Taoism 01 — Literal Translation Version

Tonight we begin speaking about Laozi’s *Dao De Jing*. This is the highest scripture in our Taoist religion. Although this *Dao De Jing* is only a short five thousand Traditional Chinese characters, some people say, “It is only five thousand words.” But I dare say that this one *Dao De Jing* covers topics more than an entire Buddhist canon with absolutely no wasted words.

If you look at ordinary scriptures, at the beginning they mostly first speak about the origin of the founder, how many disciples there were when the scripture was opened, this and that, and after turning the pages back and forth and reading over and over, there are not many sentences of real truth. The *Dao De Jing* is not like that. As soon as you enter it, the first line is: “The Dao that can be spoken is not the constant Dao.” It enters the core immediately.

And besides that, it is written in our Chinese ancient prose. If you really study it deeply, simply looking at those words is enough to keep you studying for a long time. Although there are many annotated editions of the *Dao De Jing*, with some annotations you still cannot understand them; do not even speak of the main text—sometimes even the notes themselves are hard to understand. The author of this *Dao De Jing* is Laozi. In Taoism we honor him as the founder. Sometimes he is called the Most High Taoist Patriarch, and sometimes reverently called the Most High Heavenly Worthy of Dao and De.

By the Tang dynasty, under Emperor Xuanzong—commonly called Tang Minghuang—Laozi was posthumously honored as Xuanyuan Emperor. Let us now look at the *Old Book of Tang, Treatise on Ritual*. In the thirtieth year of Kaiyuan, in the first month, an imperial edict ordered the two capitals and all prefectures to establish schools for the study of the mysterious teaching. Then, in the first year of Tianbao, in 742 CE, there was another edict raising Xuanyuan Emperor to the rank of Highest Sage.

Here I should first explain one thing. An imperial edict is a written proclamation by the emperor to the officials and people. According to the *Cihai*, it means the emperor announcing policy and letting the people know. The *Old Book of Tang* is one of the official histories. In the past people spoke of the Twenty-Four Histories; later one more was added, making twenty-five. Our Chinese official histories begin with the *Records of the Grand Historian*, then the *Book of the Later Han*, *Records of the Three Kingdoms*, *Book of Jin*, *Book of Song*, and so on down to the *Old Book of Tang* and *New Book of Tang*. Official history cannot be written carelessly, so it carries great weight.

The *Treatise on Ritual* says that in the two capitals and all the prefectures there were temples to Xuanyuan Emperor, something like Confucius temples today. It also says that schools of profound learning were established and students were ordered to study the *Dao De Jing*. This shows that if you want to be an orthodox Taoist, it is not easy if you have never studied the *Dao De Jing*. In the first year of Tianbao, Xuanyuan Emperor was further elevated to the status of Highest Sage. So we say Confucius is the Ultimate Sage; here Laozi also was honored to an equally lofty position.

Now let us look at one sentence in the *Essential Selections of the Taoist Canon*, in the *Annotated Chart of the Origins and Transmission of the Taoist Lineage*: “Laozi’s surname was Li, his given name was Er, and he became the ancestral emperor Xuanyuan.” Here again there are two notes to explain first.

The first note: the *Cihai* says that after an emperor dies he is installed in the imperial ancestral temple. We ordinarily do not simply say an emperor “died”; we say he was “raised into the ancestral temple.” What is the ancestral temple? It is the clan temple of the emperor’s ancestors. For example, the first emperor of Tang, Li Yuan, is called Tang Gaozu; his son Li Shimin is called Tang Taizong. This “ancestor” and “forebear” terminology is temple style naming. Zhao Kuangyin is called Song Taizu in the same way.

The *Book of Rites* says: “The sacrifice called di is performed in the ancestral temple.” That is to say, the offering is made in the ancestral temple. The second note refers to the *Great Dictionary of Taoism*. There it says Laozi’s surname was Li, his given name Er, his style name Boyang, and his posthumous title Lao Dan. In the time of Tang Xuanzong this temple title was further conferred. So in Taoist books he is also sometimes called the Most High Lord Li.

However, historically there is still a problem with Laozi: what exactly his father and mother were called, and what era exactly he was born in—there are many opinions. In official history, the names of his parents are not clearly recorded; Taoist books often give different versions from one text to another.

So if today we want to study the *Dao De Jing*, we must also research the background of its author, Laozi. There are many religions today, and all of them promote the greatness of their founders. But I say that the most regrettable and most backward point of Taoism today is that many believers cannot clearly say who their own founder is.

If you ask someone what religion he believes in, he may say, “I believe in Buddhism.” But Buddhism is not that superficial. A true Buddhist, at minimum, takes refuge in the Three Jewels and keeps the Five Precepts. That is like first entering kindergarten when beginning school—it is only the beginning. If one goes higher, there are many more levels. If you want to become a Dharma master, you must receive and keep the full precepts. But Buddhists do have one advantage: if you ask them who their founder is, every one of them can say Shakyamuni Buddha.

By contrast, if you ask people in ordinary popular religion who their founder is, they say, “I believe in Mazu,” or “I believe in Wang Ye,” but they do not know the founder’s name at all.

I myself am also a Taoist, so to say it plainly, I feel greatly ashamed. A believer who does not even know the name of his own founder—that is one of the most regrettable things. Besides that, other religions all study their doctrines. Buddhism has Buddhist institutes; Christianity also has seminaries; all are studying scriptures. In Taoism there is very little of this. Even where there is, sometimes they are only studying ritual forms. What are “ritual forms”? Mostly talismans, fortune-telling, geomancy, and such things. There are very few institutes truly researching the scriptures. So I say this is also one of the most backward places in Taoism.

If we speak only of believers, everyone says he is a Taoist. But compared with Buddhism, a real Buddhist at minimum keeps the Five Precepts, eats vegetarian food, and does not kill. Orthodox Buddhists do not burn spirit money. Strictly speaking, Buddhism originally was not based on the use of incense in the way people now imagine. The reason things have become mixed is because Confucianism, Taoism, and Buddhism have long been blended together, each mixed into the others. So now when many people worship, burn paper offerings, and practice various folk rituals, everything is mixed together.

Therefore I often say that when I see the present condition, I feel great regret. I joined Taoism fifty years ago and always had zeal as a Taoist, but later I never had a way to truly bring it forth.

In the early postwar years, as soon as I went out to preach the Way, it was dangerous. I once preached in Qingtongkeng, in Sandiao township. At that time the security forces pressed a gun against my abdomen and asked, “What are you doing? What doctrine are you preaching?” It was truly life-threatening; if things went badly I could have been arrested and shot. The atmosphere of martial law was still very strong then.

Later I went to the Taoist Association and said to them: let us simply set up a Taoist missionary group, so that we can promote the greatness of the founder. I still remember what the secretary-general of the Taoist Association said to me. I will not say who he was—there is no need. His meaning was approximately: “There is no money in preaching doctrine.” I said to him: you only need to get me a permit and a Taoist name under which I can preach. I will serve as lecturer voluntarily. There is only preaching, no income. I told him: stop always talking about income. Your members already pay dues. When we go out preaching, we do not take money from you. We go of our own accord. We only need you to give us a name to work under.

But that was exactly the problem. At that time, once you went out to preach, you would be harassed—especially if it resembled Yiguandao. If people noticed, they would investigate you. Without an official name, you could not preach openly. Once when I preached in Luodong, the police came in a whole group and insisted on taking me to the station. By chance a cadre from the Daode Society saw it and went to call their chairman. The chairman’s surname was Yang, Mr. Yang Kunfu. He came and got me released. After that he said to me: “Mr. Li, this cannot continue. Why not join the Daode Society? Then the Society can arrange a lecturer’s certificate for you, and you can go out and lecture.” That was why I joined the Daode Society.

But at that time I did not dare join immediately, because I did not even clearly know what kind of organization the Daode Society was. I asked them: what kind of religion is this exactly? They said it is not a single sect, but can be called a religious synthesis, very free. If you say it is Buddhist, fine; if you say it is Taoist, also fine. If you believe in Buddhism, follow Buddhist forms. If you believe in Taoism, follow Taoist forms. Whether you use incense or not, the Daode Society does not restrict you. I thought: that is all right, there is less restraint, so later I joined.

After I joined, they gave me a certificate. But honestly, even after forty years, the Daode Society remained like this: when it came to truly issuing a formal lecturer’s certificate and missionary authorization, it was still limited. So you see, what the Taoist Association itself could not do, I had to get by joining the Daode Society. Taoists are numerous, yet they are also the most backward.

Now Mazu has many followers. I will give the simplest example: what was Mazu’s real name? Many people do not know. Who is Enzhu? They also do not know. They enter the temple, see an image, and can worship—but if you ask what that deity does, they often cannot answer. If a believer has only just entered, not knowing may be excusable. But what is strange is that even people who have been there longer may also not know. By contrast, Christian pastors and Catholic priests know the origin and development of their religion very clearly. But when it comes to Laozi’s life, many who call themselves Taoists—even ritual masters—may not know it.

So I have always felt that if Taoism does not explain its doctrine clearly again, it will not do. Therefore at that time I had a wish: to bring forth the true principles of each religion. So now I lecture on the *Diamond Sutra*—that is the Buddhist part; I lecture on the *Analects*—that is the Confucian part; and I used to lecture on Yiguandao materials as well. But as for the highest scripture of our Taoist tradition, it is this *Dao De Jing*.

Yet contemporary Taoism has many shortcomings. Everyone is lost in fortune-telling, geomancy, and methods and arts. Very few truly study and promote the great spirit of the founder. Although I had already lectured on the *Dao De Jing* in Guangzhou before and had nearly finished it—more than half was already covered—why begin again now? The first reason is that when I started before, there was no video recording; that was a regret. The second reason is that there are many commentarial traditions on the *Dao De Jing*—for example *Laozi Yishu*, Heshang Gong, Hanshan Dashi, and so on.

Many people suggested that I simply use only the commentary of Patriarch Lü Chunyang of our Taoist lineage. Because Lü Chunyang’s commentary is frank, plain-spoken, and simple; it does not twist around and around. It speaks very concretely, and it is not easy for people to criticize. If I only lecture from one line, it will be quick to catch up with where I lectured before. But if in one evening I mix together four or five commentarial traditions, then what others can lecture in one night takes me three or four nights.

So now we will directly lecture on Laozi’s *Dao De Jing*, and first of all we must research Laozi’s life. People know the life of Jesus. They know the life of Shakyamuni Buddha. They know the life of Muhammad. But as for our Laozi, very few people truly pursue and investigate his life. So tonight we begin by studying Laozi’s life, and only then will we enter the scripture itself.

The *Records of the Grand Historian* does not say who Laozi’s father was or who his mother was, nor does it clearly state exactly what era he was born in, but at least it records his name. It says: “Laozi was a man of Qurenli, Lixiang, Ku county of Chu. His surname was Li, his name was Er, and he was archivist of the Zhou storehouse.”

Although there are only a few words here, several notes are very necessary to explain in detail. First, the *Cihai* says that Ku county was an old county name; in the Spring and Autumn period it belonged to Chu; in the Han it became an official county; in the Jin it was renamed Guyang; in the Tang it was renamed Xianyuan; and the old city lies east of present-day Luyi county in Henan. This is important because it explains the changes in the place name connected with Laozi’s birthplace.

The *Shiji* says Laozi was from Qurenli, Lixiang, Ku county in Chu. In the *Shiji Suoyin* the character for “Ku” is even given a special pronunciation, meaning that it should not simply be read like the modern everyday word for “bitter,” but according to older pronunciation. The teacher’s point is to remind everyone that these old place names and old pronunciations cannot simply be glossed over with today’s colloquial reading.

The next point is “archivist of the Zhou storehouse.” The “storehouse” means the place where state documents and classics were kept. The “archivist of the storehouse” means an official there managing documents and texts. The character *shi* here is not “history” in the ordinary sense but an office title. According to ancient books, every office had its *shi*, people who handled documents and assisted administration. So when Laozi served as archivist of the Zhou storehouse, it means he held an important office managing state texts and records.

This also lets us see that Laozi was not merely a figure of popular legend, but someone connected to the Zhou system of texts and archives. Later local gazetteers also record ancient traces of his birthplace. The *Kuodi zhi* says that within the boundary of Guyang county there was Laozi’s residence and temple, and in the temple nine wells still remained. So if someone in the future travels to the Luyi area of Henan, according to those records he may still see ancient traces connected with Laozi.

These things are not said casually. They are all spoken according to historical materials, so that everyone may know Laozi was not a person with no trace at all.

As for who his father was, who his mother was, how exactly he was born, and what later happened to him, those matters must be explained gradually later. If you do not even know Laozi’s life, how can you lecture on the *Dao De Jing*? In Buddhism there are biographies of the Buddha. Jesus also has a life story. But within Taoism, among those who truly know Laozi’s life, I do not dare say there are none—but I dare say among ten thousand people, perhaps not even one can explain it clearly.

So one must first clarify Laozi’s life before speaking of the *Dao De Jing*. Only then can one know where Laozi’s greatness truly lies. Even a great sage like Confucius still went to ask Laozi about ritual; the *Shiji* also contains material on Confucius asking about ritual from Laozi.

At this point the first session closes and the lecturer says good night, promising to continue next time. Then the source shifts into a continuation discussing multiple theories about Laozi’s origin.

The lecturer says that because Laozi’s life has always been debated, one can only investigate one account after another and see what Laozi really was. The first account was from the *Shiji*. Now comes the second account: Laozi was a man of Qurenli, Lixiang, Ku county in Chu; surname Li, name Er, style Boyang; he was born with white hair, therefore called Laozi, also called Lao Dan; he served as archivist of the Zhou storehouse; the book he wrote was also called *Laozi*; and he was the ancestor of the Taoist school.

Compared to the first account, this one adds more detail. It says Laozi was born with white hair, so he was called “Old Master,” and also Lao Dan. It also says his own book was called *Laozi*, so later the Taoist school honored him as its patriarch.

The teacher again reminds us about the word *shou* in “keeper of the storehouse”: it should not simply be read in today’s ordinary way. Sometimes it carries the meaning of an office title, or acting concurrently in charge of something. Ancient titles like prefect or governor could also use this sense. The teacher gives a modern example: like a vice president concurrently serving as premier. So here it still means that Laozi held an important office in the Zhou institution for books and records.

Then comes the third account, from the *Shangyuan jing*. In that account, Laozi’s mother was taking a noon nap when she saw a five-colored pearl, like an iron pellet, descend from heaven. After swallowing it, she became pregnant. Regarding this kind of story, the teacher clearly says he does not quite accept it. He thinks many religious believers like to make the birth of a founder or great person sound very miraculous and unlike ordinary people. For example, Jesus being born without a father, or someone else in legend becoming pregnant after eating a peach. In short, people love to add miraculous color.

So for claims with a strong superstitious flavor, the teacher especially reminds everyone to remain a little calm and not accept them wholesale. Hearing them is one thing, but one should still keep an attitude of investigation.

The *Great Dictionary of Taoism* gives a more concise arrangement: Laozi was from Qurenli, Lixiang, Ku county in Chu; surname Li, name Er, style Boyang; born with white hair, therefore called Laozi, also Lao Dan; he served as an official in charge of the Zhou storehouse. As for the book he wrote, originally it was also called *Laozi*. Later it was called the *Dao De Jing* because the upper section begins with “The Dao that can be spoken is not the constant Dao,” so it was called the Dao Classic; and from chapter 38, beginning with “Highest De is not De, therefore it has De,” the lower section was called the De Classic. Together they were later called the *Dao De Jing*.

Then the *Dictionary of Famous People Through the Ages* says: Li Er, a man of Qurenli in Chu during the Spring and Autumn period, style Boyang, commonly called Lao Dan or Laozi, founder of the Taoist school, once served as archivist of the Eastern Zhou. Confucius once asked him about ritual. Later, because the feudal lords fought for dominance and warfare continued year after year, he went west through Hangu Pass. The gatekeeper Yin Xi strongly detained him, whereupon he wrote the *Dao De Jing* in five thousand characters.

The teacher adds that he had already lectured on the *Dao De Jing* in Guangzhou before. It is being re-lectured now partly because the early video recordings were poor and partly because before he used too many commentaries at once. This time he still keeps multiple sources but moves faster.

He returns to the line that Confucius “asked him about ritual.” The “Qiu” there is Confucius’s personal name. Ancient people were careful about the names of sages, so one only needs to understand that the line means Confucius consulted Laozi about ritual forms. This event is also recorded in the *Shiji*.

Then it says that amid constant warfare among the feudal states, Laozi gradually became unwilling to remain in office. He then went west out of Hangu Pass. Hangu Pass lies east of today’s Lingbao in Henan and was an important pass in ancient times. Yin Xi, the pass official, saw that Laozi was about to leave and strongly urged him to leave his teaching behind. Therefore Laozi wrote down the *Dao De Jing* in five thousand words.

The *Cihai* says Yin Xi was an official at Hangu Pass. Before Laozi came west, Yin Xi first perceived his qi and knew a true person would pass by; when he finally saw Laozi, Laozi transmitted the *Dao De Jing* to him, and Yin Xi later went west together with Laozi, with no one knowing where they ended up. The teacher explains this by saying Yin Xi first observed the stars and qi, saw purple vapors coming from the west, and knew a true person would pass through the pass. So he instructed the gate guards that if they saw someone coming while riding a one-horned green ox, they should report it at once.

The teacher especially notes that later paintings often show Laozi riding a water buffalo, but that may not be accurate, because the old books speak of a one-horned green ox. What exactly that green ox was will be discussed later.

The second half of the source note continues with even more accounts of Laozi’s birth, many of them fantastic. The lecturer explicitly says that some accounts are far too unreliable. For example, one text says Laozi’s mother carried him for eighty-two years and that he was born from the left armpit. The lecturer asks: is that possible? If someone became pregnant in her teens and carried a child for eighty-two years, she would be over ninety by the time of birth. How could someone give birth from the armpit? He says plainly: can a child be born from the armpit? How could that be possible?

He says a Buddhist once telephoned him and mocked Taoism for such claims, saying Taoism was too absurd—how could a child come out from under the armpit? The teacher says his head ached from hearing such criticism. But then he adds that other religions also contain strange miraculous birth stories, and people often create them later in order to glorify their founder.

He cites Buddhist materials that say Shakyamuni Buddha was born from the right side or rib, and says that if one says Laozi was born from the armpit or side, it is not much different. These are things later believers made up. He says plainly that he does not like to speak such superstition. Truth should be believed, but stories like these should not simply be believed.

He then examines further accounts describing Laozi’s physical features in exaggerated ways: raised ridges on the forehead like the “sun horn” and “moon horn” of physiognomy, two nasal bones, very large ears, thick lips, rough teeth, and a body eight chi eight cun tall. Another text says Laozi’s mother conceived for eighty years and gave birth under a plum tree. Yet another says his father’s surname was Han, which would make Laozi originally surnamed Han instead of Li. The lecturer points out that if the dates and names do not match, the stories become chaotic.

He criticizes Yiguandao sources for giving very different birth years for Laozi. One source says Laozi was born in 604 BCE; another says he was born in 1324 BCE under Shang king Wu Ding. The difference is more than seven hundred years. How can both be true? He says he is not attacking any sect. He is simply examining history. Even Buddhist stories he has also criticized. His purpose is only to compare and test the accounts.

He says that when one serves as a preacher, misleading oneself may be one thing, but misleading living beings is serious. Therefore before speaking about the *Dao De Jing*, one must first understand Laozi’s life clearly. In society today, on the question of Laozi’s life, opinions are many and confused. Every book and every religious text gives some account of Laozi’s history, but some are too absurd and some are too miraculous. Later people always like to add color and make the founder sound different from everyone else. But because modern society is more scientific and civilized, if you speak too miraculously, people will say it is all deception.

Another account says Laozi’s mother dreamed of five-colored rosy light in space which turned into a five-colored flowing pearl that entered her mouth; then she conceived the holy fetus and in 1301 BCE, on the fifteenth day of the second lunar month, gave birth, while a hundred flowers all blossomed, heaven opened in auspicious patterns, and the child held up the sun as he emerged. The lecturer says that when reading this, one must think carefully. How large is the sun? If you look it up, it is more than a hundred times larger than the earth. You cannot even handle the earth, so how could you hold up the sun? If your hand came near such fire, it would be burned to ashes. So he says bluntly: this is too absurd. Whether it is true or false, he does not know, but even if you beat him to death he would not believe it.

A ninth account says Laozi’s mother dreamed of a five-colored pearl, conceived for eighty-two years, then while holding onto a plum tree gave birth from the left side of her ribs. The child had a yellow-white face and white hair, so he was called Laozi; he had a broad forehead with heavenly lines, large ears, two nasal bones, coarse teeth, and could understand the transformations of the stars and predict fortune and disaster. The lecturer replies that according to such descriptions, Laozi’s face would become terribly strange indeed. He says that if one writes it like this—with broad forehead, tumor-like ridges, tiny eyes, huge ears, two nasal bones, square mouth, and coarse teeth—then Laozi’s appearance becomes monstrous.

So he concludes plainly: he does not believe such theories. No matter how they are told, he does not believe them. If someone says a child can be born from the ribs, or from the armpit, let them show how that could happen. As for these miraculous and supernatural tales, he does not very much like to believe them. Truth is what should be believed; these legends should not be.

This literal version keeps much closer to the spoken sequence of the source lecture, including the lecturer’s repeated insistence on historical examination, his criticism of excessive miracle stories, and his concern that Taoists often do not know enough about Laozi before studying the *Dao De Jing*.