道德真經疏義 (趙志堅)

Dàodé zhēn jīng shū yì 道德真經疏義 (Zhào Zhìjiān)

Commentary and Explanations on the True Scripture of the Way and Its Virtue

by 趙志堅 (Zhào Zhìjiān; Táng, 8th century at latest) — identified by some sources as Zhào Jiān 趙堅 and/or as a Buddhist master

A fragmentary Táng-period commentary on the Dàodé jīng ([[KR5c0045|Dàodé zhēn jīng]]) in three juàn — heavily incomplete in the received Daozang text. Preserved as DZ 719 / CT 719 (Dòngshén bù, Yù jué lèi 洞神部玉訣類). The catalog title “(二)” disambiguates from Jiāng Chéng’s KR5c0079 Shū yì “(一)“.

About the work

Isabelle Robinet’s notice in Schipper & Verellen eds., The Taoist Canon (2004, 1:292–93, DZ 719) gives the authoritative modern framing.

Textual incompleteness

The received DZ 719 is severely damaged:

• The entire first part (the Dào jīng, ch. 1–37) in three juàn — missing.
• Sixteen chapters of the second part (the Dé jīng) — also missing (at 4.21b and 6.1a).

The text as received is therefore a small fragment of the original commentary.

Attribution and dating

The work is attributed to Zhào Zhìjiān 趙志堅 in the DZ 719 colophon. However, the attribution has textual problems:

• A Táng-era commentary by Zhào Zhìjiān in three or four juàn is mentioned in Sòng bibliographies (VDL 153) — confirming that such a commentary existed.
• Dù Guāngtíng 杜光庭, in his 901 preface to DZ 725 Dàodé zhēn jīng guǎng shèng yì 3b, mentions a “Master of the Law Zhào Jiān 趙堅” as author of a commentary in six juàn. The name form differs (Zhào Jiān vs. Zhào Zhìjiān).
• The preface to DZ 705 Dàodé zhēn jīng jí jiě 3a, reproducing Dù Guāngtíng’s preface, gives the name as Zhào Zhìjiān.

These texts seem to refer to the same commentary, dating from the eighth century at the latest. Modern scholar Wáng Zhòngmín 王重民 in Lǎozǐ kǎo 老子考 177, 267 speculates that these are in fact two different commentaries — but Robinet treats them as the same work under varying attributions.

Buddhist identification?

The content of the commentary — which is centred for the most part on meditation — suggests to Robinet that this is in fact the work of a Buddhist under the Táng dynasty. The Buddhist-meditational character is evident in:

• Emphasis on the empty heart-mind (xū xīn 虛心) as superior to the “correct heart-mind” (zhèng xīn 正心; 5.16b–17a) — a distinctively Buddhist contrastive framework.
• Emphasis on sitting-in-meditation (zuò wàng 坐忘; 5.25a–b) — classical Daoist in origin but here developed in Chán-like register.
• Three degrees of contemplation at 3.3a–b: “being” (yǒu 有), “non-being” (wú 無), and “correct contemplation” (zhèng guān 正觀) that transcends the latter — a Mādhyamika-derived scheme.
• Interpretation of Lǎozǐ 64’s qí ān yì chí 其安易持 (“what is still is easy to hold”) at 5.28a–29a as referring to tranquility of the heart-mind that must be maintained before thought and feeling manifest themselves — a Buddhist śamatha framework.

Method

The author opens each chapter of the Lǎozǐ with a résumé, before proceeding with a phrase-by-phrase analysis. The organisation is systematic and the philosophical exposition consistent — characteristic of a trained scholastic rather than of a occasional scholarly gloss.

Prefaces

No preface survives in the received fragmentary text. The Dào jīng portion — which would have contained any preface — is entirely lost.

Abstract

The commentary is of considerable interest as a possible Táng Buddhist reading of the Dàodé jīng. The Buddhist-meditational character suggested by Robinet’s textual analysis — if confirmed — would make DZ 719 one of a very small number of surviving Buddhist commentaries on a Daoist classic (alongside the better-known readings attributed to Kumārajīva and Sēngzhào, themselves of disputed authenticity).

Dating. The commentary is placed in the Táng (618–907), with composition at the latest by the late 8th century (per Dù Guāngtíng’s 901 preface to DZ 725). Per the project’s dating rule, the frontmatter gives 618–800 as a broad early-to-mid Táng composition window. Dynasty: 唐.

Translations and research

• Schipper, Kristofer, and Franciscus Verellen, eds. The Taoist Canon: A Historical Companion to the Daozang. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004, 1:292–93 (DZ 719, I. Robinet). Primary reference.
• Wáng Zhòngmín 王重民. Lǎozǐ kǎo 老子考. Běijīng: Zhōnghuá, 1927 (rpt. 1991), pp. 177, 267. For the two-commentary hypothesis.
• Barrett, T. H. Taoism Under the T’ang. London: Wellsweep, 1996.

Other points of interest

The possibly-Buddhist identification of the author places DZ 719 in the distinctive late-medieval tradition of cross-traditional Daoist-Buddhist commentary. Daoist and Buddhist scholars regularly read each other’s foundational scriptures, and a few such cross-traditional readings survive (notably Chán master Shèng yán 聖嚴’s Dàodé jīng readings in the modern era). The Táng evidence is thinner — making DZ 719 an important (if fragmentary) witness.

The similarity to Chéng Xuányīng’s commentary — as noted by Robinet (cf. Schipper & Verellen 2004, 1:292) — positions DZ 719 within the mature Táng Chóngxuán tradition, which was itself substantially influenced by Buddhist philosophical vocabulary. Whether the author was formally a Buddhist or a Chóngxuán-school Daoist is therefore perhaps a less important distinction than the broad intellectual-register identification.

Links

• Kanseki Repository KR5c0108
• Schipper & Verellen, The Taoist Canon (2004), 1:292–93 — DZ 719 entry (I. Robinet).
• ctext.org: 道德真經疏義 (趙志堅)