Chapter 2

Chapter 2

Original Text

天下皆知美之為美，斯惡已；斯惡已。
皆知善之為善，斯不善已。
故有無相生，難易相成，長短相形，高下相傾，音聲相和，前後相隨。
是以聖人處無為之事，行不言之教；萬物作焉而不辭，行不言之教。
萬物作焉而不辭；生而不有，為而不恃，功成而弗居。
夫唯弗居，夫惟弗居，是以不去。

Word Notes

• 美: fine; good.
• 惡: not-fine; ugly; bad.
• 善: goodness; moral good.
• 形: to set off/contrast.
• 傾: to tip, be set against.
• 和: to harmonize.
• 辭: to refuse, to demur.
• 恃: to rely on, presume upon.

Chapter ExplanationTranslation

When the world all recognizesunder “beauty”Heaven know beauty as “beautiful,beauty,” uglinessthere is already emerges;“ugly.”
when the worldWhen all recognizesknow “good”good as “good,” whatthere is already “not-good” already appears.good.”
Therefore being and non-beingnonbeing give risebirth to eachone other;another; difficulthard and easy complete eachone other;another; long and short set eachone otheranother off; high and low incline towardtip one another; tonestone and soundstimbre harmonize;harmonize with one another; front and back follow one another.

Accordingly,Thus the sageSage attends to affairs byof non-action,nonaction and conducts instructiona teaching without words.
The myriad beings arise,arise through it and the sagehe does not refuse; he gives life andyet does not possess;make them his own, acts andyet does not rely uponon hisit, ownachieves doing;merit accomplishes andyet does not dwell in the accomplishment.it.
Only bybecause he does not dwellingdwell in it, therefore it does thenot achievementdepart.

Word Notes

• 美 — “beauty”: good, fine.
• 惡 — “ugly / bad”: not fade.
  good.
• 善 — “good”: moral goodness.
• 形 — “to set off”: to give shape/serve as a foil by comparison.
• 傾 — “to tip”: to lean/overbalance.
• 和 — “to harmonize”: to attune/blend.
• 辭 — “to refuse”: to decline/shirk.
• 恃 — “to rely on”: to depend on, to trust in.

TranslationChapter Explanation

ThisAll chapterunder says:Heaven wheneverknow somethingthat takeswhat onis namecalled “beautiful” counts as “good,” and form—“beauty,”so “goodness”—oppositesmany arewill bornpose withas them.beautiful—beauty Wherethen thereceases to be beauty. All know that what is beauty there iscalled “not-beautiful”;good” wherecounts there is good there isas “not-virtue,” and so many will counterfeit goodness—goodness then ceases to be good.” This “not-beautiful” and “not-good” arise from beauty and goodness themselves.

Therefore

Therefore, being and nonbeing are mutually generative; hard and easy bring one another to completion; long and short set one another off; high and low overbalance one another; loud and soft tones harmonize; front and back follow each other in turn.

Accordingly, the Sage handles affairs by nonaction and carries out a teaching without words. When things come forth, he does not refuse them, letting them follow their nature. He gives life to beings but does not make them his own; he acts yet does not rely on the action; he achieves and yet does not dwell in the achievement. Precisely because he does not dwell in it, his merit abides and does not pass away.

Discourse

This chapter teaches that whenever something arises with a name and form—“beauty,” “good”—it stands in contrast. Where there is beauty, there is not-beauty; where there is good, there is not-good. And this not-beauty and not-good spring from beauty and good themselves. Thus what belongs to the post-celestial realm of named thingsforms areis not fitinsufficient to be theDao’s bodysubstance.

of the Way.

Yet if we keepcling onlyto the pre-celestial alone, there is no function. Without the post-celestial, the pre-celestial purity, there wouldcannot be nobrought efficacy;to withoutcompletion. theThe post-celestial you cannot complete the pre-celestial; the uttermostlimit of the post-celestial is precisely the pre-celestial; pre-pre and post-celestialpost circlecycle into one another. So too with all the world’s pairs.

At theThe hinge where thethis priorcycling meets is where threshold (徼) and themarvel later(妙) turn, thresholds and marvels appear.arise. The sageSage, perceiveshaving thesegrasped thresholdsthe andthreshold, marvels, groundinggrounds himself in the pre-celestial toand make use ofuses the post-celestial,celestial, butyet withoutdoes beingnot become stained by it. ThusHence he “attends tohandles affairs byof non-action,”nonaction” rulingand naturally rules by reverentself-reverence; self-restraint;he “conducts instructiona teaching without words,”words” lettingand naturally lets transformation abide;persist in spirit.

Though the myriad beings arise in profusion, and he lets them accord withfollow their innatenative nature—lettingendowment themso flourishthat they grow together without harm.harm. HeAnd “giveshe life” yet does not countcall itgiving life a virtue to his virtue;credit; “completeshe beings” yet does not claimcall bringing to completion a merit. Cool and even, he sees that the merit;merit heof isgiving indifferentlife and atfinishing ease,things takingbelongs theto generation of beings and the accomplishing of affairs as the Way’Dao’s spontaneity.spontaneity. Not only doeswould he not relyrelying on virtue orand dwelldwelling in achievement;achievement hedisqualify isit notas virtue and merit; even attachedthe to havingname “merit” asdrops aone name.back Namesinto fallthe intraces of the post-celestial realm. And yet, precisely because he does not dwell, his merit remains through the ages.celestial.

Later readers,readers failingfailed to grasp Laozi’s true intent,meaning and accused him of “non-action”quietism” that blocks progress.progress. ButThey do not see that Laozi’s “non-action”nonaction is not the torpor of a wooden idol, doing literally nothing; it is “non-actionnonaction whereby nothing is left undone”—notattending to the body of nonaction while using the function of action, without clinging to action. ClingingTo cling to action yields only narrow “small doings,” never the great. “Doing one thing,” one cannot “do the ten-thousand”; and doing without pause ends by being unableis to do atonly all.little deeds, not great ones; to act for one, not for many; to keep acting without rest until one is unable to act.

Consider: Western learning valuesprizes rest; rest—everyone sleeps;sleeps. restRest is “non-action,”nonaction; yet itby nourishesrest, spirit, enabling every kind of undertaking. Thisspirit is trulyrestored “non-actionand byone whichcan everythingundertake all work. If one works without rest, one dies within a week—this is done.”action But if one never rests, within seven days one dies—here “action” collapsesturning into completeno inabilityaction, toindeed act.

nothing

done. Or thinkconsider of electrons:electrons: in theopen voidspace they seem to do “nothing,” nothing—nonaction—yet throughby combinationtheir and bondingcombining they giveconstitute riseevery tothing allunder thingsHeaven. Once formed, without a change in thetemperature cosmos.or This “non-action” is a profound, all-accomplishing action. Oncepressure, a thing iscannot fixedbecome insomething form,else. withoutThus changesthe original combining—the nonaction—remains the greater action. Or think of temperature and pressure, it cannot transform into something else: the field of formed action is minor next to the primal combinatory power. When its “combinations” are exhausted and decomposed to the last trace, one returns again to electrons—action returns to non-action.

Or consider a masterskilled whooperator tendsbefore many machines: he sits there “not moving”still—nonaction—that is non-action; yet without budging he governswatching the running of them all. This is “not-stillness” within “not-moving.”motions. When a machinemotion runs badly,rough he adjustsadds water, fuelsfuel, the fire, addsor oil, or makesadjusts somea slightlever—action. correction—this is action, the “having-desire” that contemplates the threshold. WhenOnce the machine runs again, he returns to stillness—actionstillness. withoutShould attachment,he returningcling to non-action.action If,and instead,fuss heover becomesa attachedsingle tounit, doing—fixating on one machine—thenthe others would stall or gorun outoff-spec ofand tolerance:all chaos.would Attachment to doing undermines the “non-action”be in whichdisorder. nothingHence is left undone. Thus non-actionnonaction is supremely subtle: subtle—the body and mother of all action, the mother of all doing.action.

SomePeople claimcall Laozi’sDaoist teachingnonaction is“useless,” uselessas andif impedesit progress;retarded theyevolution. They do not understand non-action, nor progress.progress. The advanceevolution of instrumentsdevices proceeds from the pre-celestial to the post-celestial:celestial; when action-driven “progress” drives matterpushed to itsthe extreme, atomsit dissipateexhausts material potentials and the earth’s beingscreatures perish. Suchperish—so-called “progress,”evolution” inbecomes truth,regression. This is regression. I do not sayto instrument-progressblame device-evolution—such evolution too is bad;natural it,and too, is Dao’s spontaneity—without it there would be no world.world. EarlierMy Iearlier saidremark that if“what weis keep only thepurely pre-celestial there ishas no efficacy: my intentfunction” was meant to break a one-sided view, not to belittle instrument-progress, but to rebuke those who despise the ancients and slander Dao-learning by clinging to one-sided views.invention.

Laozi’s “attending tohandling affairs by non-action”nonaction” and “accomplishingachievement without dwelling”—this is the progressevolution of Dao-learning, learning—the onlygenuine trueprogress. progress.Strictly In truth,speaking, Laozi alsoeven speaks of “regression”regression: if the Great Dao diddoes not “regress,”regress, thereyet without regression the world would benot noappear. world.Anything Whatthat can be spoken andor seen ofis already the regressed Dao. isPushed Daoto alreadythe “regressed.” The extremity oflimit, regression isbecomes progress; pushed to the extremity oflimit, progress isbecomes regression—progress and regression turn in a circle.cycle. IfFor convenience we compare Dao-learning and tool-learning, let us call tool-learningthe device-path “regression” and the Dao-learningpath “progress,” and remember that each cycles intobut the other.two progressions and regressions interpenetrate.

After Laozi’s five thousand words,characters, Guan Yin, ZhuangZhuangzi, and LieLiezi elaborated further—call this elaborated—“progress,” yetyes, muchbut ofoften it floated as empty talk without concrete works. In the Han, comingHan after the wars of the Warring States, Cao Shen used a single sliceportion of Laozi’s WayDao to bring peacepeace; tounder the realm. Emperor Wen followed that intent, and, punishments almostnearly fell into disuse;disuse, and the realm had the flavor of Cheng and Kang; people esteemed the Yellow-Lao learning. That was nearlyone restored, and all honored the learning of Huang-Lao. This shows even a portionpart of Laozi’s teaching,Dao progressingreaching toan itsapex. height,When bringsDao-learning order.regresses, Butdevice-learning progressadvances. Europe’s new learning began from the Han. From then on, Laozi’s Dao turned into Ge Hong’s alchemy, then Kou Qianzhi’s talismans; it flowed into prayers, charms, and technical arts, and into empty talkers of Jin, dissipated and unrestrained. Han Yu therefore denounced it; Song scholars followed, claiming Lao-learning was worse than Yang and Mo.

By today, Western devices have evolved to the heightextreme: turnsfor to regression: as Dao-learning regressed, tool-learning advanced. Europe’s “new learning” began in Han times. Laozi’s Dao-learning turned into Ge Hong’s elixir methods and then Kou Qianzhi’s talismans and registers, devolving further into rituals of warding and sealing—and in Jin times idle talk and libertine excess—so chaotic that Han Yu branded it heterodox; Song scholars, unseeing, followed suit and traced “Lao poison” to Yang and Mo.

Today the West’s instruments are advanced to their utmost. In wealth and military power—green-smoke airships, swift and lethal—how many timesstrength, they surpass us!us Ina cunninghundredfold; offor manufacturewealth, in craft and reachindustry, oflikewise. enterprise—how many times they exceed us! Since weHaving long lost the true, useful true Dao-learning,learning, and we do not understandunderstanding instrument-learning either,devices, how could we not beseem shown up as poor and weak—almostweak? to national ruin? TheThus hot-blooded rushedreformers, eager to save the state,nation, butdumped withoutall examiningblame rooton andLaozi. branch;The somewhole blamedcountry Laozi,echoed andthem, a chorus rose until many viewedtreating “old learning” aslike ifpoison. itBut werenow poison.device-learning Herehas reached its limit and must regress; Dao-learning hadmust regressedadvance. toNot itsinto extremity;extinction, regressionbut ataway itsfrom extremityexaltation—and turnsyet to progress: hence, Laozi’s true Dao-learningdevices will advance,still andevolve, Westernsince instrument-learningdevices willare “regress”—not by vanishing, but by losing its supremacy, returning to its place as aone part withinof theDao. whole.

Formerly,

Earlier a portion of Laozi’s WayDao wascould enough to quell warfare in China; todaystop the wars of our land; today, the whole of Laozi’s Great Dao can,can stop the world’s wars.

The threshold and marvel I believe,observed quellyears theago world’sare wars.just Thethis: “marvel”let iseveryone Dao’s emptiness; the “threshold” is the virtue of cherishing life. Let the world honorspeak Dao and speakdiscuss of De,De, and progress alongevolve with the Great Dao.Dao. If we honor competition alone,all we followknow tool-learning’sis “regression.”competition, Thewe slide with devices into regression. Western scholarssages developed instrumentsdevices so that all might share thematerial comforts of material civilization;happiness; I wish to join those who love Dao toin developdeveloping Dao-learning so that all might share themoral blessings of moral civilization.happiness.