Bryan Van Norden wrote:
>I recently realized that DDJ 25 does, in fact, tell us that DAO4 is being used in a new sense. After describing what I take to be a metaphysical entity (more on this below), the text says,
>"As yet I do not know its name.
>Here we have, recorded for posterity, the moment in Chinese history when DAO4 is first used to refer to a metaphysical entity. The author says that the entity he is referring to currently has no name; however, he will refer to it as "DAO4." You wanted a passage which illustrates an awareness that DAO4 had not previously been used as a name for a metaphysical entity.
Great! Can you expand on this a bit?
1. Are we sure it's an "entity"? What about the line that seems to refer to a process (zhou xing er bu dai)?
2. Have you a theory of why the metaphysical concept is introduced in this way only in chapter 25, after the word dao4 has already been used in at least a dozen chapters? Moreover, what is the theoretical role of the metaphysical dao4--why introduce it at all? What theoretical work is it doing?
3. How does the metaphysical use of the word relate to the uses in the other chapters? For example, in chapter 1 we're told that the dao4 can be expressed but it's not a constant dao4. Is the dao4 in chapter 25 a constant dao4? Or is it too an inconstant dao4? If it's a constant dao4, does chapter 25 contradict chapter 1? If it's an inconstant dao4, then can it be a metaphysical absolute? Or is it just a cosmic process? Or is the dao4 itself constant, but our "styling" of it inconstant?
Give us a holistic interpretive theory. I realize that you just had this idea, and you couldn't very well sit down and spend the whole rest of the day or night elaborating on it. But give us a theory. It doesn't have to be a finished one--just a rough description of a fairly comprehensive view of what's going on in these texts.
A generalization: People who are interested in or intrigued by Hansen's theories are people who for various reasons find the traditional interpretation of Laozi and Zhuangzi unconvincing. We can't see how to develop the received view in a persuasive way. If anyone else can, we will be happy to listen.
Christopher Fraser
Date created: 11/9/96 Last modified: 11/9/96 Questions? Contact: Stephen C. Angle