Lao-tzu

Laozi, (Chinese: “Master Lao,” or “Old Master”),
original name (Wade-Giles) Li Er, deified as Lao
Jun, Tai Shang Lao-Jun, or Tai Shang Xuanyuan
Huangdi, also called Lao Dun, or Lao Dan (flourished
6th century bce, China), the first philosopher of
Chinese Daoism and alleged author of the Daodejing,
a primary Daoist writing. Modern scholars discount
the possibility that the Daodejing was written by
only one person but readily acknowledge the
influence of Daoism on the development of Buddhism.
Laozi is venerated as a philosopher by Confucians
and as a saint or god in popular religion and was
worshipped as an imperial ancestor during the Tang
dynasty (618–907). (See also Daoism.)
The life of Laozi
Despite his historical importance, Laozi remains an
obscure figure. The principal source of information
about his life is a biography in the Shiji (“Records
of the Historian”) by Sima Qian. This historian, who
wrote in about 100 bce, had little solid information
concerning the philosopher. He says that Laozi was a
native of Quren, a village in the district of Hu in
the state of Chu, which corresponds to the modern
Luyi in the eastern part of Henan province. His
family name was Li, his proper name Er, his
appellation Dan. He was appointed to the office of
shi at the royal court of the Zhou dynasty (c.
1046–256 bce). Shi today means “historian,” but in
ancient China the shi were scholars specializing in
matters such as astrology and divination and were in
charge of sacred books.
After noting the civil status of Laozi, the
historian proceeds to relate a celebrated but
questionable meeting of the old Daoist with the
younger Confucius (551–479 bce). The story has been
much discussed by the scholars; it is mentioned
elsewhere, but the sources are so inconsistent and
contradictory that the meeting seems a mere legend.
During the supposed interview, Laozi blamed
Confucius for his pride and ambition, and Confucius
was so impressed with Laozi that he compared him to
a dragon that rises to the sky, riding on the winds
and clouds.
No less legendary is a voyage of Laozi to the
west. Realizing that the Zhou dynasty was on the
decline, the philosopher departed and came to the
Xiangu pass, which was the entrance to the state of
Qin. Yinxi, the legendary guardian of the pass
(guanling), begged him to write a book for him.
Thereupon, Laozi wrote a book in two sections of
5,000 characters, in which he set down his ideas
about the Dao (literally “Way”) and the de (its
“virtue”): the Daodejing. Then he left, and “nobody
knows what has become of him,” says Sima Qian.
After the account of the journey of Laozi and of
the redaction of the book, Sima Qian alludes to
other persons with whom Laozi was sometimes
identified. One was Lao Laizi, a Daoist contemporary
of Confucius; another was a great astrologer named
Dan. Sima Qian adds, “Maybe Laozi has lived one
hundred and fifty years, some say more than two
hundred years.” Since the ancient Chinese believed
that superior men could live very long, it is
natural that the Daoists credited their master with
an uncommon longevity, but this is perhaps a rather
late tradition because Zhuangzi, the Daoist sage of
the 4th century bce, still speaks of the death of
Laozi without emphasizing an unusual longevity.
To explain why the life of Laozi is so shrouded
in obscurity, Sima Qian says that he was a gentleman
recluse whose doctrine consisted in nonaction, the
cultivation of a state of inner calm, and purity of
mind. Indeed, throughout the whole history of China,
there have always been recluses who shunned worldly
life. The author (or authors) of the Daodejing was
probably a person of this kind who left no trace of
his life.
The question of whether there was a historical
Laozi has been raised by many scholars, but it is
rather an idle one. The Daodejing, as we have it,
cannot be the work of a single author; some of its
sayings may date from the time of Confucius; others
are certainly later; and a version of the text has
been recovered in an archaeological find at Guodian
that dates to before 300 bce. Owing to these facts,
some scholars have assigned the authorship of the
Daodejing to the astrologer Dan; while others,
giving credit to a genealogy of the descendants of
the philosopher, which is related in the biography
by Sima Qian, try to place the life of Lao Dan at
the end of the 4th century bce. But this genealogy
can hardly be considered as historical. It proves
only that at the time of Sima Qian a certain Li
family (see above) pretended to be descended from
the Daoist sage; it does not give a basis for
ascertaining the existence of the latter. The name
Laozi seems to represent a certain type of sage
rather than an individual.
Hagiographical legends
Beyond the biography in the Shiji and sporadic
mentions in other old books, several hagiographies
were written from the 2nd century ce onward. These
are interesting for the history of the formation of
religious Daoism. During the Eastern, or Later, Han
dynasty (25–220 ce), Laozi had already become a
mythical figure who was worshipped by the people and
occasionally by an emperor. Later, in religious
circles, he became the Lord Lao (Lao Jun), revealer
of sacred texts and saviour of mankind. There were
several stories about his birth, one of which was
influenced by the legend of the miraculous birth of
Buddha. Laozi’s mother is said to have borne him 72
years in her womb and he to have entered the world
through her left flank. One legend gives an
explanation of his family name, Li: the baby came to
light at the foot of a plum tree (li) and decided
that li (“plum”) should be his surname. Two legends
were particularly important in the creed of the
Daoists. According to the first, the Lao Jun was
believed to have adopted different personalities
throughout history and to have come down to the
earth several times to instruct the rulers in the
Daoist doctrine. The second legend developed from
the story of Laozi’s journey to the west. In this
account the Buddha was thought to be none other than
Laozi himself. During the 3rd century ce an
apocryphal book was fabricated on this theme with a
view to combating Buddhist propaganda. This book,
the Laozi huhuajing (“Laozi’s Conversion of the
Barbarians”), in which Buddhism was presented as an
inferior kind of Daoism, was often condemned by the
Chinese imperial authorities.
Laozi has never ceased to be generally respected
in all circles in China. To the Confucians he was a
venerated philosopher; to the people he was a saint
or a god; and to the Daoists he was an emanation of
the Dao and one of their greatest divinities.
Max Kaltenmark