Early Journal Content on JSTOR, Free to Anyone in the World This article is one of nearly 500,000 scholarly works digitized and made freely available to everyone in the world by JSTOR. Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the mid-‐seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries. We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-‐commercial purposes. Read more about Early Journal Content at http://about.jstor.org/participate-‐jstor/individuals/early-‐ journal-‐content. JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-‐for-‐profit organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
AUTHENTICITY
THE
KING.
OF THE TAO TEH
time ago when venturing on the work of translating Lao at the general agree SOME Tze's Tao Teh King,1 I was astonished ment as to its genuineness, "
I do not know of any other the authenticity
of which be so well
and quoted
of so ancient
book
of the origin and
a date
the genuineness
as
says :
who
the Tao
Teh
King
of the text can claim
to
substantiated."
At that time I was
not aware of the fact that Prof. Herbert
one of the best Chinese
Giles,
Professor Legge
A.
now living, had made as in the genuineness of the Tao
scholars
vigorous an onslaught on the belief Teh King as the memorable T?bingen historical character of the Gospels.
school
had made
on
the
I am sorry for this oversight, for I should not have failed to it in the preface to my translation and should at the same
mention time
utilised
have
Professor
Giles's
critical
remarks
on
several
scure passages in the Tao Teh King. The article appeared at Hongkong back as 1886, in the China Review, published 1 For have been
generally consummation the word
the Chinese not acquainted with I and literature language that no definite system of transcribing Chinese words has as yet the abolition of this anarchical state is a Though agreed upon.
to be wished, it seems all but impossible, were it alone for devoutly that the Chinese itself is by no means Thus uniform. pronunciation or canonical is pronounced in the Peking book) (i. e., a classical and
in Canton
dialect
ching,
scribed
sometimes Tze, Tzu, for the same sound,
tended
(pp.
readers
to state
the reason
ob
as far
the sake of leaving quotations consistent, but the thoughtful words and names.
is sometimes tran -f (philosopher) are in sometimes Tz\ all of which short u as in "but." For pronounced
Further, king. sometimes Tz?, an
abruptly in their original form, itwas reader will find no difficulty
to be strictly impossible in identifying the proper
THE
OF THE
AUTHENTICITY
TAO
TEH
575
KING.
and is very little referred to by sinologists and still less 231-280), advertised by the publishers. Only of late, since the learned au thor came more prominently before the public, have his views on more
mentioned
been
Lao-Tze
Professor
frequently.
whose
Legge,
Teh King in the Sacred Books of theEast ap in 1891, does not take the slightest notice of Professor peared does Victor von Strauss, nor any other of the later neither Giles ; translation of the Tao
Rev.
The
translators.
Dr.
P.
peared Giles's
alone
translation
W.
KingsmilPs theory. These
facts
are
not The
to explain my oversight. whether or not Professor Giles he
whose
J. Maclagan,
translation
ap
about two years ago in the China Review, ignores Professor Mr. T. attack on the authenticity of the Tao Teh King.1 is based
upon Professor Giles's to extenuate but merely
quoted main question, however, remains, is justified in his assumption when
:
says
in question
work
"The
is beyond
did say, but more
that Lao-Tzu
The
has been mostly mistranslated. there be, may
be safely
a forgery.
all doubt
relegated
of what
meaning
to the category
It contains
indeed much
he did say, as found therein,
that he did not. What
he did not say,
ifmeaning
of things unknown."
restates his position most forcibly in his recent of Chinese Literature, and adds :
Professor Giles book, A History "A
dwindling Teh
known Tao
minority still believes " (p. 57).
that we
possess
that book
in the well
King
In a private letter to the author of this article Professor Giles formulates his view in a somewhat milder form, making clear the saying :
main point of his contention, *? The
work we possess
only contend Tzu,
at whose
that these were date
does
'book' was
no
contain many
handed
down
of Lao-Tzu's
by tradition
actual
utterances.
to such writers
I
as Chuang
in existence."
is a great authority inmatters sinological, and I confess from the start that my knowledge of Chinese literature is Professor Giles
limited and cannot compare with the mass of material necessarily I approached the sub at his command. has he which Accordingly 1Dr. Maclagan's Mr.
T W.
KingsmiU's
translation translation
is published appears
in Vol. in Vol.
XXIII.
XXIV.,
of the China Nos.
3 and 4.
Review.
576
THE
MONIST.
idea that I should have to recast my ject with the preconceived views of the Tao Teh King, and I gave a very careful perusal to article on "The Remains the mooted of Lao-Tzu" a but after ; rigorous consideration of all arguments offered against the authen ticity of the book, I have come to the conclusion that?barring corruptions of the text and additions that have slipped in through the carelessness as
regarded
of copyists?the
bulk of the book must after all be
genuine.
question is sufficiently important to deserve further inves It acquires an additional interest by affording a parallel tigation. to the history of the New Testament criticism, which (as it appears The
at present) at the outset overshot the mark and put the age of the In the same way the first critical scholars Gospels much too late. relegated the bulk of the Hebrew books, the as well as their authenticity to the their composition subjects of have learned now that, although the final re realm of fable. We
of the Old Testament
of the several
biblical books may be late, the bulk of their is genuine and ancient, establishing the fact that tradition is much more reliable than has commonly been assumed. There in the early productions of man's literary is a strong conservatism of which can hardly be appreciated aspirations, the tenaciousness
daction
contents
This conviction has again been brought home by modern writers. to me by a reconsideration of the authenticity of Lao-Tze's Tao Teh King.1 1The present the Encyclopcedia itatively
treated
state of New Britannica, in Prof. H.
Testament summed up in criticism, most concisely s. v. "Gospels," and quite exhaustively and author works on the New Testament, his J. Holtzmann's
der N. T. Theol. (2 vols.) takes a very de It reliability of the main facts told in the Gospels. is assumed that Mark, Matthew, and Luke have drawn from an original Gospel, now lost, of which Mark is the most faithful and oldest reproduction. The words to the three synoptic Gospels in common would this primitive fairly represent is commonly called scholars Ur-Markus, i. e., original source, which by German Mark. the spade of excavators to us that though the Old Tes has revealed Further,
Handcommentar; cided stand upon
and
his Lehrbuch
the historical
tament may have been compiled at a late date, it nevertheless contains are older than the most confident assertions of the old-fashioned
which
to believe.
orthodox
than the date of fact, some of them being older the venerable hoariness of the Old Testament Moses, legends, while superseding the preposterous of the first critics, is of little avail for propping up assumptions theology
dared
In
traditions
THE
AUTHENTICITY
OF THE
TAO
TEH
577
KING.
let us investigate Professor Giles's arguments. They are are The former based on the fact partly negative, partly positive. never alluded either that Confucius, Tso-ch'iu Ming, and Mencius But
or to his book.
to Lao-Tze
is the statement not
to Lao-Tze's with
hatred
The argument proves nothing. Nor it stands quite correct. There is an allusion, Tao Teh King, but to his doctrine of requiting as
is no more
name
Lao-Tze's
mentioned
in
than is that of Confucius in the various passage to Confucian doctrines in the Tao Teh King.
refer
goodness.
the mooted ences
The
occurs
passage
"
Some one '' The sage
in the Lun Yii and reads as follows :
hatred with 'Requite ' : If with goodness replied
said,
[I say :] With goodness be requited? " and goodness with goodness.'
what
goodness,'
justice
hatred [viz.,
be
do you
think?"
how
requited,
just retaliation]
then should
requite
hatred,
did not grasp the significance of Lao-Tze's ethics, and his reluctance in mentioning the name of his great rival was as Confucius
natural
We a
myth,
as
it was
might
reciprocated.
as well
because
Lao-Tze,
say that the literary work of Confucius was who
may
be
the Tao Teh King at a highly advanced famous rival ; or, to use a more modern on The Descent
ofMan
assumed
to
have
written
age, does not mention
his
simile, that Darwin's book must have been a product of the latter part
neither he nor his book had century, because been mentioned by any of the divines of his time in their published The negative arguments sermons or any other of their writings. is mentioned of Professor Giles are offset by the fact that Lao-Tze of the nineteenth
by Lieh Y?-K'ow, fifth century B. C,
commonly
called
Lieh-Tze,
who
lived
in the
by Chuang Chou, commonly called Chuang-Tze, lived in the fourth century B. C, by Han Fei Tze,1 either of the fourth or third century B. C, and in addition by Liu Ngan,
who
It proves too much of the Bible. the antiquated ; but if it conception dogmatical tradition. We, it proves the tenacity of religious the children of proves anything, an unsettled age, can scarcely form an adequate opinion as to the extraordinary of primitive mankind. conservatism 1 by the quietist doctrines Although Han Fei Tze's philosophy was "tinctured to the Taoist he can scarcely be said to belong while Hs?n of Lao Tze," school;
578
THE
MONIST.
king of Hwai Nan, a grandson of the founder of the Han dynasty, commonly known as Huai Nan Tze of the second century. All indulge in literal or almost literal quotations whom they venerate as a master of highest authority. from Lao-Tze, Professor Legge1 says : authors
these ancient
show
"To be
how
numerous that
in mind
borne
our Gospels.
Of
one are found
in those
istic, in whom
we
general sure copies
correct.
the writers
that
and Li?
down
to us
from
of it is shorter
readings
indeed
came
Taoism
of seventy
quotations are
; but
would
Tao are
in
if we were
only prove
that
from the very first."
had been the religion of China
Lao-Tze's
let it into
not so decidedly
there
their differences
are,
than the shortest of
These
the little book.
An2
as divided
or portions
the whole
are other authors
trust to memory,
did
Fei
come
either
There
Various
by Han
has
the whole
chapters,
two writers.
find quotations
King
of the text had been multiplied
Taoism and
the eighty-one
wonderfully
that
Teh
; and
short chapters
eighty-one
the quotations
the Tao
into
great
since time immemorial, under
prominence
the Han
The Emperor Ching dynasty, which began to rule in 206 B. C. who ruled 156-143 B. C. issued a decree by which Lao-Tze's book on tao and tehwas raised to the rank of canonical authority ; hence its name
Tao
Teh
King.
from Lao-Tze, quotations freely conceded by Professor Giles, The
and
second
century
B.
C.
the genuineness of which is date back to the fourth, third,
Accordingly
the
sentiments
are
un
equivocally antique Chinese thoughts, which fact is sufficient to in sure forever the importance of the Tao Teh King as a document of the religious evolution of mankind, rendering the obvious paral lelism to Buddhist
and Christian
sentiments
the more
remarkable
as its growth must be acknowledged to have taken place in perfect seem Now that the more frequent and the it would independence. more scattered these quotations are, the more assured would be the authenticity
of the Tao
Teh King.
Considering
the literary
whom Professor Giles also classes among the Taoists (China Review, p. 231), as a Confucianist. to any school, must be regarded if he belongs (See Mayer's Chiyiese Reader's No. Manual, 149 and 649.) 1Sacred the Books Vol. XXXIX., to his transla East, of p. 6, Introduction tion of the Tao Teh King.
Tze,
2 Viz.,
Liu
Ngan.
THE
laxity of the ancient Chinese and
exact
the
OF THE
AUTHENTICITY
numerous
authors,
TAO
TEH
it is remarkable are
from Lao-Tze
quotations
579
KING.
how correct ! Their
close
agreement not only with the present text of the Tao Teh King but also with one another could not very well be explained from oral tradition.
Take worthy
for instance chapter 58, which contains no specially note The first and second sentences are sayings of Lao-Tze.
quoted by Huai Nan Tze ; the third one (though modified) by Han Fei Tze ; farther down there are characters cited by Chuang Tze sums up the result by saying : Professor Giles and Han Fei Tze. '' With
the exception
of a few inserted characters,
out of quotations
constructed
to be found
the chapter
in the various
writers
can be entirely
already
cited."
is a strong argument in favor of the authenticity of the seems to think, on the con Tao Teh King, but Professor Giles fromwhich some lite trary, that these quotations are the material This
the present Tao Teh King. Now, I rary imposter has compiled venture to say that, from Professor Giles's standpoint, and assum to be genuine, the pia fraus of this Taoist ing these quotations "artificer"
should be called
rather a reconstruction
that the work was
than a forgery, How cleverly done.
and we ought to confess are fictitious, we must be astonished at ever, if these quotations we no would have standard at all by their close agreement, and In fact, we which we could decide what is genuine and what not. might as well declare Fei Tze, Chuang-Tze, indeed
Such Professor
that Lao-Tze
himself is an invention of Han
or perhaps Hwai Nan Tze. is the position of one who follows in the wake
of
Giles.
Why not advance one step farther and declare the whole an cient literature of China a modern forgery fabricated for the pur of the Boxers by imputing to the atrocities the pose of palliating Chinese
the semblance
of an ancient civilisation
and a sublime code
of morals? Professor
Giles's
position in the China Review
by Mr. Thos. W. No. 5), where the for translating the
(Vol. XXIII., to castigate Dr. Maclagan Teh King without referring to Professor Giles's
Kingsmill latter takes occasion Tao
is out-Giles-ed
essay on the
THE
58o
MONIST.
of Lao-Tze.
Remains
Mr. Kingsmill caps and his argument of Lao-Tze,
the existence
the climax by denying is plausible enough for
any one who knows but little of early Chinese "
Nan
Hw?i
of his school were
the other philosophers
and
Tsze
saws of unknown origin, premising ' In the prevailing the old masters said. fusion Lao.
Philosopher
new generation
an
So
loth. We
tells us
indeed
see
the process
'huo
gather
together
jumble
them
the compiler's
Lao
in a succeeding
generation,
all
heralded
the sayings
together without own, and
issue
as the Tao
Teh
of disbelief
the
however,
than
the genuine
the English
remarks
remains
to succeeding
known
juggle,
historian
the statement
add a few inane
and as
them to the world
the
to do was to necessary ' ' the old masters said,
the remark
by
of
regime, were
time. The to precede
that was
all
or reason,
rhyme
losopher Lao-Tsze. " is the origin of that paltry Such ical writers
in the other case,
'it is said,' where,
sense
stronger
in the habit
the new
of
is very careful
'huo yiieh,
a very much
and as
rewards
says :
He
the phrase ^ -f1 El into a personality, the
on in Sze-Ma-Ts'ien's but
S
phrase
implies
So
expression.
the stimulating going
of a Philosopher
the very doubtful
character
under
grew
^
to be found,
had
individual
of writers,
nothing with
them with
certain
quoting
literature.
of
of the phi of uncrit
ages
King."
is con greater part of the ancient literature of China as forgeries. Here demned by Mr. Kingsmill is Mr. Kingsmill's view in his own words : The
had
"China
and
India,
this period remains
looked
is very apparent we owe
of
and
records
him
have
the recension,
partly were
tablets, which
poetry,
as
upon
in the burst
as we
the old
to evolve,
trying
gradually be
Chwang-Tsze,
period,
old
been
that could
something
and we
are
out
literature
of her
and
of philosophic
works
Nan
Hwai
now,
from oral
which
and
from
marked
partly
the
etc.
To
from
the
the oral key of the
without
sorry to say bribed
writing,
came
Sun Tze,
Tze,
tradition,
unintelligible
primitive
the stimulus
of a vast
by the rewards
amount
of barefaced forgeries. ' of these works, it is true, contain Many
tions,
though
largely padded is a good
the Yih King as
same
nature.
spirations, There deceive,
which
is however their only
literature was devices
Professor are
this nature.
found
this distinction intention was
. . .The
to make
had not been
Teh
partakes Nan
Tsze
and
invented.
and dependent The
of
the
of its in others.
did not seek
the text so far as they could marks
these known
also
the sources
the recensions
tradi
Of
in the collection
King
of Hwai of
the old
accretions.
out seriatim
in the works
of
fragments
modern
the books
Tao
; the authors
in its infancy and quotation
of later writers
of
(/. c. ) has pointed
Giles to be
valuable
with more
Certain
specimen.
are of
the Sh? King
and diluted
to ;
intelligible
sentences
and
forger, for forger he must
the be
THE of the Tao
called,
to unearth
any
Nan
Tsze
Hwai conceal
Teh
of the old
added
the indifferent
TAO
TEH
KING.
581
had no such excuse.
King
fragment and
OF THE
AUTHENTICITY
an
joinings,
literature
It was profitable in those days and ; so he plagiarised Chwang Tze both
ignorant padding, and
uttered
the patter
the composition
of the juggler,
to a credulous
the genuine production of Lao-Tze, initial). (this time with a capital '' I have used in no carping nor ungenerous this strong language as I do,
believing, ancient
Chinese,
the opportunity
that we
have
a source
it has been to search
not
learned
all
of regret
for themselves,
have
that is possible
that those who been
content
to
age as
spirit ; but
from the study of have
the
to follow
time and in the old
tracks."
Mr. Kingsmill claims that "both of the Tao Teh King are Indian. He
the form and the doctrines"
identifies "the great Tao" with the Sanskrit marga, the eightfold noble Path ; the wu wei or not-doing with Nirvana; $j JjJ;kung ck'eng, i. e., merit com and with Karma; pleted, ffi yii, i. e., desire, with trishna, thirst.1
to identify the three gunas with teh (virtue) as goodness (saliva), y? (desire) as passion or activity {rajas) and ^ tan (paleness) which he transcribes tarn, and calls it "a word im " ported for the occasion (!) with "darkness or inertia {lamas). The word sggp'u, simplicity, in chapter 28 means to him "Bhagavat" " in chapter 58 is transcribed mi, confusion," (p. 154), and to be "a transliteration of Indian "me, old mat,91 and declared
He
goes
so far as
m?y?, illusion" (p. 190). All this is partly far-fetched, partly positively untrue. The not as the Buddhist Taoist's Tao is a world-principle, marga a moral
endeavor.
is no
similarity except that one of the to be "path." It is used by happens to translate "path," and by the Christians to trans There
of the word Tao
meanings the Buddhists
or logos. Lao-Tze's term wu wei (not doing) is a rule of conduct while the Buddhist Nirvana is the transcendent state late "word"
of bliss attained
In the language of the Buddhist by the Buddha. The differ it takes the place of the Christian heaven. missionaries ence between kung ch'eng (merit completed) the and Buddhist 1The on p. 149 first line inMr. Kings hidden" character chi, i. e., "subtle, a misprint. ch'i "breath," It is probably meant for^ mill's is obviously article " or the primeval which latter, however, ought not to be translated life-principle," matter." by "primeval
THE
582 tantamount
is almost
JCarma
to
MONIST. contrast
the
between
"virtue"
and
"sin."
of teh,y?, and tan with the three gunas, or qualities, viz., good, bad and indifferent is as purely imaginary as and possesses not even a that of "simplicity" with "Bhagavat," identification
The
semblance
Kingsmill will was imported or
"darkness
used Tao
Further, it is difficult to understand how Mr. tarn, that the word prove that tan was pronounced from India, or even that it ever had the meaning
of truth.
let
inertia,"
alone
badness
in
the
sense
of
tamas,
as
in India. of ancient Chinese authors from the the quotations date back to the fourth, third, and second century, feels compelled by his theory not to allow its com
Although Teh King
Mr. Kingsmill position to have
taken place before the intercourse between China and India was established under the Han dynasty, which means the first century of the Christian era.1 Mr. Kingsmill's "literal translation" of the Tao Teh King seems from an edition with many variants which differ In addi from all the traditional texts at my command.
to have been made considerably tion he alters
it pleases him.2 It reads some in the grim humor of Mark Twain when
the text whenever
times as if itwere written
translating a translation of one of his funny stories back into Eng calls the Tao Teh King a that Mr. Kingsmill lish. No wonder "paltry juggle." Mr. Kingsmill
that the book contains
allows survivals
proverbs enough tions which breathe
of some
B. C), 1The
in the "rhyming period," but the quota
spirit, such sayings as are unequivocally ancient and date any intercourse with India.
the Buddhist-Christian
"requite hatred with goodness" back centuries before there was The
older
from the start (viz., 208 dynasty favored Taoism in grateful remembrance of the aid which Liu Pang, its Han
Han
dhist missionaries
from 201 B. C. till 190 A. D., and the first Bud dynasty reigned in the eighth year of Ming T?, corresponding to reached China
66 A. D. 2For
instance, spirit of the valley."
in Chapter
6 he
reads
the "spirit
of desire"
instead
of "the
THE
OF THE
AUTHENTICITY
TAO
TEH
KING.
583
founder, had received from Chang Liang the Taoist. Accordingly there is not the slightest foundation inMr. Kingsmill's assertion an "to open contest" with the Confu attempt (p. 195-196) that
as to question the of those days "was as hopeless in the of the dictates heydays Holy Office/' and that to the writings of an "the only hope of success lay in an appeal " was accomplished tiquity which by the forgery of the Tao Teh cianist scholars
of the Church
King. Although I am willing enough to accept all reasonable propo sitions of any advanced school of Chinese Higher Criticism, I am not sufficiently convinced either by Professor Giles or by Mr. Kings to leave "the old tracks." I see too many objections and con
mill
in their views.
tradictions
It seems
to me
of a later Taoist,
Teh King were the pious fraud contain at least some of the aberrations
that if the Tao
itwould
and above all a demonstration
of Taoism
of the claim that the great of preparing an elixir of life,
in the possibility the fad of almost all later disciples of Lao-Tze. All re ligious forgeries have a dogmatic tendency or some other practical purpose, and the absence of any dogmatic tendency in the Tao
master
believed
which was
renders the assumptions
Teh King
of both Professor Giles
Kingsmill very improbable. Mr. Kingsmill goes so far in his assertion
and Mr.
that his views need
not be taken seriously, while Professor Giles's more moderate posi tion deserves attention, were it merely on account of his high as
standing
a
sinologist.
Professor Giles and Han
Tze
only reliable "Han which but
Fei
are
grants that the quotations made by Huai Nan are genuine and treats these authors as the source of our knowledge of Lao-Tze. He says : Fei Tze
Tzu,
found
the wording
of the in the Tao
is different.
third century B. C, Teh
King.
Many
That
of Han
quotes many
sayings
is, they are meant
Fei Tzu's
quotations,
of Lao
Tzu,
for the same however,
make
1 the boldest and cleverest Deuteronomy, perhaps forgery in the history of for the purpose of establishing the monopoly of the temple religion, was composed its dogmatic of Jerusalem, while the rigid monotheism of tendency is to establish the prophets.
;
5?4
THE
sense
where Fei
Han
the corresponding
Tzu
also
Twice
King.
have
been
some book
"Of
Huai
Nan
Tzu,
said,
Lao-Tze's
The
are nowhere
who
lived
can be walked
way which
with
Teh
the teachings
nonsense.
in the Tao
to special
descending
in the second
make
King
to be found
of Lao
century B. C,
pleading, . . . Tzu.
Teh this
the same may
be
a book."
Teh King
Tao
Without
dealing
that he never mentions
except
"
in the Tao
which
'a book.'
well
may
sentences
gives quotations
he mentions
MONIST.
begins
:
is not the eternal
way."
sentence is quoted by both Han Fei Tze and Huai Nan but the formerwith a slight variant, adding the untranslatable Tze, chi after tao, and the latter rendering the quotation more particle ^ This
complete by adding the next following sentence, "The name which can be uttered is not the eternal name;" but both introduce the quotation Tze
Lao
by ^^EJ or
writes,"
"as
Tze yueh, "Lao
is written
in Lao
Tze's
Tze
says,"
not "Lao
book."
is very apodictic. We might as well say that many sayings which have a deep sense in the Tao Teh King are purely trivial when read in the sense in which they are quoted by The editor of the China Review Han Fei Tze and Huai Nan Tze. Professor
Giles
adds a comment '' Mr.
Giles
has brought
to Professor
Giles's
us for expressing
will pardon
there is still room
forward,
by the term Lao
typically represented type as much as heaven
article in which he says : our conviction
to believe
that Lao
differed
Tzu,
that, in spite of all he Tzu,
from men
or the set of men
of the Han
Fei Tzu
differs from earth."
are contained in our pres there are other quotations which are not found in it. Mr. Giles makes much of it. He says : In addition
to the quotations Teh King,
which
ent version of the Tao
it [viz.,
"If
'the book'
Ching
at all costs,
then we
of Lao
Tzu
are not
which
mentioned are upon
by Han
Fei Tzu]
must
the horn of a dilemma,?it
in the modern
Tao
T?
be
the Tao
contained
T?
sayings
Ching."
that some genuine sayings of Lao-Tze were preserved by oral tradition which in itself is by no means im probable, although the reliability of such a mode of tradition could Professor Giles
be
only for an illiterate age and must But considering regarded as doubtful.
admitted
fairly be
assumes
in a literary age the prominence
THE
OF THE
AUTHENTICITY
TAO
TEH
585
KING.
we may very well assume that in addition to his gen uine literary remains, there ought to have been in vogue a number
of Lao-Tze,
of apocryphal sayings of his. We know that in the history of Chris tianity, in addition to the canonical and apocryphal gospels, there ay/oa<?a,the unwritten words of the Lord which no New Testa frequently quoted by the church-fathers ; but to be a forgery ment critic has ever thought of proving the Gospels by a reference to unverifiable quotations of the sayings of Christ. the so-called
existed
were
are by no means apocryphal and agraphal sayings of Lao-Tze as numerous as those of Jesus, and ifwe are not misinformed, they are less frequent than a reader of Professor Giles's article is apt to
The
think. In reply to another argument of Professor Giles we may say that there are words in the New Testament which cannot be found in Greek dictionaries (for instance the expression iwiovcrios),but the fact cannot be brought forward against the authenticity of the Gos pels. Thus it is quite possible that the compilers of ffjjjj? Shuo W?n use at or about they had embodied all Chinese words in the time of the Christian era and might after all have omitted a
believed
that belonged to the sixth century B. C. Professor Giles says :
character "
(B. C.
sayings which
Other
?are stated
by Chuang
Tzu
occur
in the Tao
to have
fallen
T?
Ching
from
the
as utterances lips of
of Lao
the Yellow
Tzu,
Emperor
2697)."
Professor Giles here refers to such sentences as Obviously "one who knows does not talk; one who talks does not know" our (Chap. 56), and the curious quotation of the sixth chapter of Tao Lieh
Teh King which (as says the commentator Tze attributes to the mythical Huang T?,
peror.1
T'au
Kien) Em
the fact that the Tao Teh King is full of considering have quoted this passage from not Lao-Tze could why
But
quotations, a book which popular tradition attributed Giles's argument has no force. Further, 1Also
T'u
the Yellow
Professor
to chapter
Giles
contends
38, the text of which,
however,
to Huang
T??
Professor
that such a book is doubtful
as
the
586
THE
MONIST.
and that it Tao Teh King was never written by Lao-Tze, He grants that Han Fei did not exist at the time of these writers. Tze twice mentioned a book of some kind, but "Chuang Tzu, the
modern
greatest Taoist writer of all ages, who flourished in the fourth cen tury B. C, never alludes to any book from the hand of Lao Tzu." of By the same logic we might easily prove that the Epistles or the original Mark cannot have existed in the first century some of those authors who of the Christian era, simply because
Paul
the fact that quote from these writings do not expressly mention their quotations were taken from epistles or refer to them in vague and
general
terms.
Sze-Ma
Ch'ien,
the
Chinese
Herodotus,
no
assuredly
mean
authority, who lived from about 163-85 B. C, mentions the book as saying that it had two parts, discussed the tao and the teh, and which are consisted of five thousand and some words?statements as
exact
can
be.
Professor Giles says
"In '
acters
natural
had
never
was
Lao-Tze
family was
as
to make
Ch'ien.
He
in the hamlet
proper
In Cho
he was
gentry. Tan.
of a somewhat
of Lao-Tze's
Ch'?-Jhren,
His
beyond
char that
all doubt
super
is tinged."
account
Ch'ien's
in 5,000 and odd
it clear
to say nothing
the work,
the rest of his account
born
the Li
his appellation
Yang,
set eyes upon
is the Sze-Ma
'a book
he mentions
Tzu
it in such a way
hue with which
Here "
of Lao
his brief memoir ; but he mentions
he himself
His
to the testimony of Sze-Ma
objects
:
Li-Hsiang,
name
was Er,
in charge
life: K'u-Hien,
his posthumous
of Ch'u. title Po as state
of the secret archives
historian. " on the rules of propriety. went to Cho in order to consult Lao-Tze Confucius *' reverence of for the sages of Confucius, [When speaking propriety, praised ' : The men of whom said Lao-Tze you speak, Sir, have, if you please, antiquity], together with noble man roving-plant ures deeply
their bones
your affectation I have "
about.
and wanders as
if he were
tude as though he were what
Their
mouldered.
if he
finds his time he rises, but
and
poor. stupid.
Let
go, Sir,
plans.
to you, and
[Unable
All
not
still extant.
If a
find his time he drifts
are
like a
alone
that the wise merchant
noble man
exaggerated
left.
I observe The
to communicate
Confucius
words
does
of perfect
your
proud
virtue
hides assumes
airs, your many
this is of no use
to you, Sir.
his treas an atti wishes, That
that is all.'
to understand
the basic
idea of Lao-Tze's
ethics].
is
THE he addressed
his disciples,
fishes can swim, I know make
nooses
make
arrows.
clouds
when
the dragon? 1' Lao-Tze
'
reason
practised
in Cho
and came
wrote
in which
a book
he discussed
of
can fly, I know
nets
that the
the running, one could
For
; for the flying, one could can bestride wind and
I saw Lao-Tze.
His
of his
to retire, I request
Sir, since it pleases you '' Lao-Tze Thereupon and odd words,
most
make
587
KING.
know how he
To-day
to the frontier.
TEH
can run.
could
and virtue.
TAO
that the birds
animals
I cannot
rises.
he heavenwards
he departed
I know
one
to the dragon
and namelessness. '' Lao-Tze resided Cho,
:
saying
'
that the wild
; for the swimming, As
OF THE
AUTHENTICITY
doctrine
life. When The
Is he perhaps
aims
he
custom-house
you for my sake two parts
the concepts
in self-concealment
the decay
foresaw
officer Yin-Hi to write
of :
said
a book.'
of five thousand
consisting
of reason
like
and virtue.
Then
he
departed. one knows where
"No
he died."
i. e., His Sze-Ma Ch'ien is an historian, author of the Shi Ki, the first Chinese book that can truly be called torical Records, It may be granted there is scope for doubt whether the History. and Confucius is historical ; in itself it is by interview of Lao-Tze no means Confucius's
The account which Chuang-Tze gives of impossible. at Cho is commonly regarded as a ro visit to Lao-Tze
but Sze-Ma Ch'ien's report is too sober to treat it in the same way. I am at a loss how Professor Giles can say that Sze-Ma book on the Tao and the Teh "in such Ch'ien mentions Lao-Tze's
mance,
a way as to make it clear beyond all doubt that he himself had never set eyes upon the work, to say nothing of a somewhat super If there natural hue with which the rest of his account is tinged." is a
supernatural
hue
I have been unable The
account
in Sze-Ma
to discover
Ch'ien's
account
of Lao-Tze's
of the interview between Lao-Tze
and Confucius
gains in credibility ifwe consider the fact that Sze-Ma a Confucian and not a follower of Lao-Tze.1
is one difficulty only in Sze-Ma Ch'ien's account. unaware of the fact that about half a century before Emperor book to that of a King, had raised the dignity of Lao-Tze's
present
in his article by Mr. Suzuki, number of The Mo?iist, p. 612.
'' Lao-Tze
and Professor
was
Ch'ien
There
1Stated
life,
it.
Giles
He
is
Ching i. e., a "
in the
588
THE
canonical
MONIST.
are we
But
justified in assuming that Sze-Ma a a and scholar After Ch'ien, although historian, was omniscient? a all he was not historian in the modern connotation of the word, writing.
but the path-finder of historiography who had to battle with all the difficulties of primitive conditions and the limitations of his age. In my opinion, it lies quite within the scope of probability that the book in Sze-Ma Ch'ien's had been copy of Lao-Tze's possession written before the issue of the decree of its canonisation or at least before
it became
art of printing cious
and
must remember that the generally known. We had not as yet been invented and books were pre
rare.
up for the lack of force of his argument by stating his position most forcibly. He says : Professor Giles makes
" his
Had
this book
immortal
some
history,
effort to see
same
The
and positively "Ssu-ma
he
at which
that such a man
Ssu-ma would
is merely an assertion argument which is stated, repeated further down : the historian, to Lao
attributed
that he would
assured
at the date
to believe
Ch'ien
wrote
not have made
it."
Ch'ien,
tions a work
in existence
been
it is difficult
have
Tzu. done
who wrote He so had
about
a century
saw
never it been
before Christ, men
it himself
in existence
vigorously
; but we may
rest
at the time at which
lived."
It seems
to me
that a man
like Sze-Ma
Ch'ien, being ap of Lao-Tze, would parently greatly interested in the philosophy indeed "have made some efforts to see it" ; and ifhe had not been to find it, would
able
surely have expressed regret about it. The tallies exactly with the size, contents, and title of in our possession now, implies plainly that he knew it.
statement which the book
in our possession contains passages quoted by Han Fei and other Yet authors. Tze, Chuang Tze, says Professor Giles, 'no book' was in existence." at Chuang Tze's "date The
book
With
all deference
scholarship, he advances petto
to hold
to Professor
I fail to be convinced other and
stronger the traditional view
Giles's
superior sinological his ; and unless arguments by reasons I shall still continue in that the Tao
Teh King which
THE
AUTHENTICITY
we have now is substantially has
Lao-Tze
TAO TEH
KING.
the book which, Sze-Ma
589 Ch'ien
says,
written.
Professor Giles's is perhaps
Lao-Tze
OF THE
attitude on the question of the authenticity of characteristic of his natural inclination (which
respects is very commendable) be either hot or cold, and to express in many
never
to be
lukewarm, to himself vigorously. Even in his review, while singing the praises exhausts the whole gamut of eulogy, says :
Mr. George T. Candlin of the great sinologist "that he may be oracular,
to a degree, scant pugnacious of courtesy sometimes to opponents, but never dulL,, I agree with Mr. Candlin's praise of Professor Giles, especially also with the comment as to his lack of dullness which sometimes implies that dogmatic,
he exaggerates and carries his contention too far.1 A negative view is nowadays so much credited with being the more critical and more scientific conception that it almost seems as though an affirmative position ought to be based upon some in terest which its holder has at stake. But I have no axe to grind. priest and am utterly indifferent as to whether or not the authenticity of the Taoist canon can be upheld. My interest in the Tao Teh King is for the sake of the ideas it contains, and I I am no Taoist
do not care whether Lao-Tze, family, composed it, embodying and sayings, or whether
proverbs
the old philosopher Er of the Li in his collection of aphorisms older it be the product
of an oral tra
1 to be one of the foremost sinologues is acknowledged Professor Giles Though in spite of its great preferences over other dictionaries in the world, his dictionary The China Review its readers in every consecu is not without flaws. presented and E. von Zach. with emendations The former by E. H. Parker a special at the prominent in carping delight lexicographer, prefacing his in a Boxer-like cruel humor as follows [China Review, comments No. i, XXXIII., tive number
takes
p. 48) : " Giles's
affords endless sport to the merry, and we may look for Dictionary a long year of sparring yet. I find it quite a mental relief, after the It is all the more studies of the day, to indulge in a little Giles-baiting.
tomany
ward serious
in that I know it can never do any harm agreeable, to a hippopotamus, if not would Giles give points there is not more danger of my fine shafts wounding the latter pachyderm's bullet piercing of a dum-dum Professor his
gating Teh King
Giles
favorite under
also
seems
doctrines.
the word
Tao.
: in pachydermatousness Mr. to a rhinoceros; indeed and his grizzly hide than there is skin."
bent on making his dictionary He inserts his views actually
a means concerning
for propa the Tao
THE
59o
after the time of the burning of the books (212 seem strange that, as was actually the itwould
dition, composed B. C), although case,
several
MONIST.
copies
have
should
been
rediscovered.
On
the
as
think that merely sumption that the book is a forgery one would one copy should have been found. that most of the pitlry say After all Professor Giles concedes King so attractive are genuine the main thing, it seems to me, is the contents of the book and its spirit, not the authenticity of the edi
ings which render the Tao utterances of Lao-Tze, and
Teh
tion that now lies before us. markable of a
later
At any rate, the antiquity of these re even if their compilation in book-form were
utterances,
is unequivocally
date,
assured.
It is true that the Tao
Teh King in its present shape is not a of a doctrine but a jumble of in logically arranged presentation a collection of aphorisms. coherent remarks, But this neglected harbors gems of deepest wisdom of stylistic composition us to discern back of it a thinker of deep philosophical and enables It seems to me that if the book were the product of an insight. exterior
imposter, would tents,
have
in
poor
tentions. man,
been
elegant,
Tradition
broken
the
sectarian
spirit,
been very different : the make-up
have
the result would
style in
correct
and
tendency,
tells us that Lao-Tze
down with
and
clear, paltry
but in
the
con
its con
wrote his book as an old
and filled with
age gloomy anticipations as to the future of his country. He had retired from the field of his activity in the state of Cho, and was about to leave the country in a state of dejection. he must
been himself;
can no longer have Accordingly Lao-Tze have been like a noble ruin still reflecting
the grandeur of former days. If the Tao Teh King is a fraud, its compiler must have been an unrivalled psychologist, for the book before us bears all the vestiges of the faults that old age is heir to. The author cares not for logical connexion, but he brings out plainly the burden of his to the world. He message repeats himself, he quotes proverbs while
saws
as
to suggest they happen is loose and careless, the composition
and wise
impressive.
themselves, and thus, the whole is after all
THE
at
written
derstand
the
Lao-Tze's
of Chinesp
TAO
the book to be genuine
Supposing being
OF THE
AUTHENTICITY
very
end
of
ceremonialism
and
the
to have
time immemorial even before Confucius for a man
It is natural
sions
about
ceremonialism
scarcely probable in mere
to speak
made
like Lao-Tze
by name ; in fact, he never mentions But he vents his full of quotations. and
true, we
can
its un
self-sufficiency
been rampant from himself its apostle.
not to mention
Confucius
although his book is allu feelings in unmistakable the external show of virtue. It is names,
that an imposter would allusions.
591
the tradition about
ostentatious
seems
which
KING.
career
its author's at
indignation
TEH
have been so cunning as as
Imposters,
a rule,
show
unmistak
ably the purpose for which a book is forged. They want to use the authority of their master for an endorsement of their favorite ; and a pious Taoist would not have allowed to slip without plainly denouncing Confucianism.
views sume
an opportunity Should we as
that he was
artful enough to imitate a senile disregard of diction and oracular allusions to the dangers of growing Confucian ism? We deem it highly improbable. Teh King had been compiled in the way Profes from the authors who suggests, quoted sayings of Lao the artificer of the book would certainly have tried to make
If the Tao sor Giles Tze,
complete and would not have omitted a number of the to him as the material quotations which were just as accessible to have incorporated in the Tao Teh King. which he is supposed On the other hand, it is likely that he would not have inserted the book
from the Yellow Emperor and other sources. quotations I agree with Professor Giles that the text of the Tao Teh King must be regarded as corrupt or doubtful in many passages, and it seems to me that most of the corruptions arise from the fact that the book was written by an old man under aggravating cir The man who wrote
itwas great, but when he wrote to appear to advantage before literary critics. The agitation of his mind becomes apparent in the lack of logical cohesion, which became the source of doubts and sug cumstances.
it he was not in a condition
gestions
for commentators
Professor Giles
says :
and
a cause
of
errors
for copyists.
THE
592 '' Truly
we may
in diametrical
of it is that
the outside
is an ambiguous
the Chinese
that
vinced
in Chinese
say of every passage
the worst
and
sententice;
MONIST. literature, public which
language,
Quot
becomes
tot
homines,
daily more
is, as nearly
con
as possible,
to the truth."
opposition
I for one belong to that class of people who believe that the for vagueness than any Chinese language offers more opportunities and I envy Professor Giles other language known to me; the assurance
he offers his
with which
as unequivocally them without
translations
correct.
If I only could persuade myself ! misgivings It is pleasant to deal with people who
to accept
are outspoken, for they are definite in their opinions, and the directness with which they It is sometimes difficult to their arguments saves time. propound find out what those others mean who, though they have very de cided views, neither affirm nor deny, thus leaving their readers in a quandary. to the Professor Giles, I am happy to say, belongs on severe former class, but he might be positive without being those who differ from him. The
is more
King
Therefore
King. one
with
is a Chinese language so than any other book
puzzle, and the Tao Teh or classic, except the Yih good reason to be charitable
Chinese
sinologues
have
another.
The
slovenliness
the various
text-corruptions which are
but
copyists,
of Lao-Tze's
by
as
no means
style was the natural cause of have crept in through careless numerous
or
as
as Pro
hopeless
us believe.
make
Frequently his lack of pa to tience induces Professor Giles reject a sentence unnecessarily. For instance, speaking of chapter 8, he says : fessor Giles would
*' Either
Lao
the former case, early
teachers
We
wrote
nonsense,
unqualified should
have
heard
or he
less about
did him
"Superior
not write
that.
as one of
In
the great
of humanity."
the chapter, which Professor Giles nonsense, as follows :
translate
unqu?lified
thousand
Tzu
I think we
goodness
resembleth
things, yet it quarreleth
water. not.
Water
Because
in goodness it dwelleth
condemns
benefiteth in places
as
the ten
which
the
THE of men
multitude
OF THE
AUTHENTICITY
shun
a position
[seeking
TAO
TEH
of lowliness],
593
KING. it is near
therefore
unto
the eternal Reason. "Fora
When
chooses
faith.
chooses
ability.
government
In
goodness
its motion
chooses chooses
goodness
a heart
For
benevolence.
goodness
business
goodness
In
order.
chooses
goodness
In words,
It quarreleth
timeliness.
not.
it is not rebuked.
Therefore
Of chapter n, "This
is non-existent
or a door,
Professor Giles
of the potentiality of
the master's
says: It is an illustration
contempt.
; e.g.,
in consequence
traces of
not bear
Professor Giles
is beneath
chapter
that which dow
chooses
goodness
giving,
In
the level.
chooses
goodness
dwelling
commotion.
the absence
the advantage
of
of ingress and
of any resisting
egress
of
by a win It does
medium.
hand."
does not seem to be familiar with
the fact that
too, have been troubled with the problem of philosophers, cannot comprehend the world frommatter and motion form. We alone, from the material of which things consist, but there is an other element to be considered which has so little to do with sub
Western
of any kind that it evinces its efficiency by an absence of substance, thus justifying the old Eleatic paradox, that the part
stance
may be more '* Thirty hole
than the whole.
spokes
in the nave]
on that which cutting
unite
depends
in one nave,
out doors
and on
the wheel's
is non-existent
translate chapter
We
that which
utility.
Clay
[on its hallowness] we build
and windows
is non-existent
the vessel's
and on that which
the house's utility. [on the empty space] depends '' when the existence of things is profitable, Therefore, them which
renders
[on
into a vessel,
is moulded
depends
a house,
11 as follows : the and
utility.
By
is non-existent
it is the non-existent
in
them useful."
The most
is expressed in prominent moral maxim of Lao-Tze or which literally means "non-action," his doctrine of ?? context The of the of the many aphoristic sayings "not-doing." Tao "He means
Teh
King makes who makes mars" artful
unwarranted
it plain what (see chapters and
interference conceits
ingly, is the abstinence course of things.
or
an
pretensions.
of all
Lao-Tze
means
29 and 64).
unnatural The
by saying, To make (wei)
assertion "not-doing,"
of
our
own
accord
this and a laissez-faire of the natural
594
THE
MONIST.
in things is as important in life, as non-existence As by carving out, or by taking away, we can give form existing. to anything, so by doing the not-doing there is nothing that cannot Non-action
be done. "
By
wu
following parable
is quoted
this interpre
Lao-Tze's
quotes.
saying
in non-action."
Nan Tze
by Huai
as
to the
the moral
: if it really
asked Nothing
"Light
rate,
any
that there is advantage
sentence
This
wei;
he
(chapter 43):
so I know
"And
at
be done."
far from denying
is presumably
Giles
of Lao-Tze's
as genuine
that cannot
there is nothing
not-doing
Professor tation
:
Says Lao-Tze
existed
or not.
Nothing
so
did not answer,
to watch it. All of a sudden he could not see it, or hear it, or Light ' ' to that ? I can be nothing myself ; ! cried Light touch ; who is equal " but I can't not be nothing.' (Loc. cit., p. 261.) set to work ' it. Bravo
all respect for the high opinion which Professor Giles forHan Fei Tze, saying that his "quotations make sense the corresponding sentences in the Tao Teh King make non
With
cherishes where
I must
sense/'
be nothing," about
ceptions
"The
Tao
sense
and
sense
for me.
oneness; all
of
the
"I
sentence,
It is at best a joke.
nonsense
differ.
Take,
for
can't
not
But
con
instance,
the
:
says
produces
trinity produces
oneness
produces
duality;
duality
produces
things."
inmy opinion, in their literal significance the i. method of thinking, starts with unities: e., Tao, dualities in contrasts or combinations, and finally pro
These
ideas possess,
sense.
good
the
that
is too deep
sentence?Lao-Tze
following
trinity;
confess
exhibiting All thinking is done in duces trinities by a synthesis of two ideas. these trinity relations, just as trigonometry calculates everything But Professor Giles, discovering in Mr. by measuring triangles. Balfour's translation a bad mistake in Latin grammar,1 condemns Lao-Tze's He
proposition makes
the plural
without of "afflatus,"
further ado, saying {loc. cit., p. 260): "afflate"
!
'The whole quoted
passage
And
TAO
of a numerical
reminds me
TEH
595
KING. I used
which
proverb
to hear
:
by my great-grandmother One
fool makes
And
so the world
many, do continue."
a series of lines among which we read :
41 contains
Chapter
OF THE
AUTHENTICITY
THE
Those
enlightened
Those
advanced
by tao appear by reason
' The
greatest whiteness
The
completest
virtue
dark,
appear
retreating."
like shame,
appears
insufficient."
appears
further on : "The
largest vessel
The
means
Lao-Tze
Obviously
voice
loudest
is not yet completed, is void of speech."
that the sage
is not ostentatious
idea expressed and appears ignorant to the vulgar?an repeatedly that genuine innocence is lacking in the in the Tao Teh King, sense of shame, that the largest vessel (the empire or the world) is never complete and the most powerful revelation of truth cannot be exhausted
in words.
translates one of these sen
Professor Giles
tences as follows : '' He
who
in abundance
as
is truly pure behaves as though
behaves
though he were
it were
sullied
; He
who
has virtue
not enough."
And as to the last line he says : "The
meaning
is :
The meaning follows : "The
thing takes long to complete, sound
is explained
king of Ch'u
Prime Minister
'A great A great
did
then observed,
is seldom
heard."
by a quotation
fromHan
as
Fei Tze
for the first three years of his reign. nothing ' There has been a bird sitting three years
His quite
can your How still, without wings, without flying, and without uttering a sound. ' 'It was probably that ? letting its wings grow,' replied the king, Majesty explain ' in watching the people. When it does fly, it will itself meanwhile and occupied soar
to heaven.
When
it does
not afraid.
I understand
government
into his own hands,
you.'
cry, there will Six months
be
consternation
afterwards
the king
and ruled with unparalleled
among men. took
success."
the reins
Be of
596
THE
sentences
is profound, but Han too trivial to be helpful.
of Lao-Tze's
The meaning Tze's
MONIST.
Fei
explanation appears to me There are many more of Professor
Giles's interpretations of a Lao-Tze similar will scarcely in from which way passages quoted to the recommend themselves sinologists, and arguments offered to prove his views are not convincing. For instance : passage, "there is no sin greater than fiky?," i. e., desire as genuine because quoted by Han Fei (chapter 46), is accepted insists that y? must be translated by Tze ; but Professor Giles The
Fei Tzu instances the ambition "ambition," simply because "Han and so settles the point." of certain famous personages Comment ing upon another sentence (of chapter 71) Professor Giles says of Huai Nan Tze, his other great authority: ' He
the passage,
quotes
set
T? King
of the Tao
for the worse,
better but always
to compress and
of one of the mightiest
the work
The plaints
as Lao
probably
to work
Tzu
uttered
here,
to serve
then
it, before
up with
the compiler
there, never
to expand
for the
of his own as
padding
of old."
teachers
com passage which is commonly interpreted as Lao-Tze's of Confucianism about the Pharisees (chapter 19), viz. :
"Abandon
discard
your saintliness,1
and
your prudence,
the people
will
gain a
hundredfold,"
is interpreted by Professor Giles as
comments '' The exact
import
"The asked
Lao replied
during
how
reasons
"wisdom"
even
Nan Tze's
to say was
meant
For
be no thieves,
the
as an attack
that, with
less wisdom
as Huai
instance,
inasmuch
a phrase,
against to regard
led
as
Nan
successful
Tzu
theft im
power. in a
the world
by showing
the reigns
1For lates
Tzu
Tzu
and were
get on better.
there would
occurs
saying
Lao
would
mental
considerable
plies
Tzu
the world
the sentence,
explains
they misapprehended
traditions. What
knowledge,
took up arms
is that the Confucianists
of which
their own
upon and
truth
of Huai
:
follows
real
on the basis
slightly different would
how violence
and
of
emperors,
unknown
the wisest
to me, Professor
for "saintliness."
in Chuang
form
go along without disorder
Giles
had
and
Tzu.
government always
in spite
here, as
Someone
; to which
been
Lao
conspicuous
of carefully-framed
in other passages,
trans
THE codes
of laws.
edge,
and
AUTHENTICITY
' Therefore
OF THE
it has been
zvill be at peace.''
the empire
TAO
said, abandon "
TEH
597
KING.
wisdom
and
discard
knowl
Nan Tze's
explanation of Lao-Tze's philosophy, to make people too stupid for criminals, appears to me so trivial, so foolish, and at the same time so immoral, implying an obvious misconcep main contentions, that Professor Giles must par tion of Lao-Tze's Huai
don me
to the traditional
for still adhering
interpretation of the
passage.
Chapter 54 concludes with the phrase : "How in the world do I know that it is so?"
and Lao-Tze
this !"
adds: So
"By far as I know all commentators
means agree that Lao-Tze to say "by this my tao (or Reason) which I am preaching to the I see no other possible explanation, and thus Mr. Chalmer world. this way"; Mr. Balfour, "By translates "By this method"; and Professor Giles adds (1. c, p. 267): '
case we are
In which
ing and
leads
left stranded
with
a
' method
' which
comes
from noth
to nowhere."
comment may be racy, even witty, but it is not fair.1 Professor Giles translates the beginning of chapter 36 quoted by Han Fei Tze in these words : This
"If must
you would
you must
contract,
first strengthen.
If you would
first expand.
take, you must
If you would
weaken,
you
first give."
a general indeed first strengthen the enemy before he him? Professor Giles's translation gives no sense and his construction is impossible. My own translation is more literal and Must
weakens comes
nearer 'That
the
is about
about
to fall has
has
is about
which
which
surely been
truth
to weaken surely been
: to contract has
surely
has been
[first] raised.
surely
been
[first]
[first] strengthened. That
which
is about
expanded.
That
That
which
to be
despoiled
is
[first] endowed."
In spite of his dependence upon Han Fei Tze and Huai Nan forLao-Tze Tze, Professor Giles does not hesitate to appropriate 1Professor here
Giles
too far to point
is opposed to translating tao by reason, out how groundless his objections are.
but
it would
lead me
598
THE
MONIST.
such sayings as betray an unusual depth of thought. in chapter 49 : of the famous passage '' This
to Lao
tion in attributing
Professor To
although
translates
Giles
the good
to make
order
Tzu,
I have
so
far failed
no hesita
I have
saying which
to discover
it in any
works."
of his disciples'
'
one very remarkable
contains
chapter
he says
Thus
I would
be good.
the passage
as follows :
the not-good
To
I would
also
be
good,
in
them good."
In translating this passage, Professor Giles interprets figteh mean "to to that this substitution obtain," saying teh, (virtue) The fact is (as I found "is common enough in archaic Chinese." out myself since the publication of my edition of the Tao Teh King) that one of the very best editions actually reads ^ teh, to obtain, I this reading, for jjjg teh, virtue. Adopting propose to render the as
passage "The actualise
follows
good
:
I meet with
goodness.
faith, thus I actualise
The
goodness,
faithful
the bad
I meet
with
I also meet with
Thus
goodness.
faith, the faithless
I also
I
meet with
faith."
My version differs from that of Professor Giles and I think renders the sense more accurately. Supposing we had the word in the sense of "being in English "to gooden" good toward," a run thus: "The ones I gooden; literal version would the good not-good ones I also gooden, to obtain (viz., actualise) goodness." that the pro The translation of Professor Giles not only assumes noun "them," which is not in the text, must be understood, but would "make" the bad good. Even implies that thus Lao-Tze ifwe grant that the word % shan could be twisted tomean "to make
also
(i. e., to be good oneself), the light good," instead of "to gooden" moral doctrines throws on this which our knowledge of Lao-Tze's that his passage demands that we interpret the words as meaning purpose is to realise goodness first of all in himself, without bother The utilitarian turn which Pro ing about the badness of others. fessor Giles genuine
gives
sentiment
I will
to the sentence
does
not appeal
to me
as the
further, although
I feel
of Lao-Tze.
not carry the discussion
any
THE
OF THE
AUTHENTICITY
TEH
TAO
599
KING.
tempted to have my say on several other points made by Professor but I will only Giles and might also indicate points of agreement can add that though I arguments accept neither Professor Giles's I have learned a great deal from his un of Lao and vigorous article on "The Remains questionably racy Tzu." His positive tone and the apparent arbitrariness of his views nor his main
conclusion,
do not disturb me.
I am satisfied with the result that his articles
have been helpful to me, and I will not on account of a as to our conclusions, withhold from him the radical disagreement
and books
gratitude
I owe him for his labors, which are both instructive and
suggestive.
I conclude
by quoting from Professor Giles the gem of Lao-Tze's sayings :
hatred with
"Requite
goodness."2
(as Professor Giles justly been says) "has a its the of Teacher." author catchet upon great Professor Giles says : who,
that
the Golden
have
here had
one
little pebble
belongs
the most
because
question,
at Lao
to it a moral ' But we may
Tzu's
lower
than
been
foolish
Legge,
the greatest
competent
among
to say
of Christ,
that they are upon
offender of all on
in other respects,
gigantic monolith
enough
Rule
the Golden
from off their feet and admit
to take their shoes Dr.
faculty, have
ranks
of Confucius
Nevertheless,
holy ground. Rule
in the logical
wanting
Rule
to confer
held
which
'' Those
on
his comments
cannot
the Golden
resist flinging 'There
hardly
to rest upon
its own
aphorisms:
character.' safely
this one of Lao
leave
Tzu's
sayings
merits." *
*
has dug out from the writings some agrapha which are worth mentioning.
Professor Giles disciples
1 When
I
translated
the Tao
ticle, and it is a satisfaction with his versions as against
ar I had not seen Professor Giles's King, to find that my translation agrees essentially in passages 5, 7, quoted by him from chapters
Teh
to me others
of Lao-Tze's
13, 27, 29, 33, 38, 63, 64, 65 and 78. 2Professor Giles translates : "Recompense
injury with kindness."
THE
6oo
Fei Tze
Han
MONIST.
:
this sentence
from Lao-Tze
quotes
mgtz.fts & m ? ^ * a ? ?j?tiit?iS s :
means
which
"Pao
by
fire by plastering
against
guarded
floods
avoided
Kuei
the cracks
stopping
the fissures
up
in his
dike; 1
[of his stove]."
Chang-jen
a saying The quotation may be a genuine agraphon of Lao-Tze, not written down by himself but preserved by oral tradition, until Han Fei Tze cited it. But itmay not be ; forwe must remember never mentions names in the Tao Teh King. that Lao-Tze same
The itwith
tells a story of little significance Tze :
author
and adorns
this saying of Lao "The
takes time by the forelock."2
in a modified
occurs
sentence which
Another Teh King
wise man
(chapter
the man,
not value
"Do
form in the Tao thus :
Nan Tze
27) is quoted by Huai value
the abilities."
tells to illustrate the meaning The story which Huai Nan Tze of the sentence, though lacking in superiority, is somewhat more interesting than other stories of his, which therefore are left un "Huai
Nan
who
to try his
their general's it had been
bed-curtain.
1Since quote
and
was
attacked
His
went
This
was
stole
the following I make
the translations 2Professor
the general's
pillow,
night he stole
which
Giles's
translation reads:
"The
was
saintly
aghast
camp,
Giles,
for
stole
with a message fuel.
The
to secure
I feel
to
begged and
a
; but
then, when
restored with
the long pin used
is idiomatic
were
and
the enemy's
gathering
these quotations from Professor in his own words.
the sentence Literally [his] business."
State,
next morning
returned
fond of sur
lost, the master-thief
into
by night
was
so far as to engage
retainers
by the Ch'i
on the point of being He
State
even went
found by one of the soldiers who was
our master-thief ; and
skill.
the Ch'u
of once
as a master-thief.
himself
:
it in these words
general
of ability,
their State and all was
adverse
be allowed
sage
with men
represented
shortly afterwards tune was
says, a certain
Tzu
himself
rounding man
condenses
Professor Giles
quoted.
that
same night
a similar mes * Good
the hair.
in duty bound
to
or rather Shakespearean language. in [the right] time attends to
man
the ' ! cried
heavens
of
at a council
the general
the army of the Ch'i
which
Upon
authenticity
the
teh
tao
of war,
king.
they will
6oi
have
my head
next.
was withdrawn."
State
our article with the quotation of a noble senti is as fit a subject for a sermon to-day as itwas in the It is recorded by Huai Nan Tze, and is related days of Lao-Tze. as follows : by Professor Giles conclude
We
ment which
'' When
a certain
fell down
wall
ruler was
said he in reply to the remonstrances
who is down'S'^^ift-.A^R renew
on
allegiance
the spot.
How
much
succeeded
town, a large part of the ' to beat a retreat at once. For,' ' never hits a man of his officers, a gentleman
noble Truly
1 'Let tnemrebuild their wall, and thenwe will
behavior the feudal
so delighted
the enemy
age of China
was
that they tendered
not wanting
in lessons
better would Western
diplomats and generals have with China if they had known more
in their dealings literature, Chinese
Chinese
gentlemanly
enemy's
and heroism."
of magnanimity
about
This
the attack.'
an
besieging
the former gave orders
; whereupon
behavior
religion, and Chinese
ideals
of
! Editor.
1 Literally down."
:
'' The
superior
man
not
threatens
the man
in [a state of being]