality), using the number nine (the ultimate Yang number) to structure the text. Dividing it into 81 chapters symbolizes the supreme numerical expression of the Great Yang (ultimate Yang).

Huang Maocai observed that while "Dao" and "De" (Virtue/Power) differ in name, they are inseparable in essence, functioning as two sides of the same reality. Some modern scholars mistakenly treat the first volume as solely about the Dao and the second as solely about De, which fundamentally misrepresents the text's intent. Just as the *I Ching* (Book of Changes) uses 64 hexagrams based on the numerical pattern of "eight times eight," the *Dao De Jing* employs 81 chapters structured around "nine times nine," revealing their underlying unity. This inspired later thinkers like Yang Xiong (styled Ziyun), who modeled his *Taixuan Jing* (Canon of Supreme Mystery) on the *I Ching*, also adopting 81 sections.

Lin Dong argued that Confucius (the Master) and Laozi (the Old Master) actually complement each other in their teachings. Confucius employed benevolence, righteousness, rites, and music as tools for governance, while Laozi emphasized emptiness, stillness, and Wuwei (non-action) to illuminate the Dao's origin. Yet these Confucian virtues themselves stem from the Dao, just as Wuwei represents the Dao's fundamental principle. Later misinterpretations arose when some adherents of Laozi's thought pursued emptiness and inaction to extremes, neglecting practical affairs and thereby tarnishing his legacy.

Confucianism's emphasis on the "subtlety of the Dao-mind" and "governing through non-action" actually incorporates Laozi's "Three Treasures": first compassion, second frugality, and third "daring not be ahead of the world." Laozi also advised that "those who assist rulers with the Dao do not dominate by force," showing his alignment with certain Confucian ideals. Thus, Confucianism and Daoism share the same essential Dao—they simply emphasize different aspects while sharing the same goal of benefiting humanity. When Laozi speaks of "cutting off benevolence and discarding righteousness" or calls rites "the beginning of disorder," this isn't opposition to Confucius but a call to return to the Dao's root. While benevolence and rites can govern, the highest ideal is to teach people to embody the Dao spontaneously.

Liu Shili (styled Zhenjingzi, active during the Shaoxi era of the Southern Song) originally composed *Jie Jie Dao De Jing* in sixteen sections, of which five are selected here for commentary.

玄之又玄謂元之始自然是也此乃眾妙之門戸首論道次

論天地又以次論人心可謂盡之矣學者當默識之

玄牝玄陽也牝陰也門者二氣橐籥之門戸如前章云眾妙

之門亦如語云誰能出不由戸何莫由斯道也大不可泥以

口鼻爲玄牝之門謂天地根小其老子之說未有天地先有

元氣是爲天地根

盈則必虛戒之在滿銳則必鈍戒之在進金玉必累戒之在

貪富貴必淫戒之在傲功成名遂必危戒之在不知止老子

之言深欲救人非謂絕人事處山林者可與入道雖居乎富

貴功名之域皆可勤而行之張者必歙强則必弱興則必廢

與則必奪物理之自然是謂微明微明謂精微明著昭昭然

可考或以權術解其義天之道利而不害若是乎

或謂孔子以直報怨今云以德報怨何也然老子教人惟欲

處其柔弱與天爲徒而無所爭可以弭天刑遠人禍若以直

報怨怨何由已當時孔子故有所激而言終不若以德報之

爲善觀復高士謝守灝曰道德經唐傅奕考覈眾本勘數其字云項

羽妾本齊武平五年彭城人開項羽妾塚得之安邱望之本

**Interpretation**

This passage elucidates the fundamental laws governing all phenomena in the universe. The phrase "mystery upon mystery" refers to the primordial Qi (vital energy) that constitutes the basic substance of all things—the source of all wonders. It first discusses the Dao (the fundamental principle of the cosmos), then the movements of heaven and earth, and finally the cultivation of the human mind, thoroughly expounding these principles for learners to silently contemplate and comprehend.

"Xuan" represents yang energy, while "pin" symbolizes yin energy. The "gate" denotes the passageway where yin and yang energies interact and transform each other. As mentioned earlier about the "gateway to all mysteries," or as the common saying goes, "Who can enter or exit without passing through a door?"—all phenomena follow this universal pattern. However, one should not narrowly interpret the "gate of xuan-pin" as mere nasal breathing, claiming this to be the root of heaven and earth. Such limited understanding diminishes Laozi's teaching—the true origin of heaven and earth lies in the primordial Qi that existed before their formation.

When things reach their extreme, they reverse: fullness leads to emptiness, hence one must guard against complacency; excessive sharpness turns to dullness, thus rashness should be avoided; gold and treasures become burdens, so greed must be relinquished; wealth and status breed indulgence, requiring the abandonment of arrogance; the pinnacle of success is most perilous, teaching the wisdom of knowing when to stop. Laozi's teachings aim to save humanity—it's not that one must retreat to mountain forests to cultivate the Dao. Even amidst wealth and fame, these principles can and should be practiced.

What opens must close; what is strong must weaken; what flourishes must decline; giving simultaneously means being taken from. These are natural laws of development—subtle yet evident, clearly observable. Some interpret these principles through strategies of power, but the nature of heavenly Dao (natural law) benefits all things without harm. While Confucius advocated "repaying injustice with justice," Laozi's teaching to "repay injury with virtue" may seem contradictory. In truth, Laozi guides people to maintain a gentle posture, aligning with heavenly Dao without contention, thereby avoiding natural and human calamities. Responding to hatred with confrontation perpetuates endless cycles of resentment. Confucius spoke within specific historical contexts, yet ultimately, dissolving enmity through virtue proves superior.

The Song Dynasty Daoist master Xie Shouhao noted in his commentary: When Fu Yi collated the *Daode Jing* during the Tang Dynasty, he consulted multiple versions including the manuscript excavated from the tomb of Xiang Yu's concubine (a copy discovered in 206 BCE from the burial site of the Chu warlord's attendant) and Anqiu Wangzhi's edition for textual verification.

魏太和中道士㓂謙之得之河上丈人本齊處士仇嶽傅之

三家本有五千七百二十二字與韓非喻老相參又洛陽有

官本五千六百三十五字王弼本有五千六百八十三字或

五千六百一十字河上公本有五千三百五十五字或五千

五百九十字并諸家之注多少參差然厯年旣久各信所傳

或以佗本相參故舛戾不一史記司馬遷云老子著書言道

德之意五千餘言但不滿六千則是五千餘矣今道家相傳

謂老子爲五千文蓋舉其全數也(見老君實錄)太上道德眞經集註

**Interpretation**

During the Taihe era of the Northern Wei Dynasty, a Daoist priest named Kou Qianzhi obtained a version of the *Dao De Jing* (Classic of the Way and Virtue) that was said to have been transmitted by the River Sage (Heshang Zhangren), a Han Dynasty recluse traditionally credited with annotating the text. This particular edition had been preserved by the Qi State hermit Qiu Yue. At that time, three major versions of the *Dao De Jing* were circulating: one containing 5,722 characters, cross-referenced with the "Yu Lao" chapter of Han Feizi's writings; an official copy stored in Luoyang with 5,635 characters; and the version annotated by Wang Bi (a Wei-Jin era Neo-Daoist scholar) which had either 5,683 or 5,610 characters.

The River Sage's transmitted edition also showed discrepancies in character count—some records listed it as 5,355 characters, others as 5,590. The variations among annotated editions were substantial, as over time, adherents grew partial to their own transmitted versions, sometimes blending content from other editions, resulting in textual inconsistencies. Sima Qian noted in the *Records of the Grand Historian* that Laozi's work on the essentials of Dao and De comprised "over five thousand characters," meaning more than five thousand but fewer than six thousand. Today, Daoists often refer to the *Dao De Jing* as the "Five Thousand Character Classic," rounding off the count for convenience. (This account appears in the *True Record of Lord Lao*.)

(Here concludes the *Miscellaneous Notes on the Collected Commentaries of the Supreme Daoist's True Classic of the Way and Virtue*.)

雜說終

---

原文底本：Kanripo 漢籍リポジトリ（京都大学），CC BY-SA 4.0。  
Source text: Kanripo Chinese Classics Repository (Kyoto University), CC BY-SA 4.0.  
HTML version: https://daozang.app/en/text/KR5c0097/