Guodian Bamboo Slips: A Study on the Laozi Texts

Author: Li Ruohui
Publisher:
Publishing Date: 2004-02-01
Features: Mr. Zhu Dexi once said in the study of bamboo and silk texts, "Sometimes, even after deciphering the characters, we may still fail to understand the meaning of the text." This is indeed an experience-based observation. In this regard, academia has paid more attention to homophones than to the obscure meanings of ancient languages. For example, in the Guodian Laozi, Jia 19: "Heaven and earth are in harmony, and they overflow with sweet dew." The character "yu," in the bamboo slips Jia and Yi versions, is written as "yu," while in Wang Bi's version, it is written as "jiang." The annotators of the Guodian Bamboo Slips note: "The bamboo slips Jia and Yi versions write 'yu,' and the annotators believe 'yu' can be read as 'yu' or 'shu,' which is acceptable." Mr. Gao Ming suggests that "yu" should be borrowed as "yu." Mr. Liu Xinfang argues that "yu" should be read as "jia." Mr. Ding Yuanzhi agrees. Mr. Chen Wei proposes a new interpretation: "We know that in the Ejun Qie Jie · Zhou Jie, 'yu' represents the opposite of 'shang' in navigation, roughly meaning 'xia.' We have also discussed a passage in the Guoyu · Wu Yu, where 'yu' in 'also ordered the right army to bite the tongue and cross the river for five miles to wait' also refers to sailing downstream along the river. Therefore, the 'yu' in Laozi Jia can be directly interpreted as 'xia,' which corresponds to the 'jiang' in the traditional version 'to pour sweet dew down.'" According to Ruohui: The original annotations and the views of Gao, Liu, and others only focus on the interpretability of the text. Chen's interpretation, however, derives the meaning of "yu" as "xia" through comparative analysis of textual patterns, and his argument is credible. There are also cases where people deliberately seek novelty and originality. Mr. Qiu Xigui pointed out when discussing the reconstruction of Chinese classical studies that when comparing bamboo and silk ancient texts with transmitted ancient texts, one should avoid inappropriate novelty, i.e., "claiming that characters that correspond to each other in bamboo and silk ancient texts and transmitted ancient texts and have the same or very similar meanings have different meanings." Here is an example. In Laozi, Chapter 45: "Great perfection seems like deficiency, yet its function is never exhausted; great fullness seems like emptiness, yet its function is never depleted. Great straightness seems like bending, great skill seems like clumsiness, great eloquence seems like taciturnity. Calmness overcomes agitation, coldness overcomes heat. Tranquility and inaction serve as the model for the world." The traditional interpretation of this sentence is: "Complete things appear as if they are lacking, but their function never fails. Full things appear as if they are empty, but their function is never exhausted. Straight things appear as if they are bent, skillful things appear as if they are clumsy, outstanding eloquence appears as if it is taciturn. Calmness overcomes agitation, coldness overcomes heat. Tranquility and inaction serve as the model for the people." Among these, the phrase "great straightness seems like bending" is written as "great zhi seems like bending" in the Guodian bamboo slips, Jia 14-15. Mr. Wu Genyou of the Philosophy Department at Wuhan University proposed a new interpretation based on this, arguing: "In the Chu bamboo slip version of Laozi, the character 'zhi' in the phrase 'great zhi seems like bending' refers to the large, thick, and long straight wood placed outside ancient door frames, which is locked to make the door more secure. The original character for 'zhi' in other versions of the same sentence is 'zhi.' The character 'zhi' in the phrase 'wood zhi seems like bending' originally means 'short.' Considering the meaning of 'zhi' in the preceding text, this sentence can be directly translated as: 'Tall door frames appear as if they are short.' This perfectly illustrates Laozi's use of reverse thinking to break conventional wisdom. Everyone assumes that the taller the door frame, the more secure the door. Laozi, however, disagrees. He believes that if people have no malicious intentions, even short door frames can make the door secure. Therefore, 'great zhi seems like short' does not mean it is truly short but rather that it is so because the rulers govern wisely, and all things naturally evolve without thieves." Later, Mr. Wu Genyou further argued in his article "Taking the Difference Between 'Great Zhi Seems Like Bending' in the Chu Bamboo Slip Version of Laozi and 'Great Straightness Seems Like Bending' in Wang Bi's Version as an Example to Examine the Trajectory of Laozi's Thought Evolution" that the change from "great zhi seems like bending" to "great straightness seems like bending" reflects a shift in meaning during the interpretation of the Laozi text: many ideas about political strategies and methods gradually became universal personal virtues for scholars, transforming specific political wisdom into more universal life wisdom. Therefore, the transformation from political philosophy to ethics is one way the meaning of the Laozi text shifts. Examining the basis of Wu's argument, there are approximately six points, which are reviewed one by one as follows.
The process of the Laozi's composition is an unresolved debate that has lasted for a long time and remains inconclusive to this day. Regarding this issue, the most influential views have been:
1. Written by Laozi himself: This theory, first mentioned in the "Biography of Laozi and Han Feizi" in Volume 63 of the Records of the Grand Historian, states that Laozi practiced morality and self-concealment, seeking anonymity. After staying in Zhou for a long time and witnessing its decline, he left. At the pass, the gatekeeper Yin Xi said, "You are about to withdraw into seclusion. Please write a book for me." Laozi then wrote the (Upper and Lower Sections), containing five thousand words on the meaning of morality, and left. No one knows where he went. This theory has been criticized since the Song Dynasty but has gained renewed support in recent years. Some scholars believe the Laozi was written by others and attributed to Laozi. As for who wrote it, opinions vary widely. Limited by my knowledge, I am aware of theories attributing it to Yang Zhu, Taishi Dan, and Zhan He. However, even among scholars who believe the Laozi was written by Laozi himself, it is generally agreed that the text contains later additions.
2. The period of stabilization (Han and Wei Dynasties): Represented by the Zhi Gui version, the Heshanggong annotations, the Xiang'er annotations, and Wang Bi's annotations. Mr. Yang Shudao once "discovered that fifty or so people were recorded in biographies as studying Laozi or admiring his methods." Additionally, the Book of Han (Volume 30, Bibliography) lists the Laozi Linshi Jingtuan (Four Chapters of Laozi by Lin Shi), the Laozi Fuji Jieshuo (Thirty-Seven Chapters of Laozi by Fu Shi), the Laozi Xushi Jieshuo (Six Chapters of Laozi by Xu Shi), and Liu Xiang's Commentary on the Laozi. The Book of Sui (Volume 34, Bibliography, Section 3, Daoism) notes: "In Liang, there were three elderly scholars, Wuqiu Wang, who annotated the Laozi in two volumes, and Yu Fan, who also annotated the Laozi in two volumes, both now lost." Wang Bi's annotations to the Laozi Daodejing in two volumes are also mentioned as lost. Additionally, the Laozi Daodejing in two volumes was annotated by Zhong Hui. The Book of Sui also notes: "In Liang, there was the Laozi Daodejing in two volumes, annotated by Zhang Si and Shu Cai, both now lost." Other scholars who annotated the Laozi include Ma Rong, Song Xiang, Liu Tao, Dong Yu, Zhang Yi, Xun Rong, Fan Wang, and Guo Pu, all of whose annotations are now lost. The only surviving Han and Wei-era annotations are those of Zhi Gui, Heshanggong, Xiang'er, and Wang Bi.
3. The Zhi Gui version by Yan Zun in the Western Han Dynasty: The text is now fragmented, with the remaining portion corresponding roughly to chapters 38-81 of Wang Bi's version. The Book of Han (Volume 72, Biographies of Wang Gong, Liang Gong, and) includes a biography of Yan Zun, but it does not explicitly mention him writing Zhi Gui. The Bibliography of the Book of Han also does not list it, leading some to doubt its authenticity. However, the absence of it in the Bibliography does not necessarily prove it is a forgery. From the language and references used, it appears to be a genuine work. Lu You's Weinan Collection (Volume 26, Postscript to the Ancient Text of the Daodejing) states: "Right, Yan Junping's Daodejing Zhi Gui ancient text. This text has been transmitted since the Kaiyuan era of the Tang Dynasty, with Emperor Ming's annotations, so all other versions have been abandoned. Today, only this version and the one corrected by Fu Yi, the Historian of the Taizong era, are still in circulation, though scholars rarely encounter them. I searched for it for twenty years and finally obtained it. The Qubeng edition of Song Konggongwu's Reading Notes from the Prefecture Study (Volume 11) also says: 'Its chapters and phrases differ from other versions, such as treating the last seventeen characters of the chapter 'Curvedness Becomes Wholeness' as the beginning of the next chapter.' This shows that since ancient times, Zhi Gui has been considered an ancient text of the Laozi and one of its original versions. However, the current edition of the Yilan Hall, Volume 13, is suspected by Jin Chunfeng of being a forgery and is worth considering as such. The current edition is best represented by the Daozang and Yilan Hall Series versions.
4. The Laozi Zhangju version attributed to the Heshanggong in the Western Han Dynasty: The text is still preserved, but its authenticity is also debated. Recently, academia largely agrees that it was written in the Western Han Dynasty and attributed to Heshanggong. Some scholars, however, suggest it was written in the Wei, Jin, or Eastern Han periods, which is not convincing. The current edition is best represented by the Dunhuang Tang manuscript, but it is fragmented. The complete version is the Initial Compilation of the Four Treasuries edition, a facsimile of the Song Jian'an edition by Yu Shi.
5. The Xiang'er annotations by Zhang Daoling: This text is now lost, but fragments discovered in the Mogao Caves of Dunhuang have preserved it. The scroll is now housed in the Department of Eastern Books at the British Museum in London, cataloged as S.6825. The writing dates to the Six Dynasties period, with photos and transcriptions available in Mr. Rao Zongyi's Commentary and Verification of the Xiang'er Annotations to the Laozi.
6. Wang Bi's Annotations to the Laozi Daodejing in the Wei Dynasty: This has become the standard version of the Laozi for later generations. Good editions include the Ming-era edition by Zhang Zixiang of Huating and Li Changshi's Collected Tang Characters for the Annotations to the Laozi Daodejing. Additionally, the Daozang's Collected Annotations to the True Way of the Daodejing also fully records Wang Bi's annotations.
Overall, these four versions have established the basic framework for the transmission of the Laozi in later generations: the Heshanggong annotations were widely circulated among the people, the Xiang'er version became the ancestor of the later Daoist five-thousand-character version without omissions, and Wang Bi's annotations were the standard for scholars. Therefore, it can be said that the various versions of the Laozi have become fixed. However, no matter how much they are revised, the results cannot deviate from the framework of these versions—even for us today. Therefore, to avoid the confusion of identical differences from reappearing, when collating any version from a specific period or system, we should not arbitrarily change the text based on other versions from different periods or systems. Each version should be able to say: "I am what I am." This point was already emphasized by Qing scholars. Duan Yucai's Collected Works of Jingyun Tower (Volume 12, Discussion with Fellow Scholars on the Difficulty of Collating Classics) states: "Therefore, the method of collating classics must return to Jia for Jia, Kong for Kong, Lu for Lu, Du for Du, and Zheng for Zheng. Each must be restored to its original version, and only then can the correctness or incorrectness of its principles be judged. Only then can the original version of the classics be determined, and only then can the principles of the classics be gradually clarified. If the original versions of the annotations, commentaries, and textual records are not first corrected, many falsehoods will be attributed to the ancients; if the correctness or incorrectness of their arguments is not evaluated, many mistakes will be made for us today. Especially when dealing with the Guodian bamboo slips, which are not yet fully formed, we must be cautious. We cannot agree with the practice of arbitrarily changing the Guodian bamboo slips based on the reasoning that 'all other versions say so' or 'the current version is better,' especially when their text is understandable. When collating, references to the other three periods' versions should be limited to the following four cases:
1. If the order of the slips is chaotic, other versions can be used for arrangement.
2. If the slips are incomplete, other versions can be used to fill the gaps.
3. If the characters are unreadable, other versions can be used for interpretation.
4. If there are obvious errors in writing, other versions can be used to correct them.
These four points essentially acknowledge the regulatory role of other versions in understanding the Guodian bamboo slips—because their connection is an undeniable fact. Based on this, we also absolutely oppose the practice of deliberately seeking novelty and originality. We must adhere to the principle of "understanding the words to understand the sentences, and understanding the sentences to understand the Dao," because what we interpret is a philosophical classic. The question is, how to implement this in practice.