Mr. Shang Lingxuan was a responsible editor of the publishing house before he retired, we have been colleagues for a year, she is also an "old man" expert that I admire, this time in Xiangxi, in addition to seeing Mr. Jiang, most of the time is chatting with me. Yesterday she asked me what I thought of "Wei Xiyi", and I replied to her very directly: There should be no disagreement on this, right? Isn't it formless, colorless, tasteless?
Mr. Shang said: Don't talk in generalities, don't be marginal!
"Wei Xiyi" does not mean that "one" is formless, colorless and tasteless
She said: This chapter is Lao Tzu's specific description of "one": to see it is to see it, and the name is small. Hear it, and the name is Xi. 捪 (?) And the name is Yi.
"Micro": It is extremely small, so small that it is invisible to "hidden". "Seeing and seeing" is "the Tao praises no name, and the transmission is the Tao hidden without name", it is small enough to be large and has no outside, small and no inside, hidden but not appearing.
"Xi": It is the "big sound of Xi", which is extremely weak and cannot be heard from the hearing.
"Yi" means "no trace and no trace".
What do you mean? That is to say, the means of perception through sight, hearing, and touch cannot perceive what the Tao really looks like. Is this something that "formless, formless, colorless, and tasteless" can sum up?
The so-called "three can not be counted, so mixed into one", the three, naturally refers to the above mentioned three aspects of sight, hearing, and touch, can not be accurately perceived. Combining the "experiential feelings" of these three people is that "the three cannot be counted, so they are mixed into one"! Why do you say "incalculable"? Because it is extremely small, extremely weak, extremely thin.
This sentence means that the above three characteristics cannot be thoroughly explored separately, so they are integrated into one.
I agree with Mr. Shang's interpretation of "Wei Xi", which is extremely small and extremely weak, and it is said that it is a trait, that is, formless and formless. However, the interpretation of "Yi" seems to be inappropriate, and I still agree with the explanation of Gong Kawakami and Master Shan, which should be "colorless", so as to coincide with "formless and formless".
Mr. Shang said: "No trace and no trace" is not consistent with "formless and formless"?
What is the profound meaning of "nothingness" and "nothingness" appearing in the same chapter?
She went on to say, "One, there is no matter above it, and there is no neglect below it." Seek the nameless, return to nothingness"
The hereditary version is: "It is not obscure on the top, and it is not ambiguous under it", and the two versions of the high and low judgment: "皦" and "昧" are bright and dim, which can be felt, and contradict "seeing and seeing", so it is still expressed more accurately in the book.
"You" means long ago; "suddenly", the meaning of exhaustion and extinction. The "up" and "down" in this sentence are not concepts in the spatial position, but should be up and down in the time dimension, so as to be in harmony with "returning to nothing".
That is to say, the "one" that is integrated into one cannot be described in terms of its past in terms of longevity, nor can it be described in terms of extinction and exhaustion.
"Sayings": "Seek, reason also." According to the usual way of thinking and method of knowing, it is impossible to properly describe and name it, because it is beyond the scope of our perception, so Lao Tzu said that it "returns to nothingness."
You didn't notice a single detail, did you? In the book, the "none" here and the "none" in the next sentence use two very different words. Because this is from the perspective of human perception, what cannot be perceived is "nothing" - nothing. And "nothingness" is the beginning, which you should know, hence the saying that it "returns to nothingness."
Therefore, the correct understanding of "seeking the nameless, returning to nothingness" should be: for "one", exhaustive research is also unnamable, and it is returned to "nothingness".
"Nothingness" is the form of existence of "nothingness", the former is human cognition, the latter is the truth of things
It is the state of nothingness, the image of nothingness, the hope of hope.
Do you care? Here appears an "image of nothingness", followed by the "return to nothingness", two "wu", is the ancients transcription wrong? According to Mr. Jiang, the semantics expressed in this sentence "nothing" and the "nothing" in the previous sentence are different. The "nothingness" in the previous sentence is said from the perspective of metaphysical perception, and the world thinks that there is nothing; the "nothingness" here is from the perspective of metaphysical ontology, and its meaning is "yuan" and "beginning". What the author wants to express is that "nothingness" is the state of existence of "nothingness".
沕 (mi): The hidden appearance, the twenty chapters have "沕呵, its ruohai." Hope, nothing stops. "Desire" is the underlying state, although "one" cannot perceive and is "nothing", but this is the shape and image of its own existence, so it is described as "hope".
So the gist of this sentence is: this is the state of "nothing" existence, the image of "nothing" existence, this imperceptible state of existence, which is called "hope".
"Follow without seeing, greeting without seeing its head", not "the front does not see the head, the back does not see the tail"
Mr. Shang asked me what should I understand in this sentence? I say headless and tailless. She was wrong. Since we said "turn a blind eye" above, how can you say that you can't see the beginning and the end? Isn't that more? Therefore, this is not the concept of space, but also to understand the transcendence of "one" from the temporal dimension, that is, the beginninglessness and no end of "one".
So the correct understanding of this sentence should be: follow it will not see its end, and face it will not see its beginning.
"The way of adhering to the present, to the existence of the present, to know the beginning of the past, is the Tao Ji", emphasizing the idea of adapting to the ancients
This sentence is a word away from the hereditary text, and the fallacy is thousands of miles. The biography is "the way of the ancients, to the existence of the present, to know the beginning of the past, is the Tao." It expresses that grasping the existing Tao to control the specific things of the present, and being able to deduce the state of the ancient beginning, is called "DaoJi".
It seems logical. In fact, confucianism has quietly implanted the idea of the ancient and the modern, and the Taoist emphasis is on adapting to the times and opposing the eating of the ancient. Isn't the way of the present and the ancient one consistent? Mr. Shang believes that the "Tao" is still the "Tao", but when applied to social practice, because time has changed, it cannot be bound to the law. Therefore, in today's society, people should follow the current understanding, experience, laws, and methods to manage current affairs.
So the overall gist of this chapter should be:
Seeing it invisible is called "micro" (invisible); hearing it is not heard, it is called "Xi" (silent); touching it is not touching, it is called "Yi" (no trace). None of these three characteristics can make a thorough inquiry into "one", so they become one. This "one" can neither describe its past in terms of "long", nor can it describe its future with "exhaustion". This "one" is also inexplicable, so people return it to "nothingness." This is the state of existence of "nothing", the image of "nothing" itself, and this potential state of existence that cannot be perceived by us is called "hope". Follow it without seeing its end, and following it also seeing its beginning.
Grasping the Tao of the present to deal with the things of the present, and being able to deduce its ancient state, this is called the "Tao Ji".