I read the "Tao Te Ching".

Author: Zhao Youchun
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2006-06-01
Features:
Seeing it but not seeing it, it is called subtle;
Hearing it but not hearing it, it is called faint;
Touching it but not grasping it, it is called indistinct.
These three are beyond question, so they are merged into one.
One, its upper part is not erroneous, its lower part is not neglected,
Seeking it, it is nameless;
Returning to nothingness, it is called formless and imageless;
It is called hazy and indistinct,
Following it, you do not see its rear;
Meeting it, you do not see its front.
Holding the way of today to govern the existence of today,
And knowing the beginning of antiquity,
This is called the way's record.
This chapter, the interpreters' understanding of the main theme of the entire chapter is of the nature of guessing. Even if you refer to the annotations, after reading them, you will still feel bewildered and unable to believe that the annotators truly understood it. One important reason for this is that although the entire chapter discusses the way, the word "way" does not appear until the last four sentences. The preceding several large sections treat the way as a set existence, describing it with the language of sensory objects, making the meaning somewhat obscure and difficult to grasp.
1. Seeing it but not seeing it, it is called subtle;
Hearing it but not hearing it, it is called faint;
Touching it but not grasping it, it is called indistinct.
In these three sentences, the Wang text has no "while" and the last "it," and "not" is used instead of "not." This does not affect the meaning of the text, but it also reverses "subtle" and "indistinct," which is puzzling. "Indistinct" means "flat," naturally suitable for describing the smoothness of something without bumps when touched, but how can it be used to "name" something invisible? "Touching" is precisely the meaning of "touch," so it is very appropriate to pair "touch" with "indistinct" in the last sentence. The Wang text uses "grasping" for "touching," perhaps because it first treats "indistinct" as "subtle," so it uses "grasping" (meaning "to grasp") to pair with "subtle." "Faint" originally has no meaning of "silence," but in the "Tao Te Ching," there is the sentence "The greatest sound is faint" (Chapter 41). Based on this, we can be sure that "faint" here also means "silent." However, we do not need to place too much emphasis on the three words "subtle," "faint," and "indistinct" here, because these three sentences are merely saying that the set object is invisible, inaudible, and intangible. They name it based on the results of seeing, hearing, and touching, merely emphasizing that its imperceptibility has reached a very high degree. Therefore, it follows that:
2. These three are beyond question, so they are merged into one.
"Beyond question" in the Guo text is written as "beyond calculation," and it is generally believed that "calculate" is a loan character for "question," meaning "to question." So "beyond question (calculate)" means it cannot be exhaustively investigated, or that questioning stops. The Wang text has a "this" before "three." "(This) three" refers to which three? Generally, it is believed to refer to "subtle," "faint," and "indistinct." Why can these three not be questioned? This is not asked or answered. Especially, almost all of them explain the "therefore" at the beginning of the next sentence as "therefore," which is even more puzzling: "Beyond question" means the answerer has no answer, which is a problem of human cognitive limitations, how could it become the reason for the objective thing "merged into one"? It should be the other way around! Based on this, I conclude:
1. Here, "these three" refer to the three methods used to understand the set object mentioned in the preceding three sentences, namely, to "see" it, to "hear" it, and to "touch" it. It is said that using these methods to understand an object, the object must be a sensory entity, and it should naturally be "beyond question." For example, if it can be seen, there will always be something visible, and once seen, one can ask about its color, shape, etc. If the answer is given, one can continue to question how deep the color is, how large the shape is, and so on, almost endlessly. Therefore, saying "these three are beyond question" here means that the object is very special, to the point that it cannot be questioned in this way. At this point, it is actually implied that the set object is not a sensory entity.
2. The "therefore" at the beginning of the latter half is not the meaning of "therefore," but the meaning of "originally." The character "therefore" has this usage, as evidenced by the "Nature of Evil" chapter of the Xunzi: "All rituals are born from the artificiality of the sage, not originally born from human nature." According to this understanding, "merged into one" is not the result of "beyond question," or a conclusion drawn from it, on the contrary, it explains the reason for "beyond question," or the rationale. "Merged" is not the "mixed" or "confused" "merged," but the "chaotic" "merged." Ma Xuren said: "In ancient texts, when 'chaotic' is mentioned, it refers to something unanalyzed." So "merged into one" refers to a state or nature of being undifferentiated and indissociable, or something that cannot be analyzed. Adding "therefore" means that the set object is originally unanalyzable, so naturally, when you use the methods of seeing, hearing, and touching to understand it, it is naturally "beyond question." Ren Mr. translates this sentence as "It is really one thing," which is an extremely accurate translation.
P69-70