What did Laozi actually say

Author: Guo Shiming
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2006-01-01
Features: The text of this chapter in the bamboo slips differs from the Wang Bi edition in several important ways. The remaining text of Bamboo Slip Jia in this chapter is as follows:
The Way that can be spoken of is not the eternal Way. The name that can be named is not the eternal name. The nameless is the beginning of all things; the named is the mother of all things. Constantly without desire, observe its subtlety; constantly with desire, observe its essence. These two are the same yet different, emerging from the same source. Profound mystery within mystery, the mouth of all subtleties.
"The Way that can be spoken of is not the eternal Way; the name that can be named is not the eternal name" are two concise ancient texts. They can be analyzed as: The Way that can be spoken of is not the eternal Way; the name that can be named is not the eternal name. Alternatively, they can be analyzed as: The Way, what can be spoken of, is not the eternal Way; the name, what can be named, is not the eternal name. The meanings derived from the two analyses are completely opposite. Historically, only a few, such as Sima Guang during the Song Dynasty, advocated the first analysis, but it did not gain acceptance. Modern works on the Laozi all adopt the second analysis, leading to the conclusion that "The Way cannot be spoken of" and "The Way cannot be named." This view can be traced back at least to Wang Bi, with a history of nearly two thousand years. Wang Bi's annotations on these two sentences are: The Way that can be spoken of and the name that can be named refer to things and shapes, and are not their eternal nature, hence they cannot be spoken of or named.
The New Translation of the Laozi translates these sentences as:
"The Way," what can be spoken of, is not the eternal Way;
"The name," what can be named, is not the eternal name.
Today, the idea that "The Way cannot be spoken of" and "The Way cannot be named" has almost become the dominant thought in the study of the Laozi, and people have long grown accustomed to it. This has given rise to a rather strange phenomenon: everyone claims that the Laozi speaks of "The Way," yet everyone also claims that Laozi believed the "eternal Way" is unutterable. So, what exactly is the Laozi talking about? Is it talking about the "non-eternal Way," or the "unutterable Way"? If the former, why speak of it at all? If the latter, how could the Laozi possibly articulate the "unutterable Way"?
The two sentences in Bamboo Slip Jia happen to align with the first analysis (Bamboo Slip Yi only preserves seven characters: "The Way that can be spoken of is" and "the eternal name"). Grammatically, there is no longer any ambiguity, so we naturally should analyze the opening two sentences of the Laozi according to the text of Bamboo Slip Jia. In the bamboo slips, "" is written as "" in Wang Bi's edition, likely altered by later generations to avoid the taboo of Emperor Wen of Han, Liu Heng. The character "" (constant) and "" (always) can both mean "eternal" or "forever," but can also be interpreted as "frequently," "consistently," "always," or "persistently." The difference between the two interpretations lies in whether they include the future—the former does, while the latter does not, only referring to the present.
According to this latter interpretation, we can see that the first "" in "，" is a specialized term in the Laozi, a noun. The last two "" characters are the verb "to speak." The entire sentence means: The Way can be made clear, but it is not the Way people have always spoken of. In other words, others before Laozi and during his time also spoke of the Way (which is indeed true), but Laozi believed their understanding was incorrect, and now he intends to present a new perspective.
In pre-Qin texts, speaking of "The Way" was quite common. The Analects even contains more instances of "" than the Laozi, for example, in Analects·Lizhen:
The Master said, "Zan, my Way is one that I pursue consistently." Zengzi replied, "Only." After the Master left, the disciples asked, "What did he mean?" Zengzi said, "The Master's Way is simply sincerity and forgiveness."
This is a familiar example of speaking of "The Way." However, the "Way" in Confucianism is an abstract concept, while the "Way" in the Laozi is an objectively existing, material substance.
"，" corresponds to "，" in structure and meaning. Therefore, its meaning should be: The name of the Way can be spoken of, but it is not the kind of name people have always used. In general, when naming something, people rely on their senses, naming it based on its form, composition, function, etc. Wang Bi's "refer to things and shapes" likely refers to this. Since the Way is fundamentally different from ordinary things, we cannot name it using conventional methods. Thus, although it is "nameable," it is "not an eternal name."
In the following chapters, we can clearly see how the Laozi explains and refers to the Way using "non-eternal" methods. Wang Bi understood that conventional naming methods are "refer to things and shapes," and that the Way cannot be named using these methods, which aligns with the original meaning of the Laozi. However, concluding that "The Way cannot be spoken of" or "cannot be named" is somewhat one-sided: the Way that cannot be explained using conventional methods can still be explained using "non-conventional" methods.