The Daodejing with my commentary (occasionally updated)

The text analyzed here is the English translation of the Daodejing by Gia-Fu Feng and Jane English, Lao Tsu - Tao Te Ching (Wildwood Hose, 1991).

~~~

The interpretation offered here is inspired by the metaphyical theory of Alan Watts, the 20th-century pop-philosopher and popularizer of Eastern philosophy. Ironically, one of the clearest and most straightforward presentations of this "metaphysic," as Watts called it, is found in one of his least straightforward and systematic works: Myth and Ritual in Christianity, Watts's attempt to locate his metaphysic within the Catholic tradition. His remarks in The Way of Zen make it clear that he saw Laozi's Daodejing as presenting the same basic metaphysical picture. This is especially clear from Watts's decision in The Way of Zen to translate a line from Daodejing 1 as "Naming is the mother of the ten thousand things" instead of "The named is the mother of the ten thousand things." This translation choice implies that—in agreement with my interpretation below—language ("naming") is what divides Reality into the world of separate things.

~~~

Daodejing 1 

The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao. 

Commentary: Reality-in-Itself (“the eternal Tao”) cannot be described (“told”).

The name that can be named is not the eternal name. 

Commentary: Reality-in-Itself is not divided into separate things. Instead, our minds divide Reality into separate things such as trees and dogs. We use words to refer to these separate things. Because these separate things do not exist in Reality-in-Itself, words (“names”) do not capture Reality-in-Itself (“the eternal”).

The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth. 

Commentary: The indescribable (“nameless”) Reality-in-Itself is prior to (“the beginning of”) separate things (“heaven and earth”).

The named is the mother of the ten thousand things. 

Commentary: Words (“the named”) divide Reality into separate things. 

Ever desireless, one can see the mystery.

Commentary: To see Reality-in-Itself (“the mystery”), one must eliminate one’s desires.

Ever desiring, one sees the manifestations.

Commentary: As long as one has desires, one will continue to divide Reality into separate things. These separate things can be called “manifestations” of Reality-in-Itself: they are not Reality-in-Itself, but they are the way Reality appears through the lens of words.

These two spring from the same source but differ in name; this appears as darkness. 

Commentary: The things to which words refer are only manifestations of Reality-in-Itself. Therefore, even the words “Reality-in-Itself” refer to a mere manifestation. Hence, both the world of things and what we call “Reality-in-Itself” (“these two”) are mere manifestations that “spring from the same source”: the true Reality-in-Itself. The true Reality-in-Itself is completely “dark,” or obscure, because it cannot be put into words. 

Darkness within darkness. 

Commentary: We said that the true Reality-in-Itself is “dark,”or obscure, because it cannot be put into words. But once we have said this, we have described the true Reality-in-Itself in words! The result is not the true Reality-in-Itself but a mere manifestation of the true Reality-in-Itself. In other words, within the darkness of “the true Reality-in-Itself,” described in words, there is the deeper darkness of the truly true Reality-in-Itself, which cannot be put into words.

The gate to all mystery. 

Commentary: But now we have described “the truly true Reality-in-Itself” with words. So we must treat it as merely a manifestation of Reality-in-Itself. The true darkness, the true Reality-in-Itself, lies still deeper. And so on. Hence, any attempt to describe Reality-in-Itself leads to an endless regress. From the standpoint of ordinary, word-based thought, Reality-in-Itself remains an inscrutable mystery. 

Daodejing 4 

The Tao is an empty vessel; it is used, but never filled. 

Commentary: Reality-in-Itself (“the Tao”) is “empty⁠”; it contains nothing⁠—in the sense that it contains no thing. Reality-in-Itself is not divided into separate things. Hence, although all things emerge from Reality-in-Itself, Reality-in-Itself is not full of those things.

Oh, unfathomable source of ten thousand things!

Commentary: Because Reality-in-Itself cannot be put into words, ordinary thought cannot fathom it.

Blunt the sharpness,

Commentary: Like sharp cookie-cutters, words divide Reality into things. To see Reality-in-Itself directly, we must stop thinking in terms of those “sharp” words.

Untangle the knot,

Commentary: Words divide Reality into separate things, but this division is not a feature of Reality-in-Itself. Hence, words entangle us in confusion, preventing us from seeing Reality-in-Itself. To see Reality-in-Itself, we must “untangle” ourselves from this confusion.

Soften the glare,

Commentary: Each word is like a harsh spotlight, singling out one portion of Reality and screening out the interconnection between that portion of Reality and the rest of Reality. To see Reality-in-Itself, we must stop thinking in terms of these “glaring” spotlights called words. Merge with dust.

Oh, hidden deep but ever present!

Commentary: We can think of Reality-in-Itself as “hidden deep” beneath the illusory world of things, but we can also think of it as merged with everyday things (“dust”), as present in them.

I do not know from whence it comes.

Commentary: Any attempt⁠—including this one!—to put Reality-in-Itself into words creates a paradox. When we use the words “Reality-in-Itself,” we treat Reality-in-Itself as a thing, a thing called “Reality-in-Itself.” Therefore, if we use the words “Reality-in-Itself,” then reason demands that we apply to Reality-in-Itself the assumptions that we apply to other things. In our experience, each thing is caused by another thing. On one hand, therefore, we must say that Reality-in-Itself has a cause. On the other hand, Reality-in-Itself cannot be caused by another thing, because Reality-in-Itself includes all things. In short, we must say that Reality-in-Itself has a cause “from whence it comes,” but it is impossible to identify this cause.

It is the forefather of the gods.

Commentary: Words divide Reality into things. Hence, Reality-in-Itself is the source (“forefather”) of all things, including the gods.

Daodejing 6

The valley spirit never dies;
It is the woman, primal mother.
Her gateway is the root of heaven and earth.

Commentary: Because words divide Reality into things, Reality-in-Itself (“the valley spirit”) is the source (“mother,” “root”) of all things. When words cease, things “die,” for Reality ceases to be divided into things. Reality-in-Itself, however, “never dies”: it still exists when not put into words.

It is like a veil barely seen.

Commentary: Reality-in-Itself cannot be put into words. Even these very words, which attempt to discuss Reality-in-Itself directly, provide only a glimpse of Reality-in-Itself, which is “barely seen” through them.

Use it; it will never fail.

Commentary: When one does not use words to divide Reality into things, Reality-in-Itself still exists. Moreover, one can always create a new world of things by applying words to Reality again.

Daodejing 14

Look, it cannot be seen - it is beyond form.
Listen, it cannot be heard - it is beyond sound.
Grasp, it cannot be held - it is intangible.

Commentary: Reality-in-Itself is too big to see, hear, or hold. Of course, we can see, hear, and hold portions of Reality, but doing so is not seeing, hearing, or holding Reality, just as holding a tree is not holding the forest of which the tree is a part.

More importantly, when we see, hear, and hold portions of Reality, we think of those portions as separate things. But Reality-in-Itself is not divided into separate objects; our minds impose this division on Reality. Therefore, separate things are unreal. Hence, the things that we think we are seeing, hearing, and holding are unreal. In that sense, we cannot see, hear, or hold Reality at all.

These three are indefinable;
Therefore they are joined in one.

Commentary: We were just talking about seeing, hearing, and holding. Now, our minds can distinguish the parts of Reality that we can see from the parts that we can hear and the parts that we can hear from the parts that we can hold. These three portions of Reality, as they exist in Reality-in-Itself, cannot be put into words (“are indefinable”). To put them into words is to treat them as three separate things, and Reality-in-Itself is not separated into things. It is less misleading to say that these three portions “are joined in one” Reality (though this statement, being made of words, still does not capture Reality-in-Itself).

From above it is not bright;

Commentary: If we approach Reality in an intelligent way (“from above”), by applying words to Reality, then we do not gain the illumination that we seek. As we have seen, to apply words to Reality is to falsify Reality.

From below it is not dark:

Commentary: If we approach Reality in a seemingly stupid way (“from below”), by not applying words to Reality, then we are not as trapped in the darkness of ignorance as some people might think. Reality-in-Itself cannot be put into words, so the one who does not try to put it into words has a wisdom that others lack.

An unbroken thread beyond description.

Commentary: Reality-in-Itself is not divided into separate things (“unbroken”) and cannot be put into words (“beyond description”).

It returns to nothingness.

Commentary: Although we can use words to identify separate things within Reality, Reality-in-Itself is not divided into these things. Hence, Reality returns to being no thing as soon as the mind stops applying words to it.

The form of the formless,
The image of the imageless,
It is called indefinable and beyond imagination.

Commentary: A word is a form or image that represents a thing. Therefore, the words “Reality-in-Itself” compose a form or image of Reality-in-Itself. But Reality-in-Itself cannot be put into words; in that sense, Reality-in-Itself is formless and imageless. Hence, we might describe the words “Reality-in-Itself” as “the form of the formless” or “the image of the imageless.”

Stand before it and there is no beginning.
Follow it and there is no end.

Commentary: Words divide Reality into conveniently-sized things. Each of these things has boundaries (“beginning,” “end”). Reality-in-Itself is not divided in this way.

Stay with the ancient Tao,
Move with the present.

Commentary: As long as one is seeing Reality-in-Itself, one cannot view the mental images that we call “memories” and “predictions” as memories or as predictions—that is, as representing past or future events. To view the images as representing past or future events, one must view both the images and the past or future events as distinct things—that is, one must divide Reality into things. But if one divides Reality into things, then one is no longer seeing Reality-in-Itself. Therefore, as long as one sees Reality-in-Itself, one lives completely in the present rather than in the remembered past or the predicted future. 

Knowing the ancient beginning is the essence of Tao.

Commentary: From ancient times, Reality-in-Itself (“Tao”) has been the source (“beginning”) of the world of things.

Daodejing 25

Something mysteriously formed,

Commentary: If we try to put Reality-in-Itself into words, we treat it as a thing. We must think of each thing as having a cause, as being formed by something else. Therefore, as soon as we try to put Reality-in-Itself into words, consistency demands that we conclude that Reality-in-Itself was somehow caused (“formed”). However, it makes no sense to say that Reality-in-Itself has a cause, since any such cause would have to be part of Reality-in-Itself. Hence, we must say both that Reality-in-Itself is caused and that its cause is totally mysterious to us.

Born before heaven and earth.

Commentary: Reality-in-Itself exists “before” things in the sense that words create things by dividing up Reality.

In the silence and the void,

Commentary: When we talk about “sounds” and “bodies,” we are thinking of each sound and each body as a separate thing. Reality-in-Itself is not divided into separate things. In Reality-in-Itself, therefore, there is an absence of sound (“silence”) and an absence of bodies (“void”).

Standing alone and unchanging,
Ever present and in motion.

Commentary: Words divide Reality into separate things—some distant and others present, some unchanging and others in motion. However, Reality-in-Itself is not divided into separate things. If we try to think of Reality-in-Itself, then we must think of it as having all the properties of the different things that we perceive: it must be both unchanging and in motion, both distant and present.

Perhaps it is the mother of ten thousand things.

Commentary: Through the power of words, Reality-in-Itself becomes the source (“mother”) of all separate things.

I do not know its name.
Call it Tao.
For lack of a better word, I call it great.

Commentary: Reality-in-Itself cannot be put into words; there is no appropriate word (“name”) for Reality-in-Itself. However, if we wish to communicate anything about it, then we must use words, so we might as well call Reality-in-Itself “Tao.”

Being great, it flows.
It flows far away.
Having gone far, it returns.

Commentary: Here Laozi is probably talking about the cyclic pattern of nature, which he would consider to be the basic rhythm of Reality-in-Itself.

Therefore,
"Tao is great;
Heaven is great;
Earth is great;
The king is also great."
These are the four great powers of the universe,
And the king is one of them.
Man follows the earth.
Earth follows heaven.
Heaven follows the Tao.

Commentary: Many ancient cultures viewed Reality as a harmonious whole governed by a single, overarching law. The Egyptians called this cosmic law ma’at; the Indians called it rta; the Stoics called it logos; and the Chinese called it tao. Laozi is saying that everything ultimately follows the cosmic law, which is the basic rhythm of Reality-in-Itself.

Tao follows what is natural [ziran].

Commentary: Reality-in-Itself (“Tao”) is not divided into separate things. From the perspective of Reality-in-Itself, therefore, we cannot say that one thing causes the activity of another thing. Instead, we must view all activity as arising spontaneously [ziran] within Reality-in-Itself.

Daodejing 32

The Tao is forever undefined.

Commentary: Reality-in-Itself (“the Tao”) cannot be put into words. 

Small though it is in the unformed state, it cannot be grasped.

Commentary: Words cannot grasp the undivided (“unformed”) Reality-in-Itself.

If kings and lords could harness it,
The ten thousand things would naturally obey.
Heaven and earth would come together
And gentle rain fall.
Men would need no more instruction
And all things would take their course.

Commentary: Separate things are portions of Reality-in-Itself. Therefore, Reality-in-Itself encompasses all separate things (although, from the perspective of Reality-in-Itself, there are no separate things). Hence, if rulers could control Reality-in-Itself, then they could control all things.

Once the whole is divided, the parts need names.

Commentary: Words (“names”) exist to label the different things into which we divide Reality.

There are already enough names.

Commentary: When placed in its historical context, this comment is surely an example of the Taoist attack on Confucian concepts such as “rectification of names.” But read in light of the interpretations above, the comment might also mean that those who try to put Reality-in-Itself into word (“names”) have talked enough.

One must know when to stop.
Knowing when to stop averts trouble.

Commentary: We can communicate something about Reality-in-Itself (though always in a misleading way); otherwise, there would be no point in writing about Reality-in-Itself in the Daodejing. Nonetheless, we must remember language’s inability to grasp Reality-in-Itself and not be too ambitious in describing Reality-in-Itself (“knowing when to stop”).

Tao in the world is like a river flowing home to the sea.

Commentary: When the mind stops dividing Reality (“Tao”) into things, the world of things reverts to Reality-in-Itself, just as a river returns to the sea.

Daodejing 40 (excerpt)

The ten thousand things are born of being.
Being is born of not being.

Commentary: All things emerge from the world of things (“being”). This world of things itself emerges from Reality-in-Itself, which is no thing (“not being”) in the sense that it is not divided into separate things.

Daodejing 42 (excerpt)

The Tao begot one.
One begot two.
Two begot three.
And three begot the ten thousand things.

Commentary: I have said repeatedly that Reality-in-Itself isn't divided into separate things. Hence, one might think that Reality-in-Itself is one thing. This conclusion, however, is incorrect: Reality-in-Itself ("the Tao") is neither "one" nor many ("the ten thousand things"). But before we can divide Reality into separate things, we must think of it as a single thing to be divided. The mind first portrays Reality as one thing ("The Tao begot one") so that it can then impose division, duality, onto Reality ("One begot two"), resulting in the world of separate things ("the ten thousand things").

Daodejing 52 (excerpt)

The beginning of the universe Is the mother of all things.

Commentary: Reality-in-Itself is the source (“beginning,” “mother”) of separate things.

Knowing the mother, one also knows the sons.

Commentary: Because Reality-in-Itself is the source of all things, we might call things the “sons” of Reality-in-Itself. Because each thing is a portion of Reality-in-Itself, to know Reality-in-Itself is to know all things (albeit not as separate things).

Knowing the sons, yet remaining in touch with the mother,
Brings freedom from the fear of death.

Commentary: If one has experienced the undivided Reality-in-Itself, one realizes that separate things—including people—are unreal. Death is the destruction of a person, so if people are unreal, then death is also unreal. Hence, experiencing Reality-in-Itself (“the mother”) frees one from fear of death.