《道德真經廣聖義》Vol. 6

A Commentary Clarifying the Meaning of the Dao and De

The explanation says: “Laozi” is the title by which the Most High Lord Lao was known in the world. Its origin was explained earlier.

The Dao Jing refers to the upper volume of this classic, which takes the Dao as its title. The Dao guides living beings and runs through all methods; it stands at the head of all teachings. For this reason, the Three Sovereigns honored it as the “Dao.” As the forerunner of all teachings, it is also the starting point of the great sequence of numbers: “One” (the One of emptiness and nothingness). The lower volume likewise says, “The Dao gives birth to One”; One is the root of the Dao.

The Dao’s essence reaches the wondrous depths of empty openness and exhausts the miraculous power that nurtures and transforms all things and brings them aid. In principle, it runs through the processes of generation; in meaning, it encompasses cause and effect. Turn back to it within yourself, and self and other are both forgotten; clear it from your heart, and being and nonbeing alike fall away. The Dao and De sustain and receive one another, so the work as a whole is called the Dao De Jing. Here, the meaning of “Dao and De” is explained in three parts.

First, explaining the name: Only through namelessness can one fully understand the profound teaching. Thus the classic says, “Emptiness and nothingness, ever constant and naturally so; forced into a name, it is called the Great Dao.” The meaning of Dao therefore centers on “nonbeing”: when one orders things by clinging to anything, this becomes a fault. The meaning of De centers on “being”: when one orders society in a way that misleads people, this is not De. Zang Xuanjing, an early Daoist commentator, said: “The Dao means to reach through to things while abiding in non-action.” In terms of its meaning as illumination, the Dao has three aspects: principle, guidance, and penetration. Principle refers to the Dao’s empty, insubstantial ground, through which good and evil are discerned. Guidance means leading those bound by attachments to let go of them and enter sagehood. Penetration means running through all teachings and adapting without obstruction.

The upper volume follows Yang, images Heaven, and takes the odd number as its measure; it therefore has thirty-seven chapters. Lord Lao, when teaching the classic, did not insist that the upper volume be called the Dao and the lower volume the De. Earlier scholars passed down this division, and passages in the classic mutually support it, as the preface explains. Moreover, “When the Dao declined, De appeared; when De declined, the Five Constant Virtues appeared.” This shows that Dao and De precede all conduct and that the Five Constant Virtues rest on them. Hence the Dao Jing comes before the De Jing.

Here, the name “Dao” is explained according to the terms used in the preface: guidance, penetration, and principle. The meanings of Dao and De are divided into three parts: explaining the name, clarifying the essence, and explaining the function. The first part, explaining the name: Dao and De are so profound and beyond description that they were originally nameless. To open the teaching and guide ordinary people, names were imposed upon them; thus the teaching resorts to a “name for the nameless.”

This passage comes from the Extensive Commentary on the True Scripture of the Dao and Its De (Daode Zhenjing Guang Shengyi). It explains the several layers of meaning contained in the names “Dao” and “De,” which Laozi applied to what cannot truly be named. The following gives the general meaning in plain language.

To recognize the level that “cannot be named,” one must understand the true aim of the Mysterious Teaching. Since “Dao” and “De” are only names imposed for convenience, what does each actually refer to? Zang Xuansjing says: Dao centers on Wuwei (non-action), which connects all things; De centers on “not losing,” and uses action to accomplish its effects.

We will now explain the three meanings of Dao—principle, connection, and guidance—and the three meanings of De—attainment, fulfillment, and not losing.

“Principle” refers to the underlying nature of principle as empty and void. To say “the Dao is in everything” means that, at the root, all things are empty, according to the meaning of this scripture. Another explanation says that “principle” encompasses both good and evil: the good path is called Dao, and the evil path is also called Dao. The underlying nature of good and evil is empty, which does not conflict with this meaning. But calling an evil path “Dao” does not explain it in terms of the underlying nature; it uses the word simply because things of the same kind are also called “Dao.” If the explanation follows particular matters and approaches principle through them, that interpretation can also stand.

“Connection” means connecting the processes by which all things are born and transformed, and changing freely without obstruction. The Lord of Heshang says: “Dao extends in all four directions.”

“Guidance” means leading and holding fast in a way that helps people forget their attachments and guides ordinary people into the realm of the sage. The Scripture of Spontaneity says: “Guide the branches back to the root.” The “root” is true nature; the “branches” are deluded feelings.

De has three meanings.

“Attainment” means gaining something from Dao. The Scripture of Great Peace says: “De means rightly attaining in relation to one another.”

“Fulfillment” means bringing beings to completion and delivering them, so that they reach the ultimate Dao. This name refers to the fruit stage; it also supports the completion of practices of emptiness and thus refers to the causal stage. The scripture says: “Bring them to ripeness and completion.”

“Not losing” means that De is never lost. The scripture says: “Constant De is never lost.”

These six meanings can all be connected with one another. The Scripture of the Western Ascension says: “Dao and De are undifferentiated; their mysteries and wonders are alike.” The meaning of “De” is also present within Dao. The Scripture of Ascending to the Mystery says: “De equals the unequaled; the unequaled is Dao.” Thus Dao has the meaning of “attainment”; it also has the meaning of “fulfillment.” The Lord of Heshang says: “It does not merely give birth and nurture; it also brings things to maturity and completion.” Dao also has the meaning of “not losing”: since it is called the Constant Dao, “constant” means not losing.

De, in turn, also has the meaning of “principle.” The Scripture of Giving Birth to the Spirits says: “When one responds to principle, one is constantly connected.” Since responsive communion is De, De therefore has the meaning of principle. De also has the meaning of “connection.” The Lord of Heshang says: “De is one; when the One arrives, it spreads Qi and nurtures.” De also has the meaning of “guidance”: this refers to the virtue of opening the way and guiding others. Confucius’s Analects says, “Guide them by means of De,” which is what this means. If we explain it specifically in terms of connection, the meaning is as described above.

Brief notes on proper names appearing in the text:

• Wuwei / Youwei: refraining from contrived, misguided action / taking action to accomplish something.
• The Lord of Heshang: the traditionally identified Han dynasty commentator on the Daodejing.
• The Scripture of Great Peace, Scripture of the Western Ascension, Scripture of Ascending to the Mystery, Scripture of Spontaneity, and Scripture of Giving Birth to the Spirits: various texts in the Daoist Canon attributed to ancient authors.
• Zang Xuansjing: a Tang dynasty Daoist who contributed to works including the Extensive Commentary.

Speaking of the Dao (the Way), its “permeation” does not point to any particular path; it reaches everywhere. Speaking of De (Virtue/Power), its “attainment” does not mean possessing any particular achievement; nothing lies beyond its reach. Thus one can forget oneself and forget one’s accomplishments, yet give life to and transform the myriad things, bringing them all to fulfillment.

The passage below explains this section in five different ways.

First, explanation by name

This is simply the meaning described above.

Second, explanation through mutual dependence

This shows that without De, the Dao cannot be spoken of, and without the Dao, De cannot be spoken of. The Dao and De depend on each other; their names are only provisional labels. Thus there is no De apart from the Dao, and no Dao apart from De. The Dao is the overall principle of De, while De is the Dao expressed in its workings. This is the meaning of the scripture’s statement that “long and short take shape in relation to one another,” and so on.

Third, explanation by what the terms express

As the proper names for teaching, “Dao” and “De” express the principle of “not-Dao” and “not-De.” Thus, when speaking of the Dao, one says, “The Dao that can be spoken is not the constant Dao”; when speaking of De, one says, “Highest De is not De.” Therefore, “not-Dao” and “not-De” are the true meanings of the words “Dao” and “De.”

Fourth, explanation without a fixed direction

The single name “De” has countless meanings, including cause, trace, and fulfillment. The Dao is everywhere, so how could its name belong to any one fixed place? Its meaning is therefore explained as “without direction”—having no fixed location and being confined to no single place.

Fifth, explanation through Wuwei (non-action)

Since the names are formed with “not,” their meaning is also “non-being.” The idea of “naturalness” has no fixed referent in its name; tracing it back to its source leads to the meaning of “non-being.”

A general account of the principles

“Dao” is a name established because it gives life to and transforms the myriad things; “De” is a name established in relation to teaching and transformation. Because there is De, it is called the Dao; because there is the Dao, it is called De. With respect to De, the emphasis is on “having substance and being without action”; with respect to the Dao, it is on “non-being, permeation, and action.”

Master Lu (Lu Xiujing) says in his explanation of the scripture: “Emptiness and stillness are the substance of the Dao. Being empty, it pervades everywhere; being still, it responds to everything.” Zang Xuanching also says: “Wisdom is the substance of the Dao; spiritual powers are its function.” He further says: “Dao and De are originally one, yet contain two meanings: they are one and not two, two and not one. From the one comes the two, while the one remains one; through the two, the one is present. One cannot say that it has or lacks substance, or that it has or lacks function. In truth, it takes ‘having no substance’ as its substance: it has substance, yet no substance. It takes ‘having no function’ as its function: it functions, yet does not function.” Thus no form of De is not its substance, and no function is not its working.

Seeking its substance

It is apart from emptiness and existence, neither Yin nor Yang; beyond the reach of sight and hearing, beyond the touch of the hand, and difficult to distinguish or describe.

Seeking its function

It can adapt to circumstances and uphold what is real; it can be on the left or the right. It can contain the great within the small, and the small within the great. Since its substance has no fixed direction, it cannot be grasped by thought or discussion; since its function has no fixed direction, therefore…

An excerpt from The Extensive Commentary on the Sagely Meaning of the True Scripture of the Dao and Its Virtue

Thus, responding and transforming according to each place, without being constrained by fixed forms or traces, follows one principle throughout past and present. One must simply understand that Dao and De each have their own distinct scope.

“Different yet seeming the same; seeming the same yet still different”: distinctions arise when they are analyzed through names and categories. “Different yet truly the same”: considered in terms of their underlying nature, they ultimately return to unity. What is called “not different yet seeming different” has no real point of difference; “different yet seeming the same” has no real point of sameness either. There is nothing that can be the same, and nothing that is not different; nothing that can be different, and nothing that is not the same.

What follows explains the matter through seven paired principles.

First, source and trace: The source is Dao; the trace is De. Dao as source is grounded in the wellspring of great wisdom and the eternally still, true body. De as trace is grounded in the sovereign of Highest Virtue and the Supreme One’s responsive body—that is, the body that responds and transforms.

Second, principle and teaching: Principle is Dao; teaching is De. Dao as principle is grounded in the true nature revealed through awakening. De as teaching is grounded in the true scripture revealed through awakening.

Third, object and wisdom: The object is Dao; wisdom is De. The realm of principle is the body of Dao; the wisdom of principle is the body of De.

Fourth, person and Dharma: The person is Dao; the Dharma is De. Dao as person is grounded in the two bodies of source and trace. De as Dharma is grounded in the two Dharmas of principle and teaching.

Fifth, bringing forth and bringing to completion: Bringing forth is Dao; bringing to completion is De. Dao brings forth the myriad kinds of beings by responding to Qi and transforming them, and is grounded in responsive transformation. De brings beings to completion and is grounded in putting teachings and methods into practice to instruct them.

Sixth, nonbeing and being: Nonbeing is Dao; being is De. Dao as nonbeing is grounded in contemplating emptiness at the stage of cultivation and in the wisdom of emptiness at the stage of fruition. De as being is grounded in contemplating existence at the stage of cultivation and in the wisdom of existence at the stage of fruition.

Seventh, cause and result: The result is Dao; the cause is De. Dao as result is grounded in the myriad virtues at the stage of fruition. De as cause is grounded in the myriad practices at the stage of cultivation.

These seven paired principles interweave with one another: they are two, yet not two; one, yet not one. From this we understand that Dao and De are the true ground, beyond result and cause, beyond source and trace. Yet they do not depart from source and trace: they unfold them, allowing people to see the source through its traces. Nor do they depart from cause and result: they open up the path of cause and result, enabling people to cultivate causes and move toward fruition. The remaining five pairs, such as principle and teaching, and object and wisdom, need not be explained one by one; their meaning and function are clear. The third meaning of “De” is “being that is not being.”

Modern Interpretation

It can speak of “nonbeing” and also of “being with the Dao”—this is a kind of nonbeing that is not simply nonbeing. It can speak of being, and it can also speak of nonbeing. The deluded think that “jade-like countenance and golden form” means the Dao truly exists as a thing. Here it is being explained that the Dao is originally empty and void; this is directed at the delusion of clinging to being.

The Lord on the Riverbank says that the Dao is “emptiness.” Wang Bi says that the Dao is what is called “nonbeing.” Some deluded people think that the Constant Dao and even Supreme De are actually empty and void. Here it is being explained that the line “thus, De” is precisely meant to dispel the fault of clinging to nonbeing. The scripture says, “In the dim and obscure, there is essence.” This first follows conventional terms and turns their meaning around, so that listeners can be cured of their error. When they advance in cultivation and awaken, the meaning becomes deeper still.

Understand this: to call the Dao “nonbeing” is not to cling to that “nonbeing”; to call De “being” is not to cling to that “being.” Only when the afflictions of both sides, being and nonbeing, have been exhausted does one accord with “mystery upon mystery.” This is called being free of both. Thus the scripture says of the immortal way: it is neither “not-not” nor “being that is not-being.”

This means that the Dao must become manifest through De, and De must receive the Dao in order to take shape. When the Venerable Lord Lao composed the scripture, he was never bound by the literal wording. The first part speaks of the Dao, and the second of De, but the meanings of the two parts inherently contain one another. Later generations passed down the text and forcibly split its meaning apart. In truth, the Scripture of the Dao already contains De, and the Scripture of De already contains the Dao. The sage’s intent was made quite clear in the preface.

As for the “more than five thousand words,” the text was never meant to be judged by its word count. Its literary expression and its simplicity are balanced, and its meaning flows through as a whole. One must not damage the scripture to make the count come out right, nor cut its wording merely to fit a number; either way, the larger meaning is lost. When Sima Qian said “more than five thousand words,” he did not mean exactly five thousand. Some people deleted passages to force the count, making it exactly 4,999 words, then split the “thirty” in “thirty spokes” into thirty separate characters to reach five thousand. This is like carving a boat to mark where a sword fell into the river: it is rigid attachment that fails to understand.

Commentators give the word “scripture” roughly four meanings. First, “source”: the Three Ages’ Heavenly Worthies and the Great Sages of the Ten Directions rely on the teachings of the scriptures as the source through which they attain sagehood and realize the true. Second, “path”: scripture opens up the principles and guides living beings; for those who study the Dao, it is a bridge and a road to realization. Third, “model”: its true aim is mysterious and wondrous, its ultimate principle subtle and profound; it serves as a rule for all beings and a model for all the sages. Fourth, “constant”: its wondrous principles are profound and far-reaching, quietly still and mysteriously penetrating; it is a classic that no ruler of any age can alter. Taken together, these four meanings are called “scripture.”

Another explanation says that the Scripture of the Dao was formed from condensed Qi and written in clouds gathered into seal script. Each character was a zhang in size, with rays hanging from its eight corners…

A Plain-Language Interpretation

Purple characters on jade tablets, dragon scripts, and phoenix documents refers to sacred texts written in purple characters on jade tablets, in dragon-shaped script, or on phoenix-shaped documents. They appeared when the world first emerged from a cosmic cycle and returned to Heaven at the cycle’s end.

Some were engraved on jade or inscribed on gold; others were written on bamboo, wood, silk, or paper. They were passed down and changed over time, with seal script and clerical script evolving from age to age.

Though some are rough and others refined, they are all true teachings of the Mystical Sages—such as Laozi and other realized beings. They are good medicine for treating illness: they regulate body and mind and relieve suffering. They are also wondrous gateways beyond the world: ways to transcend ordinary life.

Even if dynasties change and gold melts or stone crumbles, the teachings imparted by this Jing (scripture) continue to spread among humanity and the celestial realms, enduring through countless eons. That is why it is called a “Jing.” Hence the title, Commentary on the Laozi’s Dao De Jing, Upper Section of the First Volume.

This Jing is divided into two parts. Its five thousand words are subtle and profound, encompassing the myriad teachings and standing above all other scriptures. The dates it gives, the time of crossing the pass, the order of Laozi’s manifestations, and the ultimate purpose of his teachings are not necessarily presented accurately in every account. I will now discuss the subject in four sections to dispel uncertainties.

First Section: Clarifying the One Who Manifested

The Lord Lao is the ancestor of the Supreme Dao and the source of primordial transformation. He existed before antiquity, yet is not called “first”; he appeared in the final age, yet is not called “last.” What is more, he propagated the transformation of the Dao countless eons ago. Why, then, must he have been conceived in a womb and born in order to be said to have “come into being”? The term “manifested in the world” describes his appearance among humanity and shows that he had a beginning in this world. Taking form through a holy mother shows that he was born; the holy mother serving the Primordial Lord shows the distinction between superior and subordinate.

According to the scriptures, proclamations, and accounts from different periods, there are three accounts of his manifestation:

First: In the seventh year of the Shanghe era, a Gengyin year, on the third day of the ninth month, a Jiazi day, he was born between the Li Valley and Lingjing Mountain, in Tiangang, the Kingdom of the Northern Mysterious Maiden. His holy mother was named Mother of Mysterious Emptiness. At the time of his birth, three suns rose in the east, and nine dragons sprayed water to bathe him. Because he was born in Li Valley, he took the surname Li; his given name was Xuanyuan and his courtesy name Ziguang. He was descended from the Most High and of the Jade Emperor’s lineage. His rank was Great Lord of Long Life, the Supreme True Taiyi Lord of Great Peace, and the Emperor of the Nine Mysteries, the Later Sage of the Golden Palace. On close examination, this was also before the cosmic cycle began. The Shanghe era of the Songling reign belonged to the preceding cycle.

Second: In a Gengchen year during the reign of King Wuding of Yin, at the mao hour on the fifteenth day of the second month, he was born in Lai Township, Ku County, Chen State. His holy mother was named Mysterious and Wondrous Jade Maiden. She was the teacher of the Lord on High and was later elevated to the rank of Primordial Lady. This is the date and place of his manifestation in Bozhou. According to Huangfu Shian’s Long Calendar, the Immortal Lord Jiazi said that in the year after the Dingmao year, he would become the teacher of the Zhou. This refers to his manifestation as the exemplary teacher of the Zhou dynasty.

(If the text continues with a “third” account of his manifestation and the rest of the four sections, you may share it to continue the translation.)

In the first year of King Zhou (Dingwei) through the twenty-first year of King Zhou (Dingmao), the Lord Lao lived on Mount Qi and served as tutor to the Western Earl of Zhou, King Wen. From the ninth year of King Wuding (Gengchen) to the twenty-first year of King Zhou (Dingmao) was a total of 108 years. From then until the twenty-fifth year of King Zhao (Guichou), when he passed through the frontier pass, was another 107 years. Altogether, the span was 215 years. When Sima Qian wrote “more than two hundred years,” he was referring to this period.

Some have made the unfounded claim that the Lord Lao was born during the reigns of King Ping, King Ding, King You, or King Li. These are strained explanations and should not be taken seriously. Why? If he had been born during the reigns of Kings You, Li, Ping, or Ding, he could not later have met King Wen and King Wu. A third account holds that, after bidding farewell to Yin Xi, the Guardian of the Pass, at the Louguan, the Lord Lao arranged to meet him at the Qingyang Market in Shu. He then manifested there in the twenty-ninth year of King Zhao (Dingsi), when Yin Xi, after guarding the pass for a thousand days, traveled to Shu and met him again. If understood as one of the Lord Lao’s three manifestations, this account is the most plausible.

Second, the date of his passage through the pass

In the twenty-fifth year of King Zhao of Zhou (Guichou), the Lord Lao passed through the Hangu Pass and traveled west to teach and transform others. There he met Yin Xi, the Guardian of the Pass, and transmitted to him the two-part Dao De Jing. After completing the transmission, in the fourth month of the twenty-sixth year of King Zhao (Jiayin), he bade farewell to Yin Xi at the Louguan and ascended to the celestial realm of Taiwei. In the twenty-ninth year of King Zhao (Dingsi), Yin Xi went to Shu in search of the Lord Lao and met him again at the Qingyang Market. In the Wuwu year, the thirtieth year of King Zhao, the Lord Lao entered the flowing sands. These are the dates of his passage through the pass and the events that followed.

Yin Xi had served as a high official during King Kang’s reign. By King Zhao’s reign, he had become Guardian of the Pass, and only then did he meet the Lord Lao. Zang Xuanjing’s account places the Lord Lao’s journey west through the Long Pass during King You’s reign, but this does not agree with the location of the pass recorded in the Heavenly Treasure Spirit Talisman. Moreover, the first year of King You was Gengshen, and Zhou fell in his eleventh year, Gengwu. There was no Guichou year during his reign, so dating the passage through the pass to King You’s reign is mistaken.

Wen Ruhai instead dates the passage to the twenty-second year of King Cheng (Guichou). But Yin Xi could not yet have been Guardian of the Pass at that time, and so could not have met the Lord Lao; this account is also mistaken. He also gives the forty-third year of King Ping (Guichou), but that was far too late, coming long after Yin Xi’s time. That account is likewise incorrect. These are all erroneous claims.

After examining records from ancient and modern times in detail, we take the twenty-fifth year of King Zhao (Guichou) as the established date for the passage through the pass. The chronology fits on both sides, leaving no room for doubt.

Plain-Language Interpretation

Third, on the occasions when the scripture was expounded. Ge Xuangong’s Inner Biography says that in the time of the Yellow Emperor, the Old Lord was Guangchengzi. He expounded the Dao De Jing and the methods of the Five Sprouts to the Yellow Emperor, and was also given the title of the Five Sages.

The illustrations and the Records of the Sages in the Old Lord’s Inner Biography say that in the time of Emperor Shun, the Old Lord was Yin Shouzi. He lived in Heyang, expounded the Dao De Jing, and taught the way of filial piety and respect for elder siblings. Shun put these teachings into practice: he stepped back from public life and yielded worldly things to others, honored the Dao and valued De, and the people throughout the realm followed his example and were transformed. Thus he appointed the sixteen clans, banished the Four Fiends, brought the Four Distant Tribes into communication, and clarified the vision of the Four Eyes. In governing, he cared for the common people; at home, he cherished his nine clans. He attained the Dao in the wilderness of Cangwu, on Mount Jiuyi.

Sources cited by various writers also say that in the gui-chou year of King Zhao of Zhou, the Old Lord composed the two parts of the Dao De—the upper and lower scriptures—for Yin Xi at Hangu Pass. The Records of the Grand Historian likewise says that the Old Lord wrote a book of more than five thousand words for Yin Xi, the pass official.

Wang Zinian’s Collected Anecdotes says that during the Zhou dynasty, the Old Lord lived on Mount Jingshi and often discussed the creation and transformation of Heaven and Earth with five elders. He wrote a book of one hundred thousand words, then later removed its redundant and disordered passages, leaving five thousand words.

Now, according to the account of Heshang Gong transmitting the chapter-and-verse commentary on the upper and lower scriptures to Emperor Wen of Han, he told the emperor: “It has been more than seventeen hundred years since I began annotating this scripture. It has been transmitted through three people, and you make the fourth. Do not show it to anyone unworthy.” The Dharma Master Cheng Xuanying explained that the three transmitters were Wuguang, Xianmenzi, and Gaoqiuzi.

Consider this carefully: the Zhuangzi says that after Tang defeated Jie, Tang offered the throne to Wuguang, who refused it, bound a stone to himself, and sank into the clear spring. Since Wuguang had already died in the time of Tang, the scripture must have been transmitted before Jie. This clearly shows that the scripture was not composed in the gui-chou year of King Zhao of Zhou or on Mount Jingshi.

The Yellow Emperor’s writings also contain the line, “The Valley Spirit never dies; this is called the Mysterious Female,” reproducing this entire chapter. This means the scripture was expounded in the time of the Yellow Emperor, and that is why the Yellow Emperor quoted this chapter in his writings. Further, if we calculate the dates, and the scripture had been composed at Hangu Pass in the time of King Zhao, fewer than a thousand years would have passed by the time of Emperor Wen of Han. That does not match the statement about how long the scripture had been annotated, further confirming that it was expounded in the time of the Yellow Emperor and in the time of Emperor Shun. Moreover, Emperor Shun ruled for more than sixty years.

Plain-Language Interpretation

I. Disputes over the length of dynasties and the dates of the scripture and its commentaries

When Yu was 112 years old, he passed the throne to Yu. Yu’s descendants succeeded one another through seventeen emperors, over 471 years, until they were conquered by Tang. Tang’s descendants ruled through twenty-one generations and thirty kings, over 644 years, until they were destroyed by Zhou. The Zhou dynasty, from King Wu to King Nan, passed through forty-one generations and thirty-seven kings, over 869 years, until it was absorbed by Qin. In the forty-ninth year of King Zhao of Qin, the Dingwei year, Qin destroyed Zhou. From the First Emperor through Ziying, Qin lasted a total of forty-five years before being conquered by Han. From Gaozu and Hui through Empress Lü to the first year of Emperor Wen, Han had ruled for twenty-eight years. From Shun to this point, the total was 1,769 years.

This clearly states that the Jing was composed in the time of the Yellow Emperor, and the commentary in the time of Shun. It was not the case that Laozi wrote these five thousand characters specifically for Yin Xi at Hangu Pass alone. Scholars of keen discernment should examine this in detail.

II. Fourth: The central aims and teachings

The “Revered Scripture of the Dao and De” encompasses many meanings; its aims and teachings vary according to the reader and the tradition each takes as its guide.

• Heshang Gong and Yan Junping both explain the Dao of governing the state.
• Immortal Songling, Sun Deng of the Wei dynasty, Tao Hongjing of the Liang dynasty, and Gu Huan of the Southern Qi all explain the Dao of cultivating the self.
• Luo Shi in the time of Fu Jian, Fotucheng of Later Zhao, Emperor Wu of Liang, and the Daoist Dou Lüe of Liang all explain the Dao of causality in practice and principle.
• The Liang Daoists Meng Zhizhou and Zang Xuanjing; the Chen Daoist Zhu Rou; the Sui Daoist Liu Jinxi; and the Tang Daoists Cheng Xuanying, Cai Zihuang, Huang Xuanzhe, Li Rong, Che Xuanbi, Zhang Huichao, and Li Yuanxing all explain the Dao of Twofold Mystery.
• He Yan, Zhong Hui, Du Yu, Wang Fusi, Zhang Si, Yang Hu, Lady Lu, and Liu Renhui all explain the Dao of the ultimate void and Wuwei (non-action), as applied to governing the household and the state.

This shows that the commentators each had different aims and interpretations.

The various schools also differed in the teachings they received and the principles they made central:

• Yan Junping took emptiness and mystery as his central principle.
• Gu Huan took Wuwei (non-action) as his central principle.
• Meng Zhizhou and Zang Xuanjing took Dao and De as their central principle.
• Emperor Wu of Liang took neither being nor nonbeing as his central principle.
• Sun Deng took Twofold Mystery as his central principle.

Among these teachings, Sun’s is the most subtle.

This scripture takes naturalness as its substance and Dao and De as its function. Cultivated in governing the state, it brings about peace through Wuwei and freedom from meddling; cultivated in oneself, it means embracing the One and keeping to the center, thereby attaining the immortal Dao.

Plain-Language Interpretation

Attaining the Dao and Losing De

Those who attain the fruit of the Dao can travel through the air and journey far on rays of light. Through long and sustained contemplation, they move toward longevity. A state that loses the Dao and De is bound to decline and perish; a person who loses all De will fall into ruin. Therefore, people of the highest order should cultivate diligently and make holding fast to the Dao and De their way of life.

The Profound Preface to the Dao and De and the Structure of Its Volumes (Issued in the Twenty-First Year of the Kaiyuan Era)

Following the format of the Profound Preface to the Dao and De, this book was issued throughout the realm in the twenty-first year of the Kaiyuan era (733). It is divided into the following volumes:

Upper Volume: Thirty-six chapters, modeled on the four seasons of spring, summer, autumn, and winter.

• Chapters one through nine take “formless and nameless” as their central principle and explain the Dao of spring.
• Chapters ten through eighteen take “unknowing and indistinct” as their central principle and explain the Dao of summer.
• Chapters nineteen through twenty-seven take “possessing essence and trustworthiness” as their central principle and explain the Dao of autumn.
• Chapters twenty-eight through thirty-six take “settled, weighty, clear, and still” as their central principle and explain the Dao of winter.

Lower Volume: Forty-five chapters, modeled on the Five Phases of Metal, Wood, Water, Fire, and Earth.

• Chapters one through nine illuminate the De of benevolence.
• Chapters ten through eighteen illuminate the De of ritual.
• Chapters nineteen through twenty-seven illuminate the De of righteousness.
• Chapters twenty-eight through thirty-six illuminate the De of wisdom.
• Chapters thirty-seven through forty-five illuminate the De of trustworthiness.

Benevolence centers on walking in emptiness and embracing the One; ritual on not relying on power or acting as ruler; righteousness on gentleness, weakness, and harmony; wisdom on freedom from knowledge and from striving to be someone; trustworthiness on keeping to the covenant without contention. The work as a whole takes vast, open mystery and subtle, still emptiness as its guiding substance. If one insists on imposing categories, there are the “Five De” and the “Four Covenants”; in principle, however, it is rooted in nonattachment and Wuwei (non-action).

Purpose of the Work

Those who expound the texts, however, often cling to the wording, and many errors result. Commentaries from both ancient and modern times are also often incomplete when they rely on a single school. Here, writings from many schools are cited broadly and their underlying aims are traced fully. Wherever the meaning is clear, the material is carefully selected to help distinguish the order of historical periods and the rights and wrongs of their central aims.