EARLY DAOISM Who were the Daoists of the Dao De Jing? Michael LaFargue has called them Laoists, of the school of Laozi (Lao-tzu) in his translation with commentary:  The Tao of the Tao Te Ching
LaFargue sees the Dao De Jing as a political text with advice to the ruler and fellow officials (SHI) at court, with also an emphasis on meditation. He does not see the text as metaphysical (cosmological), but rather as describing the actual inner experience of Dao by the Laoists. LaFargue's translation and commentary make the ancient Laoists at court come back to life. He also attempts to separate the sayings that were part of an older oral tradition from later additions. The translation was also published in: Tao and Method, in 1994, which has been reviewed by: Harold Roth (in his article "Early Daoist Mystical
Praxis," in "Religious and Philosophical aspects
of the Laozi" edited by Csikszentimihalyi and Invanhoe)
agrees with LaFargue's approach: The "techniques of the Way" common to all Early Daoists:  Original Tao: Inward Training
(Nei-ye) and the Foundation of Taoist Mysticism, by Harold Roth"Although in the twentieth century scholars have distinguished between 'Dao-jia' (or philosophical Taoism) and 'Dao-jiao' (or religious Taoism), and have seen a great gulf between the two, in recent years scholars have realized that these categories obscure the fact that these two aspects of Taoism are related in a variety of complex ways hitherto not well understood. Indeed, when one becomes aware of the religious phenomena associated with the category 'philosophical Taoism,' many elements that contribute to this 'great gulf' melt away." "There is no evidence that early Taoists
identified themselves by either of the Han historians' [Sima Tan, died 110 B.C., his son wrote
the Shiji, Annals of History] labels, 'Dao-jia' or 'Huang-Lao,' or - for
that matter - by the Wei and Chin (third-century A.D.) label of
'Lao-Zhuang.' If we keep this in mind we can avoid much of the confusion
and controversy that has troubled traditional understandings of
Taoism and recent scholarly attempts to clarify them. However, some
evidence indicates that early Taoists may have defined themselves
along lines not altogether dissimilar to those used by Sima Tan:
they referred to their distinctive practices as the 'Techniques
of the Way:' "So although this scenario may not represent a social phenomenon clearly definable as a philosophical school with a rigid set of doctrines that remained relatively fixed over time, it suggests strongly that early Taoism was made of a number of closely related master-disciple lineages, all of whom followed a common inner cultivation practice first enunciated in Inward Training." (p. 185) |
What happened
to Early Daoism? LINKS: Chad Hansen's Chinese Philosophy Pages; there is a review of his book "A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought" on the "Tao Talk" mailing list files page. His study of the philosophical aspects of Early Taoism is probably the finest. Taoism Information Page Philosophical Daoism: by Hall & Ames (Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Laozi: by Alan Chan (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Zhuangzi: by Harold Roth (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Nathan Sivin: On the Word "Taoist" as a Source of Perplexity The Dao debate: Bryan Van Norden argues that the dao can be understood as a metaphysical absolute; Christopher Fraser and Steve Angle defend Chad Hansen's view that dao is better understood as a guiding discourse. Early Daoism by Gregory Smits Wulf Dieterich's Daodejing site Daoist forums: Daoist Text Symposium Tao Speaks Taoist Restoration Society Other links: |
