Thinking of Dao

Thinking of the Way and the Way of Thinking:

A Spiritual Reading of Dao De Jing

A New Way of Thinking the Way

Young-chan Ro

This book is about the “way” (dao, 道). Life is a way, a journey. Heaven has its way, the earth has its way, and human beings have their ways. For the last few centuries, however, the human way has become more distinctive, dominant, and gradually gained a control over the ways of nature. The scientific and technological triumphs that human beings have achieved over the last couple of centuries have planted a confidence in the human mind that human beings are above nature and all other beings in the universe, and the human way is the way above any other. Indeed, the human way has become not only the center but also the measure of all other beings and ways. What are the nature, purpose, and goal of the way? One of the oldest and the most authoritative discussions of the way is found in Dao De Jing. The title of the book itself clearly expresses the idea of dao (Way).

The idea of the way expressed in Dao De Jing, however, is unique and profound. The way is not only a means to reach a goal but also a goal in and of itself. The way is not ready made but in the process of making. The way both as means and goal is a dynamic, creative, and an open process. The way is both a “noun” and “verb.” The way is not something we can define, delineate, or formulate. Rather, the way must emerge, appear, and manifest itself. Our discussion, thus, aims not to construct a logical and rational framework of argument to find the way, but to explore and assist so that the way may emerge, appear, and manifest by itself. The “self-emerging” and “self-manifesting” process of the way goes beyond the written and spoken words. In this sense, the role of the written and spoken words is not in what the words say but in what the words do not or cannot say. But only by saying it, we know what cannot be said!

It is a difficult challenge and a daunting task to explore the complexity and mystery pertaining to the language employed in Dao De Jing. This mystery is also the very nature of the reality expressed in Dao De Jing, a unique language of Dao by saying it indicate what is not said, by speaking it shows how it cannot be spoken. This peculiar reality of language makes our discussion on and dialogue with Dao not only possible but also necessary.

My approach to the way in this book, thus, is not a conceptual, philosophical, and logical explanation of the significance of Dao De Jing, but a spiritual appreciation of the mystery of Dao. The Dao De Jing is a profoundly spiritual book and requires a spiritual reading. Of the many books written on Dao De Jing, most of them were to explain the historical background, textual structure, philological or philosophical nature of the text. These attempts, of courses, have made valuable contributions to the understanding of the text, Dao De Jing. We must, however, realize that Dao De Jing is essentially a book of spirituality requiring a spiritual approach to appreciate those deeper mystical dimensions of the text.

I try in this book to explore Dao De Jing from the perspective of “mystical” and spiritual understanding. The terms, concepts, and rational or logical elements that are employed in this book are intended to illustrate this “mystical” or “spiritual” dimension hidden behind all these conceptual languages. It is my hope that the terms, concepts, and words that are used in this book will point to the unknown and unknowable mystery that can be appreciated only through an intuitive awareness, immediate experience, and meditative reflection or even in silence, namely, a spiritual approach.

The Way in Crossing “Time” and “Space”

Dao De Jing, like any other classic, is a product of a specific time and space, its significance, however, goes well beyond the limits of time and space. Dao De Jing should no longer be confined to a particular historical context or cultural boundaries. In other words, Dao De Jing, transcended its origin to become a classic not only for the ancient Chinese or East Asians but also for modern and bulkpostmodern Americans and Westerners. Dao De Jing has to be understood as crossing the limits of “time”- dia-chronos (δίακρονος)- and the boundaries of the cultural regions-dia topos (δίατοπος). Dia-chronical and dia-topical hermeneutics are imperative in interpreting Dao De Jing.

A classic does not mean simply it is “ancient.” On the contrary, a classic becomes a classic when it is liberated from the confinement of “time” (ancient) and “space” (China or East Asia in the case of Dao De Jing). A classic is a classic precisely because of an enduring and contemporary relevance. Otherwise, it may well end up in a museum or in a dusty corner of a library. The value and significance of classic texts are not just to transcend specific “time” and “space” but, more importantly, a classic text has to be relevant to different “times” and “places.” A classic is not a closed book but it is an open book, open for a new meaning, a new understanding and a new interpretation. All the valuable classics have generated new meaning, fresh understanding at different times and in different places.

What makes a classic a classic is the power of interpretation. Interpretation or hermeneutics is the key in making a classic meaningful and relevant to the modern contemporary age. Also interpretation includes relating a classic to different chronological time periods and cultural regions.

Thus, Dao De Jing, a classic, is to be interpreted by situating it in both dia-chronical and dia-topical hermeneutics. In other words, the dao (Way) in Dao De Jing is even now engaged in a dialogue crossing time lines and cultural regions. Dao has to be approached in the process of dialogue, a dialogue with the past, a dialogue with the contemporary world, and a dialogue for the future of humanity-diachronical dialogue. At the same time, this dialogue should engage with East Asian worldviews and values, and relate them to that of the West in a manner of diatopical dialogue.

Text and the Making of the “Text”

Our knowledge about the historicity and the historical background of Dao De Jing has been much enhanced by recent archaeological finds (Mawangdui in 1973 and Goudian in 1993). The main thrust of this study, however, is not in the historical and textual study per se, but more in a meaningful way of engaging in a dialogue with “dao” in a comparative context. This study will pay close attention to Dao Do Jing as a historical text and the significance of the newly discovered texts for a better understanding of Dao De Jing as a text. The main focus of this study, however, is in exploring “dao” in a dialogue with the historical text of Dao De Jing. Reading a text involves an act of dialogic engagement making the reader a dynamic and lively partner in the dialogue.

With this assumption, I try to show how to read Dao De Jing not only as a historical text but more importantly as a companion in dialogue. The text in this sense is not solely an object, an historical document, but a living process in which “reading” is happening. Reading is a dialogical process in which reader and text are engaged in conversation on the subject matter. In this process of textual reading, a reader frequently engages in an act of self discovery. As we read a text, we read our own selves at the same time. In other words, true reading takes place when we read not only text but also read ourselves through the text. In this respect, the reader is not a tabula rasa, simply mirroring, memorizing and copying what the text says, but an active participant in a dialogue with the text. This book is an attempt to create such dialogue through which we can read ourselves by reading Dao De Jing. We are, in this sense, the text after all. In this sense, reading Dao De Jing is a process of making a text in allowing us to read ourselves from the perspective of “dao” in Dao De Jing.

The “Window” of Dao

When we read Dao De Jing as a way of reading ourselves, it provides a “window” through which we can read not only ourselves but to a larger extent, we can see the world, the universe, nature, and human beings through this window. In this respect, this book is written not just to read Dao De Jing itself, but to read all things through the window of Dao De Jing. Dao De Jing is a true classic in a sense that it allows us to read it not simply as a book like any other ordinary book for certain information, but it is a window through which we can read the whole world. With this assumption and approach in mind, I write this book to illustrate how to read Dao De Jing not as a “book” but as a “window” to show on how to look at the world. The purpose of this book, in other words, is to understand the unique yet profound worldview of Dao De Jing. The window of Dao De Jing, however, not fixed but it goes beyond the letters of Dao De Jing. This study of Dao De Jing, thus, is not confined to the “textual studies” but to engage with Dao De Jing to explore a deeper meaning beyond the “letters” of the text.

Hermeneutical Key in Understanding Dao De Jing

Dao De Jing is a unique text both in its form and content. The literary style of Dao De Jing is poetic, cryptic, metaphoric, and mystic. Dao De Jing understands the power, the limit, and the mystery of language. Dao De Jing displays both clarity and ambiguity of language. The key to understand Dao De Jing is to comprehend the way how language was used in it. The meaning and the content of Dao De Jing are intrinsically related to the way how this meaning and content as expressed. In other words, what Dao De Jing tries to say was very much determined by how it was said. For this reason, we have to pay attention to both the format and content of Dao De Jing. In other words, we have to be familiar with the literary patterns in Dao De Jing to understand the profundity of “dao.” This is true when we compare Laozi ( 6th or 4th century BCE) with Zhaungzi (bet. 399-295 BCE), another prominent Daoist thinker after Laozi. While Laozi’s writing was poetic and cryptic, Zhuangzi’s writing was narrative. Both, however, expressed their understanding of “dao” in their respective ways of writing. For this reason, we may not be able to understand the significance of either Laozi or Zhuangzi unless we are able to appreciate the literary patterns of both thinkers. Both Laozi and Zhuangzi fully understood the nature and destiny of the way how “Dao” can be expressed. This is the very nature of Dao.

Conceptual Language vs. Symbolic Language

It is a common impression that someone who reads Dao De Jing for the first time, feels that it contains interesting yet enigmatic sentences scattered throughout the book. But when we read it carefully and repeatedly, we will discover that profound ideas merge in a thematic way, the Daoist world view and way of thinking, and sense of value.

The language of Dao De Jing is not conceptual but symbolic and poetic. Dao De Jing understands the danger of conceptual language. Concepts are useful and powerful tools in conveying and expressing ideas in a precise formula. Concepts, on the other hand, however, have an intrinsic tendency to reduce ideas and meanings into specific frameworks. A concept is a rational and logical reduction of ideas and thought. When ideas and thought become concrete and tangible form, they become concepts. But symbols and metaphors are irreducible into other forms such as concepts that are logically and rationally constructed. By nature, Dao is not a “concept” and can’t be reduced into a definitive form. For this reason, Dao De Jing uses symbolic and metaphoric language. The nature and spirit of Dao De Jing is to transcend the world of concept because Dao is not conceptually definable but only symbolically comprehensible. Dao De Jing tries to avoid any systematic and conceptual method of explaining Dao precisely because of the fact that this way of explaining Dao is highly artificial and intellectually reductive.

Instead, Dao De Jing attempts to allow Dao to appear naturally and spontaneously. The book, Dao De Jing, is written not in an attempt to “explain” but to “explore” the nature and idea of Dao. Explanation requires a tool or a means to convey the idea. Concepts are the most common and also convenient means expressing ideas and thought. Nonetheless, concepts themselves are highly structured forms of expression. They require a certain framework, formality, and logical and rational construction. In the process of this construction, however, the ideas and thought are reduced to the form of either logic or rationality. Since Dao is not conceptually definable, it should not be “explained” in conceptual terms but to appear and emerge in the process of exploration for our comprehension.

A concept is an active form of defining, confining, and limiting the reality in order to make reality a form of intelligibility. A symbol is a passive way of allowing us to receive the reality. Symbols have the power to open our eyes and hearts to feel, move, and comprehend the reality directly. Dao De Jing in this sense is not a book to meant to conceptualize Dao for human intelligibility but for exploring the ways of knowing the reality beyond the conceptual frameworks. Conventional philosophy based and dependent on conceptual frameworks may not be able properly to express the profound wisdom contained in Dao De Jing. This does not mean that Dao De Jing is not a book of philosophy in the genuine sense of the word (philosophia), the love of wisdom or the wisdom of love. To the contrary, Dao De Jing is full of philosophy (φιλοσοφια) but this wisdom is not to be examined in the conventional sense of “philosophical” concepts.

Dao De Jing invokes a new way of thinking, a new kind of intelligibility, and knowing and understanding, a new way of revealing reality. Dao De Jing, in this sense, is an exploration of this new intelligibility by exposing ourselves to the experience of the reality without imposing our own readymade intellectual matrix and conceptual framework on Dao De Jing and reducing it to our own frame of intelligibility.

The language of Dao De Jing is symbolic in the sense that it illustrates, rather than analyzing or systemizing, in order to explore the way, Dao. Although conceptual analysis may help us understand Dao De Jing to a certain degree, the conceptualized notion of Dao is not the Dao itself. For this reason, Dao De Jing deliberately takes a non-conceptual and symbolic path of language. Conceptual analysis has its own benefit in making reality clear and precise. But its limit and risk are to make things so clear and precise that it often makes us confuse concept and reality.

Symbol, unlike concept, does not reduce the reality into an intellectual matrix but represents (re-present) the reality through illustration. Symbol does not seek logical and rational explanations but appeals directly to our immediate (un-mediated) understanding. Symbol explores the ways of knowing and understanding the reality in a holistic way. Logic or reason is not the only way to know or to explain reality. Symbol opens our intelligibility beyond the realm of reason. Symbol reveals reality through feelings, emotions, reflection, and intuition. Symbol, thus, allows us to explore other ways of understanding reality.

The power of symbol lies in its ability to illustrate and illuminate the reality without conceptualizing. Conceptualized symbol is no longer symbol. Although the use of philosophical concepts is, to a certain extent, unavoidable in a work like this, my use of conceptual language is not intended to explain or reduce symbol into concept, but to guide philosophically and conceptually trained readers to perceive the rich symbolic significance of Dao. In this sense, my point is not to explain the symbols of Dao but how to appreciate the symbolic expression of Dao. As we will see, for example, one of the most well known and popular symbols of Dao, “water,” is not to be examined scientifically in terms of its chemical substance, but to be illustrated with appreciation of our direct, immediate experience, and intuitive knowledge of water. Likewise, “the spirit of the valley,” “uncarved block,” “infant babe,” “mysterious woman,” etc are all symbolic illustrations requiring our appreciative attention and attitude in order to understand how these symbols signify the various manifestations of Dao.

Modernity, characterized by scientific attitude, analytic method, rational thinking, has emphasized the logical element and conceptual power of language. We have been trained to use language as the means and skills for communication. As a result, we have not always fully appreciated the symbolic nature of language. Philosophy has become an analytic tool, i.e., analytical philosophy or linguistic philosophy, and neglects the symbolic and ritualistic dimensions of language. For a proper understanding of Dao De Jing, it is vital for us to shift our mind set from a conceptual language to a symbolic language. In this respect, Dao De Jing requires a “bulkpostmodern” way of thinking, beyond the modern mentality.

Conceptual language was the language of the modernity. Symbolic language is a bulkpostmodern language. Conceptual language sought precision and clarity while bulkpostmodern symbolic language permits a certain degree of ambiguity, room for creative interpretation. Symbolic language is polysemic, diverse in meaning, and open for new interpretation. Symbolic language may sound ambiguous or even paradoxical.

Symbolic language not only embraces but appreciates the ambiguity of expressing the intuitive, emotional, and experiential dimensions of human being. Dao De Jing’s use of language, in this sense, is highly symbolic.

Language and Silence

Silence is a form of language, not an absence of words. Language has two sides, the spoken and the unspoken, the written and the unwritten. Silence is a mother or a womb of language. There are different kinds of silence, such as a convenient means of avoiding one’s responsibility, indifference, skepticism, etc. But the silence understood by Dao De Jing is much more profound. Silence and words are not dialectically opposing to each other but dialogically interconnected. Silence is a necessary part of being a language. Modern mentality, however, focused only on one part of language, namely “speaking” while ignoring the other part, “listening.” Modern mentality believed that we could speak of anything and everything, the more, the better. Language in the modern period, thus, valued only one part, “saying,” while devaluing, “not saying.” Language has lost its balance of “words” and “silence.” Language, by nature, is a dialogue between words and silence.

The modern period has made available to us many different means of communication. The marvels of human invention produce a flood of words and languages everywhere and every moment. Modern men and women can’t stand silence. We are pressured to speak something to someone constantly. “Silence” has become a bad word. So many problems are produced by saying too much rather than saying less. Language without silence is a dialogue without listening. Dialogue without listening is a monologue.

The bulkpostmodern mentality in the 21st century must understand the power of silence and the value of listening in order to understand the true nature of language and dialogue. Western culture, by and large, has emphasized the virtue of “words” and “saying,” while East Asian culture valued silence. The Judeo-Christian traditions in general were dazzled by the brilliance of “speech” from Moses to Jesus, but the Daoist East Asia was deeply influenced by the wisdom of silence. The children of Western culture grew up with the value of how to speak, while the East Asian children from early on learned the virtue of how not to speak.

Prose and Poem

The mystery of language is not only in what is says but more so in what it does not say. The authenticity and ingenuity of language is found when it relates speech and silence in dialogue. What makes a speech a real speech or a word a real word is in its ability to embrace and impregnate silence in what it says. What makes words and language is silence. When there is no silence, there will be no language. Prose is composed of words and sentences. It doe not give much room for silence. It expresses by saying it through words. It tries to connect words to words. Poetry connects words to silence and silence to words. It expresses by bridging between words and silence. Poets know that words alone are not adequate to express completely what she/he want to say. For poets, words become meaningful only when they are followed by silence. When word cannot express, seeks silence. Silence gives meaning to words. Language which consists of words alone is not true language. When language finds silence, it fulfills itself. When language is reduced to connected by only words, language loses its power, it becomes tedious and boring. Prose has this tendency because it depends only on the words. Poetry, however, understands the power of silence. It speaks between words and silence. Poets know how to stop speaking, where to stop to make a room for silence. A good poet does not try to express through what she says but tries to convey her ideas through what she does not and cannot say. Poet’s words contain the element of silence. A good speech is punctuated by silence. The silence followed by the words makes the words meaningful. Prose can consist of words but poetry consists of word and silence. Poet weaves words with silence. Dao De Jing is the best example of relating words and silence in the way that silence can be an effective way of expressing a profound thought.

The bulkpostmodern mentality explores the voice of silence, unheard and silenced voices, and the marginalized voice. The 21st century must be different from the 20th century in the sense that the world must turn to the spirituality of listening rather from pursuing aggressively asserting and advocating each one’s voice. Peace is listening from each other, and understanding the value of silence.

Value of Passivity

Dao De Jing redefines the value of activity and passivity. Activity is not always positive and valuable. Dao De Jing emphasizes the opposite. Speaking, for example, is a positive and active side of language while listening is a passive side of language. Human civilization has moved from passivity to activity in dealing with nature. Human beings have been active agent in dominating, and conquering nature. The active aspect of human beings was portrayed as heroic in harnessing and utilizing nature for human benefit. Human ingenuity has penetrated every part and dimension of nature for this purpose to the point of abusing nature. Modernity or the modern mentality, thus, is characterized as the maximization of human activity toward nature resulting in the ecological and environmental crisis we are facing now. The scientific way of thinking as a modern attitude toward nature, the analytical mind as a modern mentality, and rational thinking in modern philosophy all clearly reflect this “active” aspect of human being.

The bulkpostmodern way of thinking critically reflects this active and aggressive nature of modern mentality. Although bulkpostmodern thinking does not advocate going back to the pre-modern way of thinking, it suggests that we can find a new wisdom by learning from the past. Dao De Jing is such book and source of wisdom. It helps us open our eyes to take a look at the wisdom of our past with a fresh eye. The 20th century was the peak of human “activity” in inventing and developing the most violent way of abusing nature. The 21st century must be the age of accepting human limitations and a sense of humility toward nature. The passivity in Dao De Jing is not to be understood as negative, but as a positive way of allowing us to be ourselves as human in seeking both dialogue and harmony with nature. The well known Daoist idea, “wu-wei” (“inaction” or “non-action”), for example, is not a negative notion that negates human action. But rather the true idea of “wu-wei” is the highest and best form of human action. In this sense the Daoist idea of “wu-wei” is not a negative passivity, but an active way of searching the way it is, the way of nature, and let the way of nature take its course. In this respect, wu-wei, must not be understood as neither an action of indifference nor irresponsible, impulsive action. But it is an “active” way of allowing ourselves to receive the way of nature and to become spontaneous. Wu-wei requires a certain spirituality and state of mind that allows us to discern and accept the way of nature, i.e., spontaneity.

For this reason, to become spontaneous is a form of “action” and not a negation or an absence of action. It is rather a genuine and authentic form of action, the action expressing the inner state of mind. In this sense, wu-wei is the perfect unity of action and contemplation, beyond the duality of the two. In this state of mind and action, the duality of “activity” and “passivity” disappears. The modern West has divided or separated “activity” and “passivity” in a clearly dualistic manner. But the bulkpostmodern mentality seeks the reunion of action and contemplation in order to achieve the “spontaneous action,” wu-wei. In this respect, the Daoist idea of passivity contains an active attitude and spiritual awareness inviting spontaneous “acceptance” of being in nature, with nature, and thus becoming “natural.” The bulkpostmodern mentality seeks, in this sense, an “active” passivity or receptivity. Here “active” means a positive attitude toward allowing us to be in tune with our nature by restraining us from either artificial activity or impulsive reaction. Wu-wei, in this sense, should not be understood in the categories of action/inaction alone, but also in the category of being. Being and action are not dualistically divided but intrinsically related. Wu-wei is not only a form of action but also a way of being. A common misunderstanding of wu-wei stems from an attempt to comprehend wu-wei from the perspective of action without paying attention to its ontological dimension. The very idea of wu-wei is to overcome this dichotomy of being and action, “ontology” and “ethics.”

A proper way of being produces an appropriate action. When action departs from being, it becomes artificial and unnatural. The Daoist understanding of wu-wei is deeply rooted in the way of being. For this reason, wu-wei takes the inner state of being, the mind, and spirituality seriously. Without the proper spiritual and mental attitude, our action may not be able achieve the form of wu-wei. Dao De Jing certainly understood the profound significance of this spiritual dimension when it spoke of wu-wei. Dao De Jing is primarily a spiritual and mystical book, whose principal ideas and major themes must be understood from the perspective of spirituality. A proper spiritual orientation is necessary to unpack the profundity of Dao De Jing. Without this spiritual orientation, the ideas and wisdom in Dao De Jing may not be fully appreciated in their essential practicality. Wu-wei is the case in point. The major misunderstanding of wu-wei stems from the idea that wu-wei as a form of action alone without appropriating its spiritual orientation. Wu-wei, without spirituality, becomes a mere lazy bum’s catch word implying lazy inactivity or ends up with irresponsible or inappropriate action. Dao De Jing is deeply concerned about the inner or spiritual dimension of human being to act according to the principle of wu-wei. In fact, Dao De Jing’s primary concern is the proper inner state of mind and spiritual orientation in order to be able to “practice” the wisdom of Dao. In other words, the original intent of Dao De Jing is not simply to teach how to become successful in dealing with mundane affairs, although such success may come as a result, but the nature and the goal of Dao De Jing is not in this worldly “success” alone. Wu-wei is not a means to achieve a desired goal but is a spiritual process to transform our inner state of mind to realize the reality itself. Once we recognize the inner conditions of the mind and the structures of being, the action flowing from this inner and spiritual state mind will produce the outer form of action and result, namely, wu-wei.

What is the right or proper spiritual orientation or mind set to practice wu-wei? It sounds self contradictory to state “practice wu-wei.” Indeed, wu-wei does not require conscious “practice” because it would be an artificial action, directly opposed to the very principle of wu-wei (non-action). As Dao De Jing teaches, practicing or doing wu-wei is not against wu-wei. On the contrary, Dao De Jing explicitly emphasizes following and practicing wu-wei. This external practice of wu-wei, however, requires a proper inner spiritual awareness. The genuine and true sense of wu-wei can be achieved only when outer action meets this inner condition, or the action follows from the inner spirituality. From this point of view, we may say that wu-wei is primarily a spiritual process and inner cultivation that will result in the outer form of action, namely, wu-wei. Without this inner and spiritual dimension, wu-wei will become a sheer deception, a highly shrewd form of political manipulation, and a clever behavior, and then Dao De Jing is no longer a profound book of spirituality but a mere manual for achieving of social or political success. In order to appropriate Dao De Jing as a profound spiritual text, we have to expound a deeper understanding of wu-wei. The idea of wu-wei should not be understood as an independent and separate concept from other ideas inherent to Dao De Jing. But it must be understood in relation to the basic Daoist assumption of the human being, nature, the world, and the universe.

One of the most critical aspects concerning wu-wei is concerned with human “self-understanding,” an anthropological issue. Who we are and what we do. Modern mentality, for good or ill, understood human being as homo sapiens. Reason and the scientific mind were conceived as the most distinguishing characteristics of the human being. As a result human beings understood themselves as independent from the rest of the universe. But wu-wei requires a new and different anthropological assumption.

Daoist anthropology and Wu-wei

The Modern worldview has promoted the uniqueness of the human being, what makes the human being “better” and “superior” compared to the rest of other beings in the universe. This anthropological assumption has even older origins in the Judeo-Christian traditions. The Genesis cosmogony in the Bible clearly portrayed human beings above nature and exercising dominion over it. The Genesis creation narrative shows a clear order in the universe: the God the creator and all created beings including humans and between humans being and all other beings. In fact, the significance of the biblical creation narrative lies more in creating and classifying the order of beings rather than creation out of nothing (creatio ex nihilo). The Christian concept of creation, for example, was more of cosmic order from chaos than of being from non-being in an ontological sense. In other words, the intent in the biblical creation narrative is to create “hierarchy” in the universe out of anarchy. The primeval or cha