Daoism comprises a mode of traditional Chinese thought that is thought of as both philosophical and religious. Rather than being primarily concerned with this conflict in ideology, however, Daoist thinkers have been primarily concerned with conceptualization of the natural world and the underlying influence that propels it forward in its evolutionary path throughout time. Morality, leadership, and personal development are all fundamental tenets held by Daoist thinkers. Two of the primary contributors to the history of Daoist thought were Laozi and Zhuang Zou, the writers of the Daodejing and the Zhuangzi respectively. While these philosophers each demonstrate a variety of similar positions regarding the nature of the Dao, there are also many other values that are seen to be fundamentally different then one another. This is due to their differing backgrounds and historical contexts, which had a profound influence on the development of their thought.
Laozi is considered to be the writer of the Daodejing as a text and is considered to be one of the primary philosophic contributors to the spread of the idea as a religious teaching. Zhuangzi, also known as Zhuang Zhou is an actual historic person considered, along with Laozi, to be one of the most essential figures related to Daoism. Zhuangzi actually refers to a master named Zhuang whose written work has been titled Zhuangzi. Together, these figures are considered to be the two earliest figures associated with Daoism. While there is not considered to be any specific founding figures within the philosophic religion the texts that were written by these two individuals are generally considered to be the cornerstone of the Daoist religion as it exists today. Before this, the ideas and practices of Daoist belief were passed down from teacher to student in a less formal way. Upon writing these texts, these individuals were codifying their particular perspectives on a religious and moral philosophy that had a deep historic relationship with Chinese thought.
Zhuangzi's work seems to have been fundamentally informed by the Daodejing which came before him. In fact, various portions of his text seem to be directly expressed from Laozi's work. The similar forms and repeating patterns demonstrate at least a strong influence from the older work. However, despite this association, they had a variety of fundamental differences and beliefs. An official of the Zhou dynasty, Laozi believed in the idea of self-cultivation and that this could be done through the virtue of the Tao. In seeing the decline of Zhou, he ultimately left its court for other pursuits. Zhuangzi, who was of Ch'i-Yuan, living a simple life with ideals of absolute personal freedom. Unlike Laozi, he never took part in political or public activity and declined a substantial amount of wealth and power in order to pursue these values. While the period that Laozi lived in was relatively peaceful, Zhuangzi, who lived during what is called the “Warring States” period developed his philosophical ideas in a time of conflict. This would have likely had a profound effect on the content of their two texts. Their histories were fundamentally different, giving them different perspectives regarding the importance of the Dao to particular points of life.
Zhuangzi was concerned with living outside of society so as not to take part in these conflicts between social and political orders and his work demonstrates a deeper level of mystic thought due to this. Laozi's philosophy reflected a desire to return to a more perfect state, and he indicates a desire to bring these ideas to society rather than isolate himself from others. While he did withdraw from the world as a hermit it was for the purpose of producing a text and bringing it back to civilization in order to make it better. Both of these thinkers, however, were profoundly concerned with the idea of the Dao as an unpredictable and shapeless substance that guided life. The tenets of Daoism have had growing popularity throughout the world because of the “paradoxical mixture of arcane mysticism and natural simplicity” (Pohl 481). Ideas such as effortless action, naturalness, sagacity, self-perfection, and self-direction are all essential aspects of Daoist thought. However, Laozi and Zhuangi's ideas diverged on fundamental aspects regarding this very nature.
Laozi's philosophic pursuits were focused on the origins of being and the underlying causal factors leading to the evolution of the universe itself. He posited that in understanding the Dao, it could help to inform people's action so that they could be in line with the natural harmony of existence. His ideas reflect an underlying tension in regards to opposition in the natural world. Zhuangzi was primarily concerned with the idea that all things move and change according to specific laws of nature that propel things down their paths towards a specific destiny. The Dao itself is a reflection of nature and both defines and is defined by the processes of the natural world. Furthermore, while all things, at their origin, share a common identity these paths will inevitably shape them in different ways, resulting in the complex, yet harmonious, diversity of life and form that can be seen today. He argued that exterior reality could be compared to the self in order to help define a person's character and to produce methods of refining their moral qualities and virtue. Life and death were both necessary and in-balance. Spiritual truth and absolute freedom are therefore the primary concerns of Zhuangzi. These concepts would help the individual to live alongside the Dao, ensuring that they would take more moral actions.
It is generally believed that Zhuangzi's writing and logic reflect a more refined and purposeful approach towards the Dao. It has been demonstrated to show a high level of foresight and the complexity of the characters that are used in order to write the work are much more comprehensive (Schwitzgebel 3). This seems to demonstrate a much more academic approach to the work, which takes form in the higher volume of information and content that was implicit within his work. Laozi's work, on the other hand, demonstrates a much more simplistic, yet organic, approach to the Dao. His simple but elegant presentation seems to be at odds with the more academic discussion presented by Zhuangzi. There is no systematic organization or central theme to the work other than expressions of the eternal Dao itself. The text does not contain a central thesis or viewpoint but rather seems to be a celebration of the myriad of things that can be attributed to the force.
Zhuanzi attempted to demonstrate the essential unknowable character of the Dao. This is evident in the underlying conditions upon which his view of truth and insight were. Zhuangzi's work “uses a wide variety of devices to dislodge the typical reader’s general assumption that philosophical texts are in the business of stating truths” (Schwitzgebel 4). Instead he focuses on demonstrating that many things are, in fact, unknowable, and that knowing itself should not be an end, but rather coming to be one with the Dao. In coming to be one with the Dao it is possible to act in moral ways without being concerned with the actions themselves. This is because the Dao is itself morality. Understanding this is essential in developing self-cultivation and the propensity for sagacity.
Laozi's work dictates that the Dao is unknowable and unattainable while its pursuit is, at the same time, necessary. Despite the fact that it has been given a name the Dao is, in fact, unfathomable. Its entirety cannot be captured in a single expression or phrase. “One who knows does not say it; One who says does not know it” (Damrosh & Pike 19 LVI). It is the way of heaven and the natural ebb and flow of the universe which is always directed towards the best of all possible ends. Understanding contrasting elements, such as passive and active, male and female, life and death is therefore the only way to come to truly know the ideas that are being expressed by the Daodejing. Laozi challenges the representations of the Dao in physical form. Rather it is constantly elusive to the thinker, no matter their capacity for knowledge. “Darkly visible, it only seems as though it were there” (Damrosh & Pike 48 IV). The master must understand this in order to gain the insight that the Dao has to offer.
Furthermore, the ideal person is the one that is able to effortlessly become one with the Dao and can learn to act in the right way without the need for forethought. Detachment therefore becomes an essential element in coming closer to the idea of the Dao. In his view, “the goodness of the action is diminished due to some conscious urge to act virtuously on the agent’s part” (Yan 177). In attempting to act right a person is already acting wrong. Instead, they should act in ways that attempt to become one with the Dao, which when done ensures that their actions will always be moral. In this sense, “to be truly virtuous requires correct feeling, perception, and corresponding action” (Yan 184). This is directed towards becoming one with the Dao rather than acting in certain ways.
For both thinkers, the idea of detachment from judgment is the only way to attain real truth. Cultivation of the self can result in wu-wei, or oneness with the Dao, which, as in the Daodejing, is essential for acting in the right way. This idea therefore “makes a strong distinction between the sage and ordinary people” (Wang 13). Mastery for a Daoist is not the mastery of skills but the absence of the ability to not be a master at anything. This is not out of effort, but out of a deeper level of detachment from concern regarding skill. This detachment allows the indivdual to line their actions with the natural will of the Dao. Naturalness is therefore elevated to the highest moral order. While they do agree on these basic principles, it seems that “the main thrust in Laozi is the way of being a good ruler while Zhuangzi focuses primarily on how best to live in the world” (Wang 14). These differences are the result of the social and historic contexts that they were a part of.
While both Laozi and Zhuangzi's works demonstrate profound interest in the unknowable Dao, they differ on a variety of points. These are primarily related to the focus of the Dao and the importance of applying it to everyday life. In doing so a person can fundamentally alter their character for the better by establishing their actions in relation to the natural order of the Dao itself. In understanding these differences Daoism itself can be understood in a more profound way, which can help to provide insight in relation to the values that are inherent within these views.
Works Cited
Damrosh, David & Pike, David L., Lau, D.C. Dao De Jing. Perspectives: Daoism and Its Ways. The Longman Anthology of World Literature. 2016. Print.
Pohl, Karl-Heinz. Play-Thing of the Times: Critical Review of the Reception of Daoism in the West. JOCP. 2003. Print.
Schwitzgebel, Eric. Death and Self in the Incomprehensible Zhuanzi. Eschwitz. 2015. Print.
Wang, Bo. Zhuangzi: Thinking Through the Inner Chapters. Contemporary Daoist Studies in Daoist Studies. 2014. Print.
Yan, Hektor K.T.., A Paradox of Virtue: The Daodejing on Virtue and Moral Philosophy. Philosophy East & West Volume 59, Number 2 April 2009 173–187. Print.
