Tao Te Ching

Template:Short description Template:EngvarB Template:Use dmy dates Template:Infobox book Template:Taoism

The Tao Te ChingTemplate:NoteTag (Template:Zh) or Laozi is a Chinese classic text and foundational work of Taoism traditionally credited to the sage Laozi, though the text's authorship and date of composition and compilation are debated.<ref>Template:Harvp</ref> The oldest excavated portion dates to the late 4th century BC.<ref name="stanford" />

The Tao Te Ching is central to both philosophical and religious Taoism, and has been highly influential to Chinese philosophy and religious practice in general. It is generally taken as preceding the Zhuangzi, the other core Taoist text.<ref name="stanford">Template:Harvp.</ref> Terminology originating within the text has been reinterpreted and elaborated upon by Legalist thinkers, Confucianists, and particularly Chinese Buddhists, which had been introduced to China significantly after the initial solidification of Taoist thought. The text is well known in the West, and is one of the most translated texts in world literature.<ref name="stanford">Template:Harvp.</ref>

TitleEdit

In English, the title is commonly rendered Tao Te Ching, following the Wade–Giles romanisation, or as Daodejing, following pinyin. It can be translated as The Classic of the Way and its Power,<ref>Template:Citation</ref> The Book of the Tao and Its Virtue,Template:Sfnp The Book of the Way and of Virtue,Template:Sfnp Template:Sfnp The Tao and its Characteristics,<ref name="legge" /> The Canon of Reason and Virtue,<ref name="suziq" /> The Classic Book of Integrity and the Way,Template:Sfnp or A Treatise on the Principle and Its Action.Template:Sfnp Template:Sfnp

Ancient Chinese books were commonly referenced by the name of their real or supposed author, in this case the "Old Master",Template:Sfnp Laozi. As such, the Tao Te Ching is also sometimes referred to as the Laozi, especially in Chinese sources.<ref name="stanford" />

The title Tao Te Ching, designating the work's status as a classic, was only first applied during the reign of Emperor Jing of Han (157–141 BC).<ref>Template:Citation</ref> Other titles for the work include the honorific Sutra of the Way and Its Power (Template:Zhi) and the descriptive Five Thousand Character Classic (Template:Zhi).

Textual historyEdit

Principal versionsEdit

Among the many transmitted editions of the Tao Te Ching text, the three primary ones are named after early commentaries. The "Yan Zun Version", which is only extant for the Te Ching, derives from a commentary attributed to Han dynasty scholar Yan Zun ({{#invoke:Lang|lang}}, Template:Fl.). The "Heshang Gong" version is named after the legendary Heshang Gong ('legendary sage'), who supposedly lived during the reign of Emperor Wen of Han (180–157 BC). This commentary has a preface written by Ge Xuan (164–244 AD), granduncle of Ge Hong, and scholarship dates this version to Template:Circa. The origins of the "Wang Bi" version have greater verification than either of the above. Wang Bi (226–249 AD) was a Three Kingdoms-period philosopher and commentator on the Tao Te Ching and I Ching.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>

Archaeologically recovered manuscriptsEdit

Tao Te Ching scholarship has advanced from archaeological discoveries of manuscripts, some of which are older than any of the received texts. Beginning in the 1920s and 1930s, Marc Aurel Stein and others found thousands of scrolls in the Mogao Caves near Dunhuang. They included more than 50 partial and complete manuscripts. Another partial manuscript has the Xiang'er commentary, which had previously been lost.<ref>Template:Citation</ref>Template:Rp<ref>Template:Citation</ref>

In 1973, archaeologists discovered copies of early Chinese books, known as the Mawangdui Silk Texts, in a tomb dated to 168 BC.<ref name="stanford" /> They included two nearly complete copies of the text, referred to as Text A ({{#invoke:Lang|lang}}) and Text B ({{#invoke:Lang|lang}}), both of which reverse the traditional ordering and put the Te Ching section before the Tao Ching, which is why the Henricks translation of them is named "Te-Tao Ching". Based on calligraphic styles and imperial naming taboo avoidances, scholars believe that Text A can be dated to about the first decade and Text B to about the third decade of the 2nd century BC.<ref>Template:Citation</ref>

In 1993, the oldest known version of the text, written on bamboo slips, was found in a tomb near the town of Guodian (Template:Zhi) in Jingmen, Hubei, and dated prior to 300 BC.<ref name="stanford" /> The Guodian Chu Slips comprise around 800 slips of bamboo with a total of over 13,000 characters, about 2,000 of which correspond with the Tao Te Ching.<ref name="stanford" />

Both the Mawangdui and Guodian versions are generally consistent with the received texts, excepting differences in chapter sequence and graphic variants. Several recent Tao Te Ching translations utilise these two versions, sometimes with the verses reordered to synthesize the new finds.<ref>Template:Multiref</ref>

Chronological theoriesEdit

Template:See also Although debated more in early scholarship, early modern scholars like Feng Youlan and Herrlee G. Creel still considered the work a compilation,Template:Sfnp and most modern scholarship holds the text to be a compilation, as typical for long-form early Chinese texts.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> Linguistic studies of the Tao Te ChingTemplate:'s vocabulary and rime scheme point to a date of composition after the Classic of Poetry (or Book of Songs), but before the Zhuangzi,<ref>Template:Citation</ref> and would generally be taken as preceding the Zhuangzi.Template:Sfn This is the traditional "before Zhuangzi’ theory".Template:Sfn Although the Book of Songs is a diverse work, they do not appear to bear any especial resemblance.Template:Sfn

Based on Sima Qian, the text would traditionally be taken as preceding Shen Buhai. Creel proposed that Shen Buhai may have preceded it as well,Template:Sfnp but Shen Buhai does bare a "striking" resemblance to Laozi.<ref>Template:Harvnb; Template:Harvnb (citing Template:Harvnb); Template:Harvnb</ref> Although not enough to eliminate a late dating, the discovery of the early Mawangdui silk texts and Guodian Chu Slips again made a dating before the third-century more probable.Template:Sfnm Essentially the dating of A.C. Graham, the Stanford Encyclopedia supposes compilation of the current text as dating back to Template:Circa, drawing on a wide range of versions further dating back a century or two.<ref name="Stanford">Template:Cite encyclopedia</ref> Benjamin I. Schwartz still considered the Tao te Ching remarkably unified by the time of the Mawangdui, even if these versions swap the two halves of the text;<ref name="Schartz2009">Template:Cite book</ref> as one criticism of late theories for the work, although it's earliest recovered version is from late in the period, it's language was already "coherent and natural".Template:Sfn

Termed the "After Zhuangzi" theory, representative of Ch'ien Mu and Graham, a lack of early references contributes to Graham's late dating. While the Zhuangzi is the first reference for the Tao te Ching, it's Inner Chapters do not demonstrate familiar with it. Thus, an early stratum representative of the Zhuangzi's core Inner Chapters may have preceded it.Template:Sfnm Listed in the Outer Zhuangzi's history before Laozi and Zhuangzi, Shen Dao also shares content with the Inner Zhuangzi.Template:Sfnm Less technically complex than Shen Buhai, Shen Dao's current may even precede him, as espoused by Ban Gu.Template:Sfn However, Shen Dao can also be directly compared with the Tao te Ching.Template:Sfn

Sinologist Chad Hansen does not consider the Outer Zhuangzi entirely accurate chronologically, but still recalls it as part of a theoretical framework for the Stanford Encyclopedia of Daoism, positioning Shen Dao as "Pre-Laozi Daoist Theory". Discussing concepts of names and realities in its opening, Feng Youlan proposed the school of names as preceding the Tao Te Ching. But while some may have, it does not demonstrate school of names influence the way the Zhuangzi does. The Tao te Ching is not as paradoxical, it tries to demonstrate that the way or dao is not constant. Although differing, Mohism and Confucianism also discuss concepts of names and realities.Template:Sfnm

AuthorshipEdit

The Tao Te Ching was traditionally ascribed to Laozi, whose historical existence has been a matter of scholarly debate. His name, which means "Old Master", has only fuelled controversy on this issue.<ref>Template:Citation</ref> Legends claim variously that Laozi was "born old" and that he lived for 996 years, with twelve previous incarnations starting around the time of the Three Sovereigns before the thirteenth as Laozi. Some scholars have expressed doubts over Laozi's historicity.<ref>Template:Citation</ref>

File:Laozi.jpg

Laozi riding a water buffalo

The first biographical reference to Laozi is in the Records of the Grand Historian,<ref>Template:Harvnb, tr. Chan 1963:35–37.</ref> by Chinese historian Sima Qian (Template:Circa), which combines three stories.<ref>Template:Cite Shiji</ref> In the first, Laozi was a contemporary of Confucius (551–479 BC). His surname was Li (Template:Zhi), and his personal name was Er (Template:Zhi) or Dan (Template:Zhi). He was an official in the imperial archives, and wrote a book in two parts before departing to the West; at the request of the keeper of the Han-ku Pass, Yinxi, Laozi composed the Tao Te Ching. In the second story, Laozi, also a contemporary of Confucius, was Lao Laizi ({{#invoke:Lang|lang}}), who wrote a book in 15 parts. Third, Laozi was the grand historian and astrologer Lao Dan ({{#invoke:Lang|lang}}), who lived during the reign of Duke Xian of Qin (Template:Reign).Template:Sfnp

ContentsEdit

ThemesEdit

Template:See also Template:Expand German {{#section:Laozi|DDJ themes}}

Internal structureEdit

The Tao Te Ching is a text of around 5,162 to 5,450 Chinese characters in 81 brief chapters or sections ({{#invoke:Lang|lang}}). There is some evidence that the chapter divisions were later additions—for commentary, or as aids to rote memorisation—and that the original text was more fluidly organised. It has two parts, the Tao Ching ({{#invoke:Lang|lang}}; chapters 1–37) and the Te Ching ({{#invoke:Lang|lang}}; chapters 38–81), which may have been edited together into the received text, possibly reversed from an original Te Tao Ching.<ref name="Austin 2010 158">Template:Citation</ref>

The written style is laconic, and has few grammatical particles. While the ideas are singular, the style is poetic, combining two major strategies: short, declarative statements, and intentional contradictions, encouraging varied, contradictory interpretations. The first of these strategies creates memorable phrases, while the second forces the reader to reconcile supposed contradictions.<ref name="Austin 2010 158"/> With a partial reconstruction of the pronunciation of Old Chinese spoken during the Tao Te ChingTemplate:'s composition, approximately three-quarters rhymed in the original language.<ref name=":13">Template:Citation</ref>

The Chinese characters in the earliest versions were written in seal script, while later versions were written in clerical script and regular script styles.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>

TranslationEdit

The Tao Te Ching has been translated into Western languages over 250 times, mostly to English, German, and French.Template:Sfnp According to Holmes Welch, "It is a famous puzzle which everyone would like to feel he had solved."<ref>Template:Citation</ref> The first English translation of the Tao Te Ching was produced in 1868 by the Scottish Protestant missionary John Chalmers, entitled The Speculations on Metaphysics, Polity, and Morality of the "Old Philosopher" Lau-tsze.Template:Sfnp It was heavily indebtedTemplate:Sfnp to Julien's French translationTemplate:Sfnp and dedicated to James Legge,<ref name="chalv" /> who later produced his own translation for Oxford's Sacred Books of the East.<ref name="legge" />

Other notable English translations of the Tao Te Ching are those produced by Chinese scholars and teachers: a 1948 translation by linguist Lin Yutang, a 1961 translation by author John Ching Hsiung Wu, a 1963 translation by sinologist Din Cheuk Lau, another 1963 translation by professor Wing-tsit Chan, and a 1972 translation by Taoist teacher Gia-Fu Feng together with his wife Jane English.

Many translations are written by people with a foundation in Chinese language and philosophy who are trying to render the original meaning of the text as faithfully as possible into English. Some of the more popular translations are written from a less scholarly perspective, giving an individual author's interpretation. Critics of these versions claim that their translators deviate from the text and are incompatible with the history of Chinese thought.<ref>Template:Citation</ref> Russell Kirkland goes further to argue that these versions are based on Western Orientalist fantasies and represent the colonial appropriation of Chinese culture.<ref>Template:Citation</ref><ref>Template:Citation</ref> Other Taoism scholars, such as Michael LaFargue<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> and Jonathan Herman,<ref>Template:Citation</ref> argue that while they do not pretend to scholarship, they meet a real spiritual need in the West. These Westernized versions aim to make the wisdom of the Tao Te Ching more accessible to modern English-speaking readers by, typically, employing more familiar cultural and temporal references.

Challenges in translationEdit

Template:More citations needed section

The Tao Te Ching is written in Classical Chinese, which generally poses a number of challenges for interpreters and translators. As Holmes Welch notes, the written language "has no active or passive, no singular or plural, no case, no person, no tense, no mood."<ref>Template:Harvp</ref> Moreover, the received text lacks many grammatical particles which are preserved in the older Mawangdui and Beida texts, which permit the text to be more precise.<ref>Template:Harvp</ref> Lastly, many passages of the Tao Te Ching are deliberately ambiguous.<ref name="Record_2022">Template:Cite journal</ref><ref name="Chan_1993">Template:Cite journal</ref>

Since there is very little punctuation in Classical Chinese, determining the precise boundaries between words and sentences is not always trivial. Deciding where these phrasal boundaries are must be done by the interpreter.<ref name="Record_2022" /> Some translators have argued that the received text is so corrupted due toTemplate:Citation needed its original medium being bamboo strips<ref name="Harvard Gazette 2001 v799">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> linked with silk threads—that it is impossible to understand some passages without some transposition of characters.Template:Citation needed