“Philosophical” and “Religious” Daoism: Two Commentaries on Daode Jing

Appalled, a young scholar of Daoist texts holds the text of the Daode jing in each hand. Written alongside one copy is the commentary of Wang Bi, immediately seeming to flow from the original text itself. In the other hand, the fragmented text is accompanied by the Xiang’er commentary, with its demand for keeping faith, abiding by precepts, and concerning oneself with the flow of pneumas. Wondering how both can be said to be Daoism, he reads more closely. The question is not “Are there two Daoisms?” The Daoisms represented by the commentary of Wang Bi and the Xiang’er commentary are as different as night and day; but the scholar recalls that all pairs of opposites arise from the same source. If, in this case, we think of the Daode jing itself as this source, the question becomes “What is the relation between these two Daoisms, and are they incompatible?”

For, to be sure, there are two distinct conceptions of Daoism presented by the two commentaries. The concerns of each sometimes overlap, but in such instances the approaches taken to a shared concern seem to be (at the very least) somewhat divergent. To use extremely general headings, Wang Bi addresses philosophical and psychological issues (which are closely interrelated, and so may jointly be referred to as psycho-philosophical), while the Xiang’er focuses on the institutionalism which necessarily occupies an organized religion to some extent, and the quasi-bodily matters related to the pursuit of longevity or immortality, which shall be collectively called ‘physiological’ concerns.

Wang Bi’s philosophy and spiritual psychology is, of course, evident from his first points on the very first chapter of the Daode jing, where he expands on the A-not-A concepts set out at the beginning of the text. Unfortunately, since we do not have the Xiang’er commentary on this first chapter, its gloss of the section cannot be compared to Wang Bi’s explanation. Compare, however, the notes of Wang Bi to those of the Xiang’er on chapter 11, another instance where the A-not-A idea is illustrated. Regarding the example of the cartwheel, clay vessel, and doors and windows in a house (things made useful by the void they contain), Wang Bi says, “‘Wood,’ ‘clay,’ and ‘wall’ constitute the three [examples] by utilizing nothingness. To say nothingness means that which exists is beneficial only by the use of that which is absent.” (Lin pp. 19) The Xiang’er, meanwhile, focusing on the example of the cart, tells us that with the advent thereof, the ignorant sought only to increase their profit by it, while, “When the wise saw [the cart], they understood the beneficence of the Dao. Without uttering a sound, they were strictly self-regulated and put great emphasis on preserving the perfection of the Dao.” (Bokenkamp, pp. 91) While one might argue “the wise” come to their realization upon seeing the cart because they recognize its illustration of being and non-being, it is difficult to accept that this is the intent of the Xiang’er, and it certainly cannot be assumed to be.

Further difference may be seen in Wang Bi’s first note on chapter 10, where he explains keeping one’s soul and residing with one’s true nature, that is, accord with Dao. (Lin pp. 17) On the same lines, the Xiang’er launches into a dissertation on white pneuma, essence, and the precise location of the Dao within the human body (Bokenkamp pp. 88-89), a signature bit of physiological discussion that, compared to Wang Bi’s comments, one would hardly suspect to be about the same piece of text, let alone from the same tradition. Yet another example is the commentaries’ takes on chapter 16, where knowing eternity leads (though the chain of justice leading to kingship leading to Heaven leading to the Dao everlasting), according to Wang Bi, to embodying nothingness, “which water and fire cannot destroy, metal and stone cannot injure”, and which leaves “the tiger and rhinoceros … no place to thrust their teeth and horns, and war weapons … no place to stab their sharp points.” (Lin pp. 29) The Xiang’er, meanwhile, interprets the last line of the chapter (which Lin translates: “Thus the entire life will be without danger”, and Bokenkamp, in the context of the Xiang’er: “Their bodies obliterated, they do not perish.”) in an entirely different manner, and takes it as referring to the palace of Grand Darkness, “where those who have accumulated the Dao refine their forms.” (Bokenkamp pp. 102)

While the physiological preoccupation of the Xiang’er commentary has been touched upon above, its institutionalism, its tell-tale religiosity, wants explanation. Perhaps the foremost sign of this quality is the concern of the commentary to point out “false arts” and “the deviant,” and to inculcate that the Xiang’er way is the true Way (if the pun will be forgiven). Such a notion would no doubt have been laughable to a philosophical Daoist like Wang Bi, to whom there is no difference even between ‘yes’ and ‘no.’ The 27 “Xiang’er Precepts” are another indication of this tendency: an elaborate set of proscriptions not unlike the Ten Commandments which are derived from the text of the commentary. (Bokenkamp pp. 50) While some of them accord with the letter of the Daode jing itself – “Do not … point to any shape and call it the Dao”, “Place yourself in a humble position”, &c.; – all of them are contrary to the spirit of the Daode jing, for “When the world is full of taboos and prohibitions, / the people will become very poor.” (Lin pp. 107)

The differences between the ‘philosophical’ Daoism of Wang Bi and the religious Daoism of the Xiang’er are indeed vast, but both are essentially trying to answer the same question, as are all religions and philosophies: how to live well within the cosmos. Both commentaries, arising from the same original text, might be said to assert that living well is living in accord with Dao; the difference is one of the angle of approaching the matter of living at one with Dao. In doing this, each Daoism may be said to be, on the one hand, examining different aspects of humanity within the cosmos, and on the other, to be doing so through different lenses.

Wang Bi and the contemplative, philosophical Daoists focus on human mental behavior, emphasizing realization of the Dao ineffable, and prescribing (albeit sometimes vaguely and abstractly) the way we should act to go with this flow. Through largely indirect devices, Laozi points his finger at the moon, and Wang Bi gives us a little further explanation, so we can become like the “Ancients who made themselves the best”, “Unspoiled as unhewn wood.” (Lin pp. 26) In an effort to bring this loftiness down to earth, the Xiang’er focuses less on the mental, and much more on the bodily, explaining the physicality of the order emanating from Dao. Its philosophical character is not entirely gone; it still “cannot be named” and “is as if there were nothing there.” Only now some of its operation in the world is described:

The pneumas of the Dao constantly ascend and descend, active in heaven and on earth, within and without. The reason they are not seen is that they are clear and subtle. Ascending on high, they do not shine; descending, they do not … [whoosh]… (Bokenkamp pp. 96)

The student of Dao, therefore, ought to see the usefulness of both approaches, regardless of which way he tends to lean. Indeed, returning to the philosophical Wang Bi when one waxes a bit religiose, and to the Xiang’er when one becomes a little too loftily-minded is “keeping to the middle path like a bellows,” (Lin pp. 12) using both the motions of opening and closing to be inexhaustible. Neither one is to be exclusively preferred; what use, after all, is a bellows if one will not open it and close it?

If the two Daoisms represented by the two commentaries are different as night and day, then let the student who balances himself thus, holding one text in each hand, be called the traveler who goes by night and by day. Keeping faith with Dao, his essence refined, people will barely know of his existence, and his steps will leave no trail.

Reference:

• Wang Bi’s commentary is translated alongside the text of Daode jing by Paul Lin. The Xiang’er commentary may be found translated in Stephen Bokenkamp’s excellent book Early Daoist Scriptures.