Time Table of the Tao Te Ching

[ChiDragon]

 

The change of the character style.

During the Warring States, each state has a writing style of characters. Regardless, all their styles were in 篆書(Seal style). After the first emperor of Han(劉邦 Liu2 bang1) defeated the last emperor of Chu(楚霸王), Liu2 adopted the ruling principles from the TTC. However, the TTC was written in the Seal style(篆書) which was very difficult to read. Hence, Liu2 created the Official style called 隸書(Li4 Shu1).

 

This can be justified by looking at the Time Table. At the beginning of the Han Dynasty, MWD-A copy of the TTC was written in Seal style(篆書). Then it was revised to the Official style(隸書). Furthermore, since the name of the first emperor of the Han Dynasty was 劉邦(Liu2 bang1), therefore, all the characters of 邦(bang1) was changed to 國(guo2).

 

In the classic, during the Warring States, the character 邦(bang1) means country; and 國(guo2) means region. Since the change was made, then 國(guo2) means country. In the modern time, 國(guo2) becomes a country or a small country and 邦(bang1) means a big Nation like the United States.

 

The intention of this post is to prove that the MWD-B version of the TTC was written in the period of the Han Dynasty between the years of 劉邦(Liu2 bang1) 206 – 195 BCE. It was because of the changes of the character style and the character 邦(bang1) was replaced with 國(guo2).

 

Another thing to assure that MWD-B was written in the Liu Bang period. It was because the names of the next two emperors(盈 and 恒) were not replaced with other characters yet.

 

MWD A and B TTC

Edited February 27, 2014 by ChiDragon

[dawei]

Yes, there was a typo. I mistyped as MDW-B. It has been corrected to MWD-B.

The answer to your question is NO. I mean MWD-B as I had originally stated. Please look at the time table carefully.

Ok, I looked carefully and this is what I see:

 

2. 馬王堆-甲本[MWD-A] 206 – 195 BCE; 篆書(Seal style); Unearthed:1973

3. 馬王堆-乙本[MWD-B] 194 – 180 BCE; 隸書(Official Style); Unearthed:1973

 

Emperors of the Han Dynasty(206 BCE - AD220)

1. 高祖 - 劉邦 Liu2 bang1 206 – 195 BCE

 

 

yet you wrote:

The intention of this post is to prove that the MWD-B version of the TTC was written in the period of the Han Dynasty between the years of 劉邦(Liu2 bang1) 206 – 195 BCE.

 

 

 

Sometime doesn't agree in what your writing.

[ChiDragon]

Ok, I looked carefully and this is what I see:

 

2. 馬王堆-甲本[MWD-A] 206 – 195 BCE; 篆書(Seal style); Unearthed:1973

3. 馬王堆-乙本[MWD-B] 194 – 180 BCE; 隸書(Official Style); Unearthed:1973

 

Emperors of the Han Dynasty(206 BCE - AD220)

1. 高祖 - 劉邦 Liu2 bang1 206 – 195 BCE

 

 

yet you wrote:

The intention of this post is to prove that the MWD-B version of the TTC was written in the period of the Han Dynasty between the years of 劉邦(Liu2 bang1) 206 – 195 BCE.

 

 

 

Sometime doesn't agree in what your writing.

 

The point I was trying to make is that MWD-B was written in 隸書(Official Style) which the style that Liu2 Bang1 was adopted to. In addition, his name was 邦 was replaced with 國 in this version.

 

PS....

MWD-A was written in Seal style before Liu Bang become the ruler of the Han Dynasty.

Edited February 27, 2014 by ChiDragon

[dawei]

This is what you said so far:

1. 高祖 - 劉邦 Liu2 bang1 206 – 195 BCE

2. 惠帝 - 劉盈 Liu2 ying2 194 – 188 BCE

 

 

 

3. 馬王堆-乙本[MWD-B] 194 – 180 BCE; 隸書(Official Style); Unearthed:1973

 

prove that the MWD-B version of the TTC was written in the period of the Han Dynasty between the years of 劉邦(Liu2 bang1) 206 – 195 BCE.

 

 

now your trying to really say is:

 

Although the MWD-B version of the TTC was written in the period of the Han Dynasty between [Liu2 ying2] 194 – 188 BCE, it was written in 隸書(Official Style) which was the style that Liu2 Bang1 劉邦 206 – 195 BCE was adopted to.

 

Based on dates, this does not have to even be stated as MWD-B is later than MWD-A... it MUST use the seal characters.

 

As you write it incorrectly the first time (stating it was during 206-195, instead of saying during 194 – 188 BCE), It appeared as a typo. But now you've cleared it up as simply mixed up references to people and dates.

 

carry on

[ChiDragon]

Dawei....
Thank you for tracking the time period. Now, the Time table have been updated. It was a good study.

Yes, carry on! We'll get it right yet...!!!

[dawei]

Your correct in using name taboo to help date them. So that can be used to help establish why MWD-B is considered later. As both use Seal Characters it does not quite date the MWD-B yet. What I found was this:

 

This version avoids the taboo name of Liu Bang but does not avoid mentioning the name of Liu Hui, Emperor Huidi... thus, this can be even dated into time of Emperor Huidi or Empress Lu !

 

Another evidence of a latter date for MWD-B over MWD-A:

 

 

The term “right tally” (you xie) in Text A in chapter 79 appears in Text B and the later editions as “left tally” (zuo xie). This change from “right tally” to “left tally” mirrors the Han culture, which prioritized the left side over the right side, compared to the more common practice in the Warring States period, which valued the right side over the left. - The Old Master

[ChiDragon]

Dawei....
Can you give me the Chinese characters for "name of Liu Hui, Emperor Huidi... thus, this can be even dated into time of Emperor Huidi or Empress Lu ! " Thanks.

[ChiDragon]

 

Another evidence of a latter date for MWD-B over MWD-A:

 

 

The term “right tally” (you xie) in Text A in chapter 79 appears in Text B and the later editions as “left tally” (zuo xie). This change from “right tally” to “left tally” mirrors the Han culture, which prioritized the left side over the right side, compared to the more common practice in the Warring States period, which valued the right side over the left. - The Old Master

 

I don't follow you on this at all on the part of "tally".

 

What make you think that "the common practice in the Warring States period, which valued the right side over the left." In reference to Chapter 31 of the TTC, it is valued the left over the right.

Edited February 27, 2014 by ChiDragon

[dawei]

I was quoting an author who pointed out that in Ch. 79, the MWD-A has 'right tally' and MWD-B has 'left tally'...

 

MWD-A: 右

http://web.archive.org/web/20110514212730/http://home.pages.at/onkellotus/TTK/Chinese_Uni-MWD-A_TTK.html#Kap79

 

MWD-B: 左

http://web.archive.org/web/20110514205242/http://home.pages.at/onkellotus/TTK/Chinese_Uni-MWD-B_TTK.html#Kap79

 

 

Sorry, I am not trying to side track.

[ChiDragon]

No problem. We had a good discussion for Chapter 79. Please read posts #4 through #7 in the following thread.
Ref: http://thetaobums.com/topic/20907-ttc-study-chapter-79-of-the-tao-teh-ching/

MWD-B is correct. It doesn't invalidate this thread at all whatsoever.

PS....
Can you respond to post #32 of this thread. Thanks.

Edited February 27, 2014 by ChiDragon

[dawei]

Dawei....

Can you give me the Chinese characters for "name of Liu Hui, Emperor Huidi... thus, this can be even dated into time of Emperor Huidi or Empress Lu ! " Thanks.

 

I think that the location I must of copied that from, that person was taking too much liberty in names (Liu Hui is not really proper). It is Emperor Huidi 惠帝, as you already have in front of Liu Ying:

 

2. 惠帝 - 劉盈 Liu2 ying2 194 – 188 BCE

[ChiDragon]

I think that the location I must of copied that from, that person was taking too much liberty in names (Liu Hui is not really proper). It is Emperor Huidi 惠帝, as you already have in front of Liu Ying:

 

2. 惠帝 - 劉盈 Liu2 ying2 194 – 188 BCE

 

There was only one place, in Chapter 2, with his name 盈 replaced with 傾. Actually, it was very difficulty to find a character replace for 盈 as compared to 邦/國 and 恆/常. Besides, 劉盈 took over the throne at the age of 17 with no power. His mother, the queen, took over his power. He die at the age of 25 due to his innate health problem. It seems like nobody did pay much attention to him. Anyway, this is still doesn't invalidate the intent of the thread neither.

 

Edited February 27, 2014 by ChiDragon

[ChiDragon]

Now, since there was no date attached to Heshang Gong(河上公) and his version of TTC, then we have another mystery to be solved...!!!

Edited February 27, 2014 by ChiDragon

[Mark Saltveit]

ChiDragon:

 

Now, since there was no date attached to Heshang Gong(河上公) and his version of TTC, then have another mystery to be solved...!!!

 

Prof. Stephen Bokenkamp, in "Early Daoist Scriptures", says "second century C.E.?" So somewhere between 100 C.E. and 200 C.E.

[ChiDragon]

ChiDragon:

 

 

Prof. Stephen Bokenkamp, in "Early Daoist Scriptures", says "second century C.E.?" So somewhere between 100 C.E. and 200 C.E.

He is a legendary figure and even more mysterious than Lao Zi. The period given above is later than some other sources. He could be moved back a bit into the BCE.

[dawei]

I tend to agree with ChiDragon.... Heshang Gong is very mysterious in dating... but BCE is a candidate.

 

Louis Komjathy has a chronology as follows:

http://www.daoistcenter.org/chronology.pdf

 

I don't think we'll come to any unanimous agreement and this shouldn't keep this from going forward.

[dawei]

ChiDragon:

 

 

Prof. Stephen Bokenkamp, in "Early Daoist Scriptures", says "second century C.E.?" So somewhere between 100 C.E. and 200 C.E.

 

The dating you give is because the commentary is supposedly prefaced by his great uncle, Ge Xuan (164–244)... and if true then we must go back 100 C.E. But some feel earlier in Han is appropriate.

[ChiDragon]

......But some feel earlier in Han is appropriate.

Anyway, Heshang Gong(河上公), I think we can squeeze him into the BCE during the Han Dynasty.

 

Time Table

4. 文帝– 劉恒 Liu2 heng2 180 – 157 BCE

5. 武帝- 劉徹 Liu2 Che4 156 - 087 BCE

In the Time Table, we have a new comer: 武帝- 劉徹(Liu2 Che4).

 

Let's look at Chapter 79 of Heshang Gong's version:

79

1. 和大怨，

2. 必有餘怨，

3. 安可以為善？

4. 是以聖人執左契而不責於人。

5. 有德司契，

6. 無德司徹。

7. 天道無親，常與善人。

 

The sixth line contains the character 徹(Che4) which is an indication that Heshang Gong's version was already existed before 徹(Che4) becomes emperor. There are some documentaries had shown that Heshang Gong had given two sections of the TTC to 劉恒 (Liu2 heng2). 劉恒 (Liu2 heng2) was the emperor prior to 劉徹(Liu2 Che4). Hence, that would make Heshang Gong appear to be in the Han period.

Edited March 1, 2014 by ChiDragon

[Mark Saltveit]

The sixth line contains the character 徹(Che4) which is an indication that Heshang Gong's version was already existed before 徹(Che4) becomes emperor.

 

Could it also mean that it was written after he wasn't emperor any more?

[Mark Saltveit]

One of the leading Chinese scholars, Liu Xiogan, says

 

 

The date of Heshang Gong's commentary on the Laozi is disputed

by scholars. Several eminent scholars believe that the commentary

was completed in the later Han (25-220 A.D.).

 

"From Bamboo Slips to Received Versions: Common Features in the Transformation of the 'Laozi'"

Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, Vol. 63, No. 2 (Dec., 2003), pp. 337-382

[ChiDragon]

Could it also mean that it was written after he wasn't emperor any more?

It couldn't be, the character 徹(Che4) was already existed in both versions MWD-A and MWD-B. Btw The purpose of the time table is to keep the sequence of events. It had been proven that the MWD-B version was written in the Han Dynasty excluding the name of the first emperor(邦) but not the names of next thee emperors 盈, 恆, and 徹 after him(邦). Please read Post #26.

 

 

Edited to add:

The MWD-A version was written in the Seal style with the character 徹(Che4) included. Therefore, it couldn't have been written after his reign. Besides, any other version after the Han Dynasty would have had been written in the Official style.

Edited March 2, 2014 by ChiDragon

[ChiDragon]

One of the leading Chinese scholars, Liu Xiogan, says

 

 

"From Bamboo Slips to Received Versions: Common Features in the Transformation of the 'Laozi'"

Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, Vol. 63, No. 2 (Dec., 2003), pp. 337-382

I need to know the contents of the above journal and what had been said, in order, to comment.

[Mark Saltveit]

It couldn't be [written later], the character 徹(Che4) was already existed in both versions MWD-A and MWD-B.

 

I guess I'm not entirely clear on the rules of the name taboo. I had thought that the taboo only applied during the reign of that emperor. So if the Mawangui versions were written before this emperor's reign, and Heshan Gong was written after, couldn't they both have used that character? Or is that character banned going forward into the future?

 

I need to know the contents of the above journal and what had been said, in order, to comment.

 

The easiest way for most people to access Liu Xiogan's articles (and most scholarly articles) is through the JSTOR database which many public libraries -- including mine --- give access to. The URL for this article is

http://0-www.jstor.org.catalog.multcolib.org/stable/25066707

[ChiDragon]

I guess I'm not entirely clear on the rules of the name taboo. I had thought that the taboo only applied during the reign of that emperor. So if the Mawangui versions were written before this emperor's reign, and Heshan Gong was written after, couldn't they both have used that character? Or is that character banned going forward into the future?

 

FYI The ban is only applies to the entire Han Dynasty. One dynasty had no jurisdiction over the next. Actually, Heshang Gong did not really rewrite the TTC. He only interpreted it differently for his own interest. He was emphasized in the importance of the cultivation for a good physical Body before ruling a country. Most his commentary was about the cultivation of one's body to preserve life.

 

No one knew the name of Heshong Gong(河上公). 河上公 is only an description of him by saying that "a gentleman is living by the river".

Edited March 1, 2014 by ChiDragon

[ChiDragon]

The easiest way for most people to access Liu Xiogan's articles (and most scholarly articles) is through the JSTOR database which many public libraries -- including mine --- give access to. The URL for this article is

http://0-www.jstor.org.catalog.multcolib.org/stable/25066707

What are the eight digits after 211680 and what is "My MCL password".....???

 

Edited March 1, 2014 by ChiDragon