LAO TZU'S CRITIQUE OF CONFUCIAN ETHICS

THE SOCIAL CONTEXT OF HIS TIMES

Lao Tzu has given to Chinese Culture the most profoundly speculative system of metaphysics in the history of Chinese philosophy. However, his metaphysics was quite intimately related to his critique of the Confucian Ethics. In fact, Lao Tzu's metaphysics emerged first as a vehement critique of the `Too Human', that is, too anthropocentric ethical orientation in Confucianism. Lao Tzu's metaphysics is proposed as an ultimate solution to the impasse created by this too human ethics. It is characterized by an emphasis upon the ontological foundation of human nature and its re-insertion of human action into the cosmic spontaneity shared by all things as begotten by the Ultimate Tao.

According to my interpretation, Lao Tzu was first of all a cultural critic of his time: his concept of Tao was proposed as an ulterior solution to the socio-political and spiritual crises of that society. By his penetrating criticism, fused with a profound praxis of life, he established a paradigm of social critique and critique of ideology for Chinese culture in general. His writings on the Tao and its virtues, entitled the Tao Te Ching ( ), has revealed to us the image of a society in a process of radical change. On the one hand was the disintegration of the cultural order in the ancient China constituted by Chou Li ( ): the social institutions and politico-religious rites of Chou Dynasty. On the other hand, new cultural elements were emerging, but without being able to stabilize themselves as a new social order. Viewed from this perspective, even though we possess very few historical accounts about the life of Lao Tzu, after a rigorous textual analysis of the Tao Teh Ching, we could still judge that its author had composed it in the epoch of Warring States (480-221 BC). Thus, we are justified in denying the only narrative tradition concerning Lao Tzu since Ssu-ma Ch'ien, according to which Lao Tzu was a keeper of the archives at the Chou Court and an elder contemporary of Confucius (551-479 BC). On the contrary, the Tao Teh Ching was composed much later than Confucius. It was in criticizing the society of Warring States and the ethics of Confucianism that Taoism emerged as a vigorous way of thinking, and hence as a deep, fundamental trait of Chinese thinking and even of the Chinese attitude towards life and society in general.

Under Lao Tzu's penetrating criticism, the society of his time was revealed to be in a state of disorder in which, according to Lao Tzu's own words, "The people suffer because their rulers eat up too much in taxes. That is why they starve. The people become difficult to govern because those in authority have too many projects of actions. That is why they are difficult to govern. The people take death lightly because their rulers have too many desires. That is why they take death lightly" (ch. 75). It seems that for Lao Tzu social problems were produced by the political domination of the rulers themselves, rather than by the disproportion between desired values and their modes of realization. Chou li, the most important cultural institution in ancient China, was in Lao Tzu's eyes but a form of domination hindering and distorting man's communication with nature, with other men and, most importantly, with Tao. Lao Tzu's writing show that the disorder of the society of his time resulted from the distortion of free and natural communication through all forms of domination.

Lao Tzu has also criticized the inter-state conflicts of his time, which were so vehement as to resort to military solutions and unceasing wars. He said, "When Tao does not prevail in the world, war horses have to breed on the border" (ch. 46). "Whenever armies are stationed, briers and thorns become rampant. Great wars are inevitably followed by famines" (ch. 30). "The weapons of war are instruments of evil and they are detested by people . . . war should be regarded as a mournful occasion. When a multitude of people are slaughtered, it should be an occasion of the expression of bitter grief. Even when a victory is scored, the occasion should be observed with funeral ceremonies" (ch. 31). Today, the echo of these critical words of Lao Tzu still touches the hearts of many people for whom the wounds of war still throb in bitter memory, or even make the heart bleed for the death of their beloved.

These Laotsean critical descriptions of social disorder and wars show that they belong to the period of Warring States. But in this social disintegration on a grand scale new elements tended to emerge to seduce many a man's intellectual activities and desires. When the "clan-law" ( ) and "well-field" ( ) institutions were gradually obliterated, there arose a commercial society where even land became an object of commerce. In order to avoid the calamities of wars, people left their land and devoted themselves to liberal commercial activities. Therefore the lust for goods and the desire for material success became very elevated. Lao Tzu had discerned clearly the new signs of his time and had vehemently criticized them. He said, "There may be gold and jade to fill a hall, but there is none who keep them. To be bearing when one has honor and wealth is to bring calamity upon oneself" (ch. 9). "Do not exalt the worthy . . . so that people shall not compete. Do not display objects of desire, so that people's heart shall not be disturbed" (ch. 3). "Therefore he who has lavish desires will spend extravagantly. He who hoards most will lose heavily." It was also a society in which social mobility was highly promoted to the point that people of low origin could become high ranking officials. People strived for fame and position. Intellectuals rendered service to political power and became instruments of political domination. People sacrificed their spiritual freedom for the prize of their lustful desire and instrumental rationality. All these were for Lao Tzu but consequences of having forgotten Tao. What Heidegger calls "Seinsvergessenheit", forgetfulness of Being,⁽⁹⁾ is for Lao Tzu rather "Tao vergessenheit", forgetfulness of Tao. Under these social, political and even spiritual crises, people need a way out. For Lao Tzu, an authentic way out consists in returning to Tao and following Tao's own way.

Lao Tzu was not only a critic of society, he was also a critic of ideology, especially that of Confucian ethics. Confucianism, as another main current of Chinese philosophy, contains in itself many philosophical and ethical truths: therefore it is not to be treated as mere ideology. But it could be ideologized when used by political community to maintain social order and to serve political control, through transforming its system of ideas into a kind of false consciousness. Thus was the aspect of Confucian ethics criticized by Lao Tzu. Confucius himself had endeavored to maintain the ancient social order instituted by Chou li ( ).

In pre-Confucian China, Chou li embraced both the religious, ethical, political ideality and reality of Chinese life. It represented a cultural tradition, and even a comprehensive ideal of human life in general, as did the concept of Paideia for the ancient Greek people. But in the time of Confucius, Chou li began to lose this latter deeper meaning while still keeping its superficial meaning as a code of behaviour, institution and ceremonies. Confucius tried to revitalize Chou li by translating its ideal meaning into the concept of Jen ( ~ ), which represents the inner sensitive connection between man's inner self and nature, other men and Heaven. Jen manifests man's subjectivity and responsibility in and through moral awareness. By doing this Confucius had given a transcendental foundation to our interaction with nature, with other men and even with Heaven.

Then, from the concept of Jen, Confucius deduced that of Yi ( ), which represented for him moral norms, moral obligations, our consciousness of them and even the virtue of acting always according to them. From the concept of Yi, Confucius deduced that of Li ( ~ ) which represented codes of behaviour, religious and political ceremonies and social institutions. Through this procedure of transcendental deduction, Confucius tried to reconstitute and thereby to revitalize the ethical and social order once concretized in the Chou li.

As critic of ideology, Lao Tzu proclaimed that li, as code of behaviour and social institutions, was not transcendentally grounded in human nature. Rather they were merely formalistic constraints devoid of any positive meaning and were considered by him as a means of social domination from which man needed to be emancipated in order to regain his free existence. Lao Tzu said

It is only when Tao is lost that virtue arises. When virtue is lost, only then does Jen arises. When Jen is lost, only then does Yi arises. When Yi is lost, only then does Li arises. Li is superficial expression of loyalty and faithfulness, and the beginning of disorder. Those who are the first to know it have the appearance of Tao but are the beginning of ignorance (ch. 38).

Lao Tzu criticized all means of domination as expressions of losing the profound co-belongingness of all men to Tao and of immobilizing the spontaneous virtue of each individual. The Confucian Jen, Yi, and Li are for him but specific determinations of ontological origin, Tao and its virtues. Often they lead to superficial and external developments which forget totally their origin and thereby separate from Tao.

In Lao Tzu's eyes, Confucian ethics as a solution to the problems of his times contains the following difficulties:

1. Confucian ethics emphasizes deliberate actions taken with anthropocentric self-consciousness, which by so doing inclines to forget the spontaneity of man and its root in Tao. On the contrary, Lao Tzu proposes instead a mindless spontaneous creativity springing from Tao itself as the real solution. Any way out separated from Tao loses its source of creativity and tends to be artificial.

2. Without the creative support from Tao and the spontaneous character of Teh ( ), the transcendental system of Confucian ethics--which grounded Li in Yi and Yi in Jen in a transcendental way--tends towards progressive degradation. Jen degenerates into Yi and Yi into Li. Li, separated thereby from all its ontological and transcendental foundations, even when supported by instrumental rationality, could still be determined by lustful desire and therefore cause social conflict.

3. The social anomie and the commercial civilization created by lustful desire and calculating intellect cannot be improved by Confucian revitalization of Chou li, because the hearts of people, according to Lao Tzu, incline towards freedom and emancipation from all constraints.

For the above reasons, Confucian ethics, in Lao Tzu's eyes, was not an adequate solution to the problems of his times. Its tendency towards ideologization had to be criticized by an ultimate reference to each being's spontaneity, the Teh, and the source of all creativity, the Tao.

Lao Tzu's cultural critique led him to think of a way out for the society in crisis. His critique of Confucian ethics led him to deny Confucianism as an adequate solution (way out) for that society, and to replace its conceptual framework of Jen-Yi-Li by an emancipating philosophy of Tao and Teh. His main argument consists in pointing out that the human heart by nature tends towards freedom. Hence, any adequate solution must be capable of leading people to return to the creative spontaneity of each person and each being--the Teh, and to their ontological origin--the Tao. Teh is the transcendental foundation of our freedom and Tao is its utmost ontological foundation.

LAO TZU'S METAPHYSICS AND HIS CONCEPT OF TAO

The concept of Tao is central to the philosophy of Taoism. This Taoist concept was original in the intellectual history of China in the sense that it replaced the traditional, especially Confucian, concept of T'ien as the ultimate principle of reality. T'ien ( ) was the core concept representing the Ultimate Being, either as a personal God, or as the highest principle, in the She King ( ), the Shang Shu ( ) and other classics of primordial Confucianism. As such, it gave the conceptual system of Jen-Yi-Li an ultimate foundation. But in a troublesome age like Lao Tzu's, it was either difficult for people to believe in an impartial personal God or a highest moral principle, or too easy to vacillate between them in a naive way to render justice to people's unending suffering. Therefore T'ien comes to be interpreted by Lao Tzu as nature, as the locus in which all things are produced (as in the case of T'ien and Earth ( ), and as the law of nature (as in the case of the way of T'ien ( ). All three are now treated by Lao Tzu as derivative manifestations of Tao, which alone is the ultimate Reality. Man, together with all other things in T'ien and Earth, are but manifestations of Tao and have to return back to Tao. Here we touch the most important problem of the relation between Tao and man, which replaced the traditional anthropocentric, humanistic relation between T'ien and man. This means a fundamental change in metaphysics and philosophy of man. But how should we understand this metaphysics and its correlated vision of man?

In Western philosophy, the term `meta ta physica' was given by Andronicus of Rhodes to an anonymous work of Aristotle placed after the Physics. For Aristotle, the objects of this science vary. In Book 4, he proposed that, "There is a science which investigates being as being and the attributes which belong to this in virtue of its own nature."⁽¹⁰⁾

Metaphysics here means ontology, defined as the science of being as being. But, in the same book, when he tried to define the multiple meanings of the term `being', he pointed out that substance is central to them. Therefore "to study being is to study substance".⁽¹¹⁾ Metaphysics hereby became ousiology. Then, in studying various substances, he proposed the need of affirming God as the Eternal Substance, the First Cause of all beings, which is Pure Thinking Itself (Noesis Noeseos). Metaphysics thereby became theology, or first philosophy--these were names given by Aristotle himself to this honorable science. Moreover, since God is the First Cause of all movement in the physical world, in studying God metaphysics studies also the ultimate cause, and became thereby a science of causes, an aitiology.

On the one hand, Aristotle failed to recognize the ontological difference between Being Itself and other beings. Even if he had proposed to study being as being, this did not prevent him from staying on the ontic level. On the other hand, as he was quite realistic minded and focused much attention on the physical world, his ontology was much influenced by his physical vision. These reasons led him into the degrading process of development from ontology to ousiology, and from ousiology to theology (an aitiology). In the criticism of Martin Heidegger, the metaphysics of Aristotle represents a stereotype of onto-theo-logy.⁽¹²⁾

When we turn to the metaphysics of Lao Tzu, the meaning and scope change quite notably. It is in fact not a `meta ta physica', not an after- thought on physics. On the contrary, for him the physical world comes after Tao. By Tao the physical world is begotten. Any explanation of the physical phenomena is to be derived from a more profound meditation on Tao, which is Being Itself. Lao Tzu has distinguished clearly between Being Itself and other beings. He never forgets the important ontological difference existing between them. Lao Tzu's ontology is concerned with Tao rather than with the Aristotelian being as being.

Moreover, Lao Tzu's ontology is complemented by a meontology, because being and non-being are seen by him as the two essential moments of the manifestation of Tao. Non-Being is not mere nothingness, but rather a higher way of being, transcendent to our grasping either by senses or by intellect, and to the moment of being. The manifestation of Being Itself is for Lao Tzu a dialectical process between being and non-being. In this way he avoided hypostatizing Tao as substance. For Lao Tzu, the dynamism and act of existence is more essential than substance, which is but a mode of being; Lao Tzu's metaphysics is never an ousiology. Nor is it a theology, because for him Tao "seems to have existed before the Lord" (ch. 4). God is but the Lord of the realm of being, whereas Tao transcends being and therefore transcends God. God and the realm of being, in Lao Tzu's metaphysics, are derived from the manifestation of Tao. It becomes clear now that Lao Tzu's metaphysics does not belong to what Heidegger calls the onto-theological constitution.

But Lao Tzu cannot accept Heidegger's proposition that the meaning of Being is to be grasped in terms of Dasein's--that is to say, in terms of man's--understanding of it. For Heidegger, an existential analysis of Dasein's existence reveals to us the meaning of Being. Man is the there (Da) of Being and manifests Being by the same token.⁽¹³⁾ Lao Tzu, on the contrary, thinks that we cannot understand man without reference to Tao and its manifestation through all beings. Lao Tzu avoids anthropocentric humanism by referring to Tao and by inserting man among all beings which share the same creative spontaneity of Tao.

In the following sections, we will discuss first Tao and its manifestation; secondly, we will discuss Tao and all things; and finally we will discuss Tao and man. The first is ontology, the second cosmology, whereas the third is anthropology.

TAO AND ITS MANIFESTATION--LAO TZU'S ONTOLOGY

Etymologically speaking, the Chinese character "Tao" ( ) is composed of two elements: one signifying a head and another signifying the act of running or walking along. Together they signify a path or a way for a person with a thinking head to run upon or go along. When used as verb, it means "to direct", "to guide", and sometimes "to say", "to tell" or "to be told of". The significance of guiding and directing could be extended to mean principle, reason, or even method. The significance of saying and telling could be extended to mean discourse, speech and even theory. But these later meanings, which were so important for the Greek concept of Logos, and for Western philosophy in general, are less important for Lao Tzu and Chinese philosophy in general. This makes many differences in their respective epistemologies and metaphysics.

In pushing the meaning of "Tao" further to its most speculative level, it becomes, not only the ways followed by some things and some persons, but the Way Itself, the Ultimate Reality or Being itself. Here the concept of "Being" does not mean negatively, as in the case of Hegel's Logic, mere "beingness", the most impoverished ontological determination without any positive content. It represents rather the act of existence, like the Ipsum Esse according to St. Thomas, or the self-manifesting Being, according to M. Heidegger. It is not even a concept, because treating it as concept equals saying that it is merely a conceptual being or ens rationis; this reduces it to an ontic status where it loses its ontological import. That is why Lao Tzu would say: "The Tao that can be told of is not the Eternal Tao; the name that it can be named is not the Eternal name" (ch. l). In affirming this way, Lao Tzu discards from the beginning any possibility of reducing the Way to a mere object of science or discourse. Therefore in Lao Tzu's metaphysics there always exist some elements which transcend towards the trans-metaphysical, some elements in his ontology which lead beyond to the meontological.

Has Lao Tzu ever attributed characteristics to this unfathomable, unnameable Tao? Yes. In chapter 25 he said:

There is something undifferentiated and yet remains as totality, which exists before heaven and earth. Inaudible and invisible, it is independent and immutable. Its function is pervasive and ceaseless. It can be considered the mother of heaven and earth. I do not know its name and call it the Way or Tao. If forced to describe it, I will say that it is Great. Now being great means functioning everywhere. Functioning everywhere means far-reaching. Being far-reaching means returning to its origin.

Undifferentiated totality, inaudible, invisible, independent, immutable, pervasive, ceaseless, great, acting everywhere, far-reaching, and cyclical or spiral are then the characteristics given by Lao Tzu to describe Tao.

Now we must keep in mind that these characterizations are but names given reluctantly, as Lao Tzu says: "if forced to" give. Still Lao Tzu proclaims that he does not know its name. So the best name is the "Il y a", the "there is", which points silently but eloquently to the Way, the Tao. This reminds us of something similar in what M. Heidegger says in "The Way to Language":

This unknown-familiar something, all this pointing of Saying to what is quick and stirring within it, is to all present and absent beings as that first break of dawn with which the changing cycle of day and night first begin to be possible; it is the earliest and most ancient at once. We can do no more than name it, because it will not be discussed, for it is the region of all places, of all time-space-horizons. . . . What is a way? A way always allows us to reach something. Saying, if we listen to it, is what allows us to reach the speaking of language.⁽¹⁴⁾

That Appropriation, seen as it is shown by Saying, cannot be represented either as an occurrence or a happening--it can only be experienced as the abiding gift yielded by Saying. . . . The Appropriating event is not the outcome of something else, but the giving yield whose giving reach alone is what gives us such things as a `there is' (Il y a), a "Il y a" of which even Being Itself stands in need to come into its own as presence.⁽¹⁵⁾

What Heidegger says above is very near what Lao Tzu means. Their only difference consists in the fact that Lao Tzu does not interpret the Way (Tao) as Saying, "The Tao that can be told of is not the Eternal Tao" --even if he also tends to call Tao the `Il y a', and to recognize the possibility of appropriating It.

Now since Tao is the act of existence, the original self-manifesting Ultimate Reality, it must have the tendency to manifest Itself through concrete phenomena. According to Lao Tzu, Tao manifests itself through two ontological moments: the you ( ) and the wu ( ). You as being, signifies the moment of concrete manifestation, realization, the fulfilledness, and the substantiality. Wu, as non-being, does not represent sheer nothingness; it signifies rather the moment of dissimulation, possibility, potentiality, transcendence, and functionality. Lao Tzu said:

You is the name given to the origin of Heaven and Earth. Wu is the name given to the mother of all things. Therefore let there always be wu (non-being) so we may see their subtlety. And let there always be being, so we may see their outcome. The two (moments) belong to the same (Tao), but once produced they have different names. They both may be called the deepest metaphysical moments. The rhythmic dialectical interchange between them leads finally to the gate of all subtleties (Ch. l).

Here the T'ien-Dih ( ) (Heaven and Earth) means the locus in which All things exist and become, and therefore represents the totality of all things, whereas Wan-Wuh ( ) (Myriad of things) represents every thing taken separately. Since the totality enjoys priority over each individuality, the potential over the actual, and the transcendent over the real, we can say that the moment of wu is for Lao Tzu more original than the moment of you. That's why Lao Tzu said: "the myriad of things in the world come from being, and being comes from non-being" (Ch. 40). Therefore the movement of manifestation of Tao must be like this: first, Tao manifests itself as the potential, the transcendent, the dissimulated, the functional; then from this moment it begins to manifest itself as the actual, the real, the concrete, the substantial; then it transpasses this moment towards the higher moment of transcendence, potency and possibility, in order to attain a higher level of being, actuality, and reality. From all these we could affirm the following points concerning Tao:

1. Tao is in a rhythmic movement of self-manifestation.

2. Tao manifests itself through the rhythmic interchanging movements of being (you) and non-being (wu).

3. Tao is the origin and the unity of these two opposing moments, (you) and non-being (wu).

4. Tao first self-manifests as non-being and then as being. It moves by these two opposing but interacting moments.

On the ontological level, being and non-being are two opposing but interacting moments. On the ontic level, that is, on the level of being, all things are also constituted by opposing elements. This leads us to further considerations of the relation between Tao and all things.

TAO AND THINGS IN NATURE--LAO TZU'S COSMOLOGY

Through the dialectical interaction of being and non-being Tao begets all things by a process of differentiation. "All ontic beings are begotten by the self-differentiation of the Simple Origin" (Ch. 28). "Tao begets one; one begets two; two begets three; three begets the myriad things. The myriad things carry on their backs the yin ( ~ ) and embraces in their arms the yang ( ~ ) and through the blending of the material forces chi, ( ~ ) they achieve harmony" (Ch. 42).

This text articulates a process of differentiation from one to two and from two to three. It can be seen also as a process of complexification, going from the simple to the complex. Therefore the word "begets" does not represent any act of creation (creatio ex nihilo), as does the metaphysics of creation in the Judeo-Christian tradition. It represents only this process of differentiation and complexification. This theory is common to practically all Chinese philosophical schools. Chinese philosophy has not conceived any doctrine of creation; rather, it has a doctrine similar to what Plotinus called emanation, interpreted here as a process of differentiation and complexification. It is also similar to what Spinoza proposed as the way the natura naturans self-manifests into natura naturata.

All things, as begotten by Tao as their origin, have to return to Tao as their final end. Corresponding to the process of differentiation, there is the process of conversion. "All things come into being, and I see thereby their return. All things flourish, but each one returns to its origin. This returning to its origin means tranquillity. It is called returning to its destiny. To return to destiny is called the Eternal Tao" (Ch. 16).

Being the ravine of the world, he will never depart from the eternal virtue, but returns to the state of infancy. . . . Being the model for the world, he will never deviate from the eternal virtue, but returns to the state of the Ultimate of non-being. . . Being the valley of the world, he will be proficient in eternal virtue, and return to the simple Origin (Ch. 28).

Returning to that which is non-being, which is shape without shape, form without form. This is the Vague and Elusive. Meet it and you will not see its head. Follow it and you will not see its back. Hold on to the Tao of old in order to master the thing of the present. From this one may know the primeval beginning of all beings. This is called the principle of Tao (Ch. 14).

This last text tells us that Tao begets all things through the temporal process. If we could trace back in this process, we could discover Tao in its primeval beginning.

Tao is the origin of the whole temporal process. Everything happens in time, whereas Tao is the mother origin of time. Therefore the process of conversion has to be conducted in retracing back through the temporal movement till one arrives at its primeval origin. In other words, all things happen through presenting themselves to our field of experience as phenomena. But they present themselves to us after having run through a certain distance in time. We have to retrace the road they have run through to be able to attain their original starting point.

Differentiation and Conversion is therefore the ultimate relation between Tao and all things, between the Origin of time and the phenomenon in time. Lao Tzu's saying: "Return to the simple origin must be the act of all things, since they are but begotten by the self-differentiation of the simple origin" (Ch. 28). This is the best summary of this relation between Tao and all beings. These two processes are in unceasing interaction. Lao Tzu calls them metaphorically the relation between mother and son. "He who has found the mother (Tao) thereby understands her sons (all things); and having understood the sons, still keeps to its mother" (Ch. 52).

Differentiation and conversion are the ultimate relations between Tao and all things. They are also the ultimate relations between Tao and man. "To find the mother in order to understand the son, and having understood the son, still keeps to its mother" is therefore also the best description of the relation between Tao and man. But before discussing this more in detail, we must see, on the cosmological level, the principle movement of all things. Here we meet the question of natural law: Tao manifested as natural law is the principle of the movement of all things. On this level, we interpret Tao as principle ( ~ ~ ).

The law of nature seen by Lao Tzu is not based on the principle of causality which is linear in character, as in the case of Western science and philosophy, but rather on the dialectics of differentiation and conversion which is essentially a cyclical or spiral movement. The fundamental principle of nature is best summarized in Lao Tzu's saying that "Reversion is the action of Tao" (Ch. 40). Here reversion has two connected meanings: one signifying opposition, reversal; the other signifying returning, conversion. The first movement of opposition is derived from the movement of differentiation, determined originally by the dialectics between being and non-being. This leads things to differ one from another and thereby to be in relative opposition. In this sense the more extended the Way, the more differentiated and opposed are things one from another. The second movement of return is the consequence of the fact that Tao is the final end of all things, which must thereby return back to it. In this sense the further the Way leads, the nearer it is in returning back to itself. This differs therefore from the principle of causality, which pre-supposes the before/after linear temporal scheme in structuring the precedent phenomenon and the consequent phenomenon with a determinist necessity. In contrast, Lao Tzu's principle of nature is based on the dialectical movement of Concordium Oppositorum, which considers opposing elements and their mutual interaction as fundamental to all natural and social phenomena. In Lao Tzu's text, we could read many chapters describing the structural and the dynamic oppositions--we prefer to call them "contrasts". For example:

When the people of the world all claiming to know what is beautiful for the Beauty of it, will lapse into ugliness; all claiming to know what is good for the Goodness of it, they will lapse into evil (the opposite of the good). Being and nonbeing generate each other; the simple and the difficult complement each other, the long and the short compensate each other; the high and the low incline towards each other; the tones and the melodies constitute harmony one with the other; and the earlier and the later follow one another (Ch. 2).

Calamity is that upon which happiness depends; happiness is that in which calamity is latent (Ch. 50).

The heavy is the of the light. The tranquil is the ruler of the hasty" (Ch. 26).

Opposing but complementing, differentiating but unifying, distanciating but co-belonging, these structural and dynamic contrasts are constitutive of Lao Tzu's fundamental principle of nature. It has two aspects: the one structural and the other dynamic. The structural contrast means that every natural and social phenomenon is constituted of contrasting (that is to say, opposing but complementing, differentiating but unifying) elements. The dynamic contrasts mean that all natural and social movements are moved by the dialectical interaction between contrasting (distanciating but co-belonging) moments.⁽¹⁶⁾ The structure and dynamism of nature and society are therefore based on this fundamental principle. By it all things return to Tao and achieve harmony. "Mysterious virtue is profound and far-reaching. And with it all things return to their original natural state. Then complete harmony will be reached" (Ch. 65).

Based upon the above, the relation between Tao and all things could be summarized as follows:

l. Tao is the ontological origin of all things. "The Way is empty, yet use will not drain it. Deep, it is like the ancestor of myriad things" (Ch. 4).

2. Tao self-manifests into all things by a process of differentiation. "The simple origin self-differentiates into ontic beings" (Ch. 28).

3. Tao is the ultimate end of all things which have to return back to it. "All things come into being, and I see thereby their return. All things flourish, but each one returns to its root" (Ch. 16).

4. Tao is the Ultimate unity, the One of all things constituted and moved by structural and dynamic oppositions. "Of old those that obtained the One: Heaven obtained the One and became clear. Earth obtained the One and became tranquil. The spiritual beings obtained the One and became divine. The valley obtained the One and became full. The myriad things obtained the One and lived and grew. Kings obtained the One and became rulers of the empire. What made them so is the One" (Ch. 39).

MAN RE-INSERTED INTO THE ONTOLOGICAL AND COSMOLOGICAL CONTEXT: LAO TZU'S ANTHROPOLOGY

Lao Tzu never used the word hsing ( ), though he talked very often of the word teh ( ). This means that for him any idea of human nature is to be integrated into a global conception of all beings' spontaneous nature The word "teh" represents the spontaneous virtue of every being begotten by Tao in its self-differentiating process. Tao remains in the innermost constitution of every being after being is differentiated into myriad things. It remains there as their spontaneous virtue: what Tao imparts to all beings is their virtue. This affirmation replaces the Confucian formula : "What Heaven imparts to man is called human nature." (The Doctrine of the Mean) The forms of these two formulas are quite similar, but their emphases are quite different. The Confucian formula is anthropocentric and humanistic, although it recognizes T'ien as the ontological foundation of man. But in the Taoist formula, there is nothing anthropocentric or humanistic. It takes the spontaneous virtue of all beings as the necessary mediation between Tao and man. On this level, man has to recognize his co-belongingness with all things. "Tao produces them. Virtue fosters them. Matter gives them physical form. The circumstances and tendencies achieve them" (Ch. 51). Man and all things share the same metaphysical structure and the same destiny. Man should not dominate or exploit other beings as instruments or as objects in servitude. Instead, he should treat them as mediator to the Mother Tao.

The Taoist virtue is therefore very different from the Confucian virtues such as jen, yi, li, chih, etc. . . . For Lao Tzu, true virtue is to achieve this spontaneity imparted by Tao to all beings. This achieved authentic virtue is called by Lao Tzu Profound Virtue (Ch. 10, 51, 65), Eternal Virtue (Ch. 28), Superior Virtue (Ch. 38, 41), and Great Virtue. "The all-embracing equality of the great virtue follows alone from the Tao" (Ch. 21). "He will never depart from eternal virtue, but returns to the state of infancy. . . . He will be proficient in eternal virtue, and return to the state of simplicity" (Ch. 28).

Tao is esteemed and virtue is honored without anyone's order. They always come spontaneously. Therefore Tao produces them and virtue fosters them. They rear them and develop them. They give them security and give them peace. They nurture them and protect them. Tao produces them, but does not take possession of them. It acts, but does not rely on its ability. It leads them, but does not master them. This is called profound virtue (Ch. 51).

"Always to know the models is called mysterious virtue. Mysterious virtue is profound and far-reaching. And with it all things return to their original natural state. Then complete harmony will be achieved" (Ch. 65).

The highest virtue for Lao Tzu is to achieve total union with Tao and to share its spontaneity. This virtue is characterized by Lao Tzu as all-embracing, innocent, simple, original, generous and self-forgetful.

It is in view of the fact that lustful desire and calculative intellect operate under the condition of Tao-forgetfulness and hinder man from returning to this spontaneous virtue that Lao Tzu criticizes their function and that of mind in general. "[The sage] keeps their [the people's] mind vacuous, fills their bellies, weakens their ambitions, and strengthens their bones, he always causes his people to be without [intellectual] knowledge, or (lustful) desire" (Ch. 3).

All other things which hinder man from this spontaneity, such as social values (favor or disgrace), the abuse of senses and extravagant bodily movements, are all criticized and devaluated by Lao Tzu.

For Lao Tsu, the highest virtue is incarnate and concretely manifested in the person of a sage. Though a man among men, the sage has transcended all human weakness and selfishness in becoming one with Tao and thus realizing the highest virtue in spontaneous freedom and undefiled infinitude. He knows how to gain a world of love and reverence by employing himself generously for the world. "The sage takes no fancy to accumulation. Having lived for the benefit of others, he is more rich in worth. Having given all he has to other men, he is more plentiful in being" (Ch. 81). "The sage has no begotted mind of his own; he immerses his own mind in the mind of all people, and forms a harmonious one with them" (Ch. 49). "Therefore, the sage is always skillful and wholehearted in the salvation of men so that there is no deserted man; he is always skillful and wholehearted in the rescue of things so that there is no abandoned thing" (Ch. 27). The sage is therefore not only an ethical and moral achievement as in the case of the Confucian sage. He is the incarnation of Tao and its spontaneous virtue, and thereby becomes the saver of the world of appearance in the realm of being, restoring them to the primordial unity with Tao.

Contrary to the Confucian image of the sage as a great man, Lao Tzu proposes the image of an infant as best representing the Taoist sage because an infant realizes without any effort the characteristics of the highest virtue: all-embracing spontaneity, innocence, simplicity, originality, generosity, and self-forgetfulness. "He who possesses virtue in abundance may be compared to an infant. Poisonous insects will not sting him. Fierce beasts will not seize him. Birds of prey will not strike him. His bones are weak, his sinews tender; but his grasp is firm. He does not yet know the union of male and female, but his organ is aroused. This means that his essence is at its height. He may cry all day without becoming hoarse. This means that his harmony is perfect. To know harmony means to be in accord with the Eternal (Tao). To be in accord with the Eternal means to be enlightened" (Ch. 55). The relation between Tao-Nature-Man is central to Lao Tzu's philosophy. "Utterances must have a central theme. The world of events must revolve round a pivot" (Ch. 70). Now this triple relationship is the central theme of all Lao Tzu's utterances. It concerns our origin and our innermost nature and therefore is nearest and dearest to us. It must be also the easiest to know. But people are ignorant of it as a consequence of their forgetfulness of Tao and Virtue, and especially as the consequence of the fact that they are deprived of any methodology. "My utterances are quite easy to understand and quite easy to be put into practice. Yet people in the world are entirely ignorant of the know-how" (ibid.).

National Chengchi University

Taipei