Several major misunderstandings that are very easy to fall into when reading Laozi's "Tao Te Ching"! (Part 1) 读老子《道德经》极易陷入的几大误区！（上）
There is a popular question on the Chinese knowledge question-and-answer community "Zhihu", titled "After learning Taoist philosophy and reading Laozi, I became indifferent to the world and lost the motivation to strive. This seriously affected my studies. What should I do?" There are many people who follow and answer it, which makes people feel emotional.
The confusion encountered by the student who asked the question is not an isolated case. There are many people who have this misunderstanding.
When I was a teenager, I first read Laozi and was deeply influenced. It laid the foundation for my worldview. Later, I went to study various schools of thought, religious doctrines, etc., and returned to Laozi in my middle age and concentrated on studying it.
This classic is indeed profound and I know that I have not "graduated". I will briefly communicate here. My remarks are just throwing bricks, hoping to attract the jade-like opinions of masters.
First, about the theme and target readers of Laozi's "Tao Te Ching"
Taoist philosophy is not monolithic, and Taoism is more varied. Taking Laozi, the founder of the Taoist school, as an example, the original name of his work "Tao Te Ching" should be "Laozi", and the readers were originally the monarchs and dukes of the pre-Qin period.
That is to say, in Laozi's philosophy, the original subjects who implemented "non-action" and "non-contention" were the rulers, at least those who held high positions in the ruling group, rather than ordinary netizens on Zhihu, including you and me.
"Laozi" expounds on the fundamental universe - Tao, and what it says can naturally be involved, or be interpreted as everything between heaven and earth. Therefore, the whole book is concise and rich in meaning. People with different concerns can draw different inspirations from "Laozi" from different angles, such as self-cultivation, dealing with the world, using troops, health preservation, qigong, medicine, theology, prose poetry, etc. It transcends time and space, and is applicable to all corners of the world, and it will last for hundreds of years.
But the original purpose of this book may be to "use the way of heaven to understand human affairs" like the Book of Changes, focusing on the issues of governing the country and pacifying the world in the era of the collapse of rituals and music and great contention, which is basically consistent with the pre-Qin philosophers.
As for the fact that the lower-class people also studied Laozi, put themselves in the role of monarchs and princes, and practiced it in life, it was already a relatively late historical period. There is a view that it was not popular until the Tang Dynasty.
People who were close to the time when Laozi was written, such as Han Fei in the Warring States Period, annotated Laozi from the perspective of governing the country, Sima Tan in the Western Han Dynasty focused on the governance theory of Huang-Lao Dao, and Ban Gu in the Eastern Han Dynasty also said that Laozi was about "the art of ruling the country from the south". There are also other perspectives, but from the Warring States Period to the Eastern Han Dynasty, the mainstream was still the perspective of governing the world.
It is the era long away from the publication of this book that grasps the characteristics of Laozi's conciseness and richness of meaning, and the interpretation is becoming more and more diverse, and generally moving further and further away from its main purpose.
From the perspective of facts and common sense, the author has not and is unlikely to be separated from the characteristics of the times and the atmosphere in which he (or they) live. This book covers a wide range of topics but has its original theme and target audience.
Second, about the "non-action" and "non-contention" in Laozi's "Tao Te Ching"
The "non-action" and "non-contention" in "Laozi" are criticisms and reprimands of the pre-Qin monarchs and princes who abused their power and committed evil and quarreled, and advised and guided the "teachable" monarchs and princes to "non-action" and "non-contention".
This is a kind of "action" characterized by "non-action" and "contention" represented by "non-contention", not really doing nothing and not competing with the world.
So, what is the "action" opposite to "non-action"? In certain specific historical periods of human beings, there have been plans for the economy, plans for fertility, and "the bolder the people, the more productive the land", etc.
Believe that man can conquer nature, believe that human rationality is enough to control the universe and the world, believe in absolute control, and believe that human morality is enough to build an ideal utopian society. These are all "action".
What is the "competition" opposite to "not competing with others"? That is "there is no righteous war in the Spring and Autumn Period", and "the people suffer when the country prospers and the people suffer when the country perishes".
At the same time, this kind of "competition" is also "overdoing things", and "being too clever in scheming will lead to the loss of your life".
The so-called "inaction" and "not competing with others" do not mean "lying down" and not working hard, nor do they deny struggle. If you understand it that way, you will fall into the misunderstanding of waiting for rabbits, waiting for pie in the sky, being emaciated, ruthless and resigned to fate.
"Laozi" reveals the laws of nature, history, social truth and the depths of human nature with a calm observation and wise summary, and puts forward the way for monarchs to govern the country and deal with people.
This is a high-level "action" and a high-level "competition". Follow the laws of nature and go with the flow. Don't go against the will of heaven or human nature. Don't act recklessly or compete recklessly.
(To be continued)
在中国知识问答社区"知乎"上有一个热门问题，题为《学了道家哲学，读了〈老子〉之后变得与世无争了，没有奋斗的动力了，严重影响到了我的学习，怎么办？》，关注、回答者众，读之令人感慨。
这位提问的同学所遇困惑并非个例，有此误区者不在少数。
笔者年少时初读《老子》，深受影响，奠定了我世界观的基石，后辗转钻研于各大思想主义宗教学说等流派，中年时再返朴归真于《老子》，集中研读。
这一经典确实博大精深，我自知没有"出师"，在此只是抛砖引玉，简略交流。
其一，关于老子著《道德经》的主题和目标读者
道家哲学不是铁板一块，而道教那就变化更大了，以道家学派的鼻祖老子来论，他的著作《道德经》的本名应该是《老子》，读者对象本是先秦的君主、侯王。
也就是说，在老子哲学中，原本实施"无为""不争"的主体是统治者，至少是统治集团内位居高位的人，而不是知乎上的普通网民包括你我等人。
《老子》阐述的是宇宙根本――道，所言自然即可涉及，或被解读为天地间的一切。于是全书文约义丰，持不同关注点的人能从不同角度，从《老子》中得出不同的启示，如修养、处世、用兵、养生、气功、医学、神学、散文诗等等。它是超越时空的，推之四海而皆准，历百世而长青。
但此书的本旨，可能如《周易》般"推天道以明人事"，关注于礼崩乐坏、大争之世的治国理政、平定天下的问题，这和先秦诸子基本一致。
至于底层庶民也学《老子》，把自己代入君主、侯王角色，在生活中去践行，已经是较晚的历史时期了，有一种观点是迟至唐朝才普及。
离《老子》成书时间近的人，如战国韩非注《老》是从治国理政角度，西汉司马谈聚焦黄老道的治理学说，东汉班固也说《老子》是讲"君人南面之术"。从其他角度的也有，但在战国至东汉时，主流还是治理天下的角度。
倒是离此书问世时间久远的年代，抓住《老子》的文约义丰特点，解读越来越多元，离其主旨大体上越来越远。
从事实和常理来说，作者没有也不太可能脱离他（或他们）所处的时代特点、环境氛围，此书涉及广博但有原本主题、目标受众。
其二，关于老子《道德经》中的"无为""不争"
《老子》谆谆教诲的"无为""不争"，是在批评、训斥先秦的君主、侯王滥权妄为、作恶乱争，建言和指导"孺子可教"的君主、侯王要"无为""不争"。
这是一种以"无为"为特征的"为"，以"不争"为表象的"争"，不是真的啥也不干、与世无争。
那么，与"无为"相对的"有为"是什么？在人类的某些特定历史时期，曾经出现过对经济的计划，对生育的计划，还有"人有多大胆，地有多高产"，等等。
相信人定胜天，相信人类的理性足以驾驭这个宇宙、这个世界，相信绝对的管控，相信人的道德足以建立一个乌托邦的理想社会。这都是"有为"。
与"不争"相对的"争"是什么？那就是"春秋无义战"，和"兴也百姓苦、亡也百姓苦"。
同时，这种"争"也是"弄巧成拙"，还有"机关算尽太聪明，反误了卿卿性命"。
所谓"无为""不争"，并不是"躺平"，不是否定奋斗。如果要那样理解，就会陷入守株待兔、坐等天上掉馅饼、形容枯槁、无情无欲、听天由命的误区。
《老子》是以一种冷静的旁观、睿智的总结，揭示出自然规律、历史规律、社会真相和人性深处，提出君主治国理政、为人处事之道。
这是一种高层次的"为"、高水平的"争"，遵循自然规律，顺势而为，不可逆天，不可背离人性，不要妄为、乱争。
（未完待续）
Comments
Post a Comment