Classical Daoism - Is there really such a thing?

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Classical Daoism - Is there really such a thing?"

Corey Miller
5 years ago
Views:

1 Classical Daoism - Is there really such a thing? by manyulim (Visit site for author's full name and information.) - Monday, October 17, (Scott Barnwell, a long time friend of the blog, will be guest-posting on this topic. Here is Part I of Scott's thoughts. This post also appears on his own blog. Please address Scott directly in your comments.) Daojia and Huang-Lao Classical Daoism, Philosophical Daoism, Early Daoism: these terms are increasingly being seen as obsolescent by scholars in the last couple of decades. The general public those who have heard of Daoism or have read a little bit of it are largely unaware, despite the fact that for quite awhile writers have admitted that there were no Daoists in pre-han China and that the two most famous Daoists, Laozi and Zhuangzi, surely never thought of themselves as Daoists. The more recent interest in what was once called religious Daoism (Daojiao??), as opposed to philosophical Daoism (Daojia??), has seen a shift towards using Daoism to refer only to the former. In this series of blog posts I am going to explore this matter. First, I will look at the oldest evidence for a Daoist school in the Historical Records (Shiji??) and the Han Documents (Hanshu??). Next I will look into both the text and the legendary man Laozi??, followed by Zhuangzi??. Texts that will be mentioned along the way will include: the Laozi??, Zhuangzi??, Hanfeizi??? (esp. Jie Lao??, Yu Lao??), Lüshi Chunqiu????, Mengzi??, Xunzi??, Guanzi?? (esp. Neiye??), Huainanzi???, Heguanzi???, and the Huangdi Sijing????. I will also survey various scholars views on early Chinese schools of thought. Daojia?? first appears in the Historical Records written by Sima Tan??? and his son Sima Qian???, both of whom served as the Grand Astrologer (Taishi??) in the early Han Dynasty. In the one hundred and thirtieth chapter of the Historical Records, Sima Qian presented his father s outlines of the Six Jia (??), commonly thought of as the six schools of thought but probably best understood as the six areas of expertise or six approaches to government. [1] He lists these as the Yinyang (??), the Ru (?), the Mo (?), the Ming (?), the Fa (?), and the Daode (??; afterwards shortened to Daojia??). For Sima Tan, these six categories were methods or techniques of governing (Zhi?), of which he neither names texts nor exponents of these approaches. After discussing some pros and cons of the others, Sima Tan discussed the Daojia:???????????????(=?)???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? The Daoists enable the numinous essence within people to be concentrated and unified. In movement they are joined with the Formless, in tranquility they (provide) sufficiently for all living things. In deriving their techniques, they follow the grand compliances of the Yinyang lineage, select the best of the Ru and Mo lineages, and extract the essentials of the Ming and Fa lineages. They shift (their policies) in accordance with the seasons and respond to the transformations of things. In establishing customs and promulgating policies, they do nothing unsuitable. Their tenets are concise and easy to grasp; their page 1 / 6

2 policies are few but their achievements are many. [2] Unlike the other Jia, Sima Tan enumerated no shortcomings or defects of Daojia, partially, no doubt, because it incorporated the best parts of the others.[3] A bit later some further analysis is offered:???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? The Daoists do nothing, but they also say that nothing is left undone. Their substance is easy to practice, but their words are difficult to understand. Their techniques take emptiness and nothingness as the foundation and adaptation and compliance as the application. They have no set limits, no regular forms, and so are able to penetrate to the genuine basis of living things. Because they neither anticipate things nor linger over them, they are able to become the masters of all living things. They have methods that are no methods: They take adapting to the seasons as their practice. They have limits that are no limits: They adapt to things by harmonizing with them. Therefore they say: The sage is not clever: The seasonal alternations are what the sage preserves. Emptiness is the constant in the Way. Adaptation is the guiding principle of the ruler. [4] Going solely on this description, it would seem Daojia has little to do with the Laozi. It is only doing nothing and yet they say that nothing is left undone (????????) which seems to ultimately derive from the Laozi (chapters 37 and 48); although, the motto is also found in third century texts such as Zhuangzi chapters 18, 22, 23, and 25, and the Lüshi Chunqiu One can also find it in the first chapter of the early Han text, the Huainanzi. One might wonder why he labeled it Dao-Jia, since his descriptions says nothing about Dao. We may surmise that he labeled it such because of its comprehensiveness: it was a Dao that included the other Daos. Or perhaps, as his first expression of it as Daode?? suggests, it was derived from the Dao and De sections of the Laozi, (though not yet called the Daodejing???). No names of individuals or texts are named by Sima Tan for any of these lineages. It is fairly clear that the Laozi, (or Lao Dan, the supposed author), was believed by his son Sima Qian to be an exemplar of Daojia thought. His biography of Laozi mentions that Laozi wrote a book in two parts on Dao and De and in a number of places in the Shiji we find Daojia connected to the teachings and practices of the Yellow Emperor and Laozi (?????, or simply Huang-Lao??), [5] which seem to be synonymous (see below). In the Han Documents Treatise on Literature (Hanshu Yiwenzhi?????), Ban Gu s?? bibliographical listing[6] for Daojia presumably included the Laozi, as it included four commentaries on it, as well as known texts such as the Zhuangzi??, Wenzi??, Liezi??, Heguanzi???, and the Yellow Emperor s Four Classics (Huangdi Sijing????).[7] The Hanshu, for its part, describes Daojia thusly:????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? page 2 / 6

3 The current of the Daoists emanated from the Office of the Historian, which in successive generations recorded the various roads leading to success or failure, survival or destruction, and ill or good fortune from antiquity down to the present. By and by they came to understand how grasping the essentials maintains the root, how purity and emptiness preserves oneself, and how humility and pliancy sustains oneself. These became the techniques of the ruler who faces south. They accord with Yao s capacity to yield and the Changes hexagram Modesty and Humility, wherein one instance of humility brings forth four benefits. These are its strengths. Nonetheless, if taken too liberally, one will desire to disregard ritual education and abandon humaneness and righteousness, claiming that one need only employ purity and emptiness to govern. [8] Sima Tan s Daojia represented an approach to governing that centred on responding and adapting (Yin?)[9] to changes, in the process adopting any methods from other ways of governing or ordering society that proved useful, such as those of the Ru, Mo, Fa and Ming. There appears also to be some concern with Jingshen??, essential and spiritual energies, Wuwei??, non-purposive or non-interfering action and Xuwu??, emptiness and nothingness. Ban Gu s Daojia was described quite differently, as responding or adapting to changes is not mentioned once, nor adopting the best from other Jia.[10] His Daojia seems to have had more to do with humility and the way to maintain and preserve oneself, based on acquaintance with events of the past. He also regarded the Daojia as entailing a rejection of typical Ru concerns: ritual/etiquette, benevolence and duty (?????). This description has more in common with the Laozi than Sima Tan s. We turn now to Huang-Lao??, the philosophy and/or practices apparently popular in the first half of the Han Dynasty. Huang-Lao refers to the teachings of the legendary Yellow Emperor (Huang Di??, trad. c. twenty-seventh century B.C.E.) in combination with those of the Laozi. There are as many opinions on what texts Huang-Lao applies to, but many of them have connections to the land of Chu?. Some suggestions are the four silk texts from Mawangdui, a.k.a. The Yellow Emperor s Four Classics????, the Huainanzi???, the Heguanzi???, a number of chapters of the Guanzi??,[11] and a number from the Chunqiu Fanlu????.[12] Besides showing the influence of the Laozi, these so-called Huang-Lao texts appear to be anything that is not distinctly Confucian or Mohist and have theories on statecraft.[13] The Yellow Emperor was increasingly being used to give authority to writings in many, many areas of thought,[14] so what his name is supposed to imply is difficult to know. Perhaps, because he had become known to be China s first (or most significant) ruler, his name was used to signify a Laoist philosophy regarding rulership. Han Emperor Wen s wife Empress (Dowager) Dou? is repeatedly proclaimed to have been very fond of the words (Yan?) and methods (Shu?) of Laozi, or Huangdi and Laozi. For example, in the forty-ninth chapter of the Shiji we read: Empress Dowager Dou was fond of the teachings of the Yellow Emperor and Laozi. Emperor (Wen), the heir apparent, and the Dou family members were obliged to study them and prize their methods (???????????????????????????????). [15] In Shiji 107 we read again of Empress Dowager s fondness for Huang-Lao but also of a number of scholars who competed with her by advancing Rushu??, literally Classicists methods, perhaps implying Confucianism. These scholars, as Sima reported elsewhere, disparaged the teachings of Daojia (????).[16] This suggests that Huang-Lao and Daojia refer to the same ideology. Once the Empress asked a staunch defender of the Ru and expert on the Odes what he thought of the book of Laozi (???). Perhaps unwisely, he answered, these are nothing but the teachings of a menial (??????), after which he received some severe punishment.[17] Once she died (135 B.C.E.), however, the Ru/Confucians repressed the teachings of Huang-Lao and page 3 / 6

4 Confucianism began its ascendency relatively unimpeded.[18] In addition to Empress Dowager Dou and her family, well over a dozen names are mentioned in the Shiji as being adherents of Huang-Lao, such as Ji An??, Elder Gao??, Sima Jizhu????, Chen Ping??, and Elder Yue Chen???.[19] The Prince of Huainan, Liu An?? (c B.C.E.), put together the Huainanzi??? in this Huang-Lao and Laozi-friendly environment, and it shows throughout the whole text (which also draws heavily from the Zhuangzi). Generally speaking, this text could be considered a Huang-Lao text and Liu a Huang-Lao advocate. Some of them lived prior to the Han. In fact, Sima Qian labelled pre-qin thinkers Shenzi??, Hanfei??, and Jixia?? residents Shen Dao??, Tian Pian??, Jiezi??, and Huan Yuan?? as being adherents of Huang-Lao.[20] Ban Gu also labeled the pre-qin philosopher Songzi?? as Huang-Lao. However, these are purely retrospective labels, as it does not appear in any textual sources prior to the Han and these thinkers would not have thought of themselves as following Huang-Lao teachings or practices. Sima Tan does not mention Huang-Lao, which may have been a creation of his son.[21] It does not appear, however, that any of these men founded their theories or grounded their views in those of the Laozi. Sima Qian may have, after reading some of their works, saw some doctrines that resembled those of a current Huang-Lao tradition in the Han. He almost certainly did not read all of their writings, so his views of them are probably skewed and not completely representative. Perhaps his connecting Hanfei with Laozi may be attributed to his seeing the two commentaries included in the Hanfeizi.[22] Or perhaps the de-emphasizing or rejecting of beloved Confucian ideals of Ren, Yi and Li (?????) in the sayings found in the Laozi and stories about Lao Dan (in the Zhuangzi) that were shared by Hanfei, Shenzi and their followers created a bond in Sima Qian s mind. Tae Hyun Kim thinks that the Jie Lao??, Yu Lao??, Zhu Dao??, Yang Quan?? chapters of the Hanfeizi could justifiably be called Huang-Lao texts but, like Hagop Sarkissian, does not think they were written by Hanfei.[23] Sarkissian does not think the Jie Lao and Yu Lao are Huang-Lao because there is no discussion of law. No one knows why the two commentaries were included in the Hanfeizi, though perhaps to match the belief that he was based in the thought of Laozi or perhaps to add prestige to his work in the early Han. Wang Chong?? (c C.E.), in his Lunheng?? occasionally discussed Laozi, Huang-Lao and Daojia. He associated longevity and immortality with Daojia (chapter 24) as well as associating both Daojia and Huang-Lao with a good understanding of the processes of Heaven and Earth, i.e., their naturalness and lack of purposeful activity (chapter 54 and 42 respectively). He identified a Wuwei-style of government to them (chapter 54) and identified quietism (Tiandan??) as another trait of Huang-Lao and Lao Dan (chapters 54 and 80).[24] Next: Laozi?? [1] Kidder Smith, Sima Tan and the Invention of Daoism, Legalism, et cetera in The Journal of Asian Studies, [2] On the Six Lineages of Thought by Sarah Queen and Harold Roth in Sources of Chinese Tradition, Vol. I, Columbia University Press, 1999, 279, modified. page 4 / 6

5 [3] The Zajia??, the Miscellaneous Jia of the Hanshu s Yiwenzhi????? was described very similarly, taking the best of some of the others:?????????. Zajia included the Lüshi Chunqiu and Huainanzi. [4] Ibid [5] For example, Shiji 56 and 107. [6] I will refer to the Yiwenzhi chapter of the Hanshu as representing Ban Gu s view, even though he took this classification from Liu Xin?? and perhaps his father, Liu Xiang??. [7] Which may or may not be the Four Texts attached to the Laozi manuscripts found at Mawangdui. [8] Sarah A Queen, Inventories of the Past: Rethinking the School Affiliation of the Huainanzi, Asia Major, Volume 14, part 1, 2001, p [9] Yin? appears five times in the two descriptions. [10] As that was the hallmark of the Zajia??. See note #3. [11] E.g., the Neiye, Xinshu Shang, Xinshu Xia, Baixin, Zheng, Chi Mi, Zhou He, Shu Yan, Bing Fa, Ba Yan, etc. [12] Sarah Queen in her From Chronicle to Canon writes that 21 sections from seven chapters 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 77, 78 are Huang-Lao and that these texts pay little attention to Confucian texts. She writes that these chapters argue that Laozi s doctrine of non-purposive action, Shen Buhai s theory of titles and actualities, Hanfei s advocacy of impartial rewards and punishments, Mozi s emphasis on elevating the worthy, and Guanzi s techniques of inner cultivation are indispensible methods of rulership (Cambridge University Press, 1996, 85-6). [13] Roger Ames/D.C. Lau wrote, At this point in time, Huang-Lao has become a receptacle for any early Han dynasty text that has a Daoist tincture, and given the syncretism that marks this period, there is little that is excluded by it. (Yuan Dao, Ballantine, 1998, 12) [14] See Robin Yates Five Lost Classics, Ballantine, 1997, and [15] Cf. Shiji 12, 28, 121. Both Emperor Wen and Jing also had a fondness for Xingming??, which by then formed some associations with Daojia/Huang-Lao. [16] Cf. Burton Watson, Records of the Grand Historian, Vol. II, Columbia University Press, 1996, p. 93. [17] Shiji 121, Cf. Watson, Vol. II p [18] Shiji 121. [19] See Aat Vervoorn s Men of Cliffs and Caves, The Chinese University Press, 1990, 268 n31 for more page 5 / 6

6 Powered by TCPDF ( names. [20] In Laozi s biography both Shenzi and Hanfei are labelled as adherents of Huang-Lao (and Xingming??). It is no coincidence that scholars who specialized in the teachings of Shenzi and Hanfei (along with a few others) were expelled from the royal court by the Ru-supporter and imperial counsellor Zhao Wan (??). (Hanshu 6; see Griet Vankeerberghen, The Huainanzi and Liu An s Claim to Moral Authority, SUNY Press, 2001, 11). [21] Kidder Smith, 2003, 146. [22] These probably were not even written by him; see below. [23] Other Laozi Parallels in the Hanfeizi in Sino-Platonic Papers 199, March 2010, 17. Hagop Sarkissian, Laozi: Re-visiting Two Early Commentaries in the Hanfeizi M.A. Thesis, University of Toronto, [24] This will be discussed more later. PDF generated by Kalin's PDF Creation Station page 6 / 6

Foundations of the Imperial State

Foundations of the Imperial State Foundations of the Imperial State 1. Historical and geographic overview 2. 100 Schools revisited: Legalism 3. Emergence of the centralized, bureaucratic state 4. New ruler,