论文部分内容阅读
２０００年来，人们提及老子之道，都根据《道经》首二句“道可道，非常道，名可名，非常名”为解，说老子之道玄虚微妙，不同世俗之政教经术之道，不可解说、不可名状，实为永恒不变、自然长生之道，此类解说与老子哲学思想的本旨实相抵牾。究其原由，皆因学者未悟“可道”、“可名”不当如字读。根据先秦文字书写特点及先秦文献文例，应读“可道”、“可名”为“何道”、“何名”。如此，则《老子》之语言较旧解为朴素，老子之哲学思想及命题较旧解也更为一贯。
In 2000, people referred to the Tao of Lao Tzu and said that according to the first two sentences of the Taoist scriptures, “Dao Ke Dao, Dao Dao, Ming Dian Ming, and Fei Ming Ming” , Unsolvable, indescribable, and immutable, natural and immortalized way of life. Such explanations contradict the essence of Lao Tzu philosophy. The reason is due to scholars did not realize “can Road”, “can name” inappropriate reading. According to the characteristics of writing in the pre-Qin period and pre-Qin literary texts, “Ke Dao” and “Ren Ming” should be read as “He Dao” and “He Ming”. In this way, the language of “Lao Tzu” is simpler than the old one, and Lao Tzu’s philosophical ideas and propositions are more consistent than the old ones.