the short of it:
Enforced virtue is no virtue at all.
38. A Discussion About Teh*
Essential teh* makes no show of virtue, and therefore it is really virtuous. Inferior virtue never loses sight of itself and therefore it is no longer virtue. Essential virtue is characterized by lack of self-assertion (wu wei) and therefore is unpretentious. Inferior virtue is acting a part and thereby is only pretense.
Superior benevolence in a way is acting but does not thereby become pretentious. Excessive righteousness is acting and does thereby become pretentious. Excessive propriety is acting, but where no one responds to it, it stretches its arm and enforces obedience.
Therefore when one loses Tao there is still teh; one may lose teh and benevolence remains; one may forsake benevolence and still hold to righteousness; one may lose righteousness and propriety remains.
Propriety, alone, reduces loyalty and good faith to a shadow, and it is the beginning of disorder. Tradition is the mere flower of the Tao and had its origin in ignorance.
Therefore the great [person] of affairs conforms to the spirit and not to external appearance. [They go] on to fruitage and [do] not rest in the show of blossom. [They avoid] mere propriety and [practice] true benevolence.
*Virtue.
38. Discourse on Virtue.
38.1 Superior virtue is unvirtue. Therefore it has virtue. Inferior virtue never loses sight of virtue. Therefore it has no virtue.
38.2 Superior virtue is non-assertion and without pretension. Inferior virtue asserts and makes pretensions.
38.3 Superior benevolence acts but makes no pretensions. Superior justice acts and makes pretensions.
38.4 Superior propriety acts and when no one responds to it, it stretches its arm and enforces its rules.
38.5 Thus one loses Reason and then virtue appears. One loses virtue and then benevolence appears. One loses benevolence and then justice appears. one loses justice and then propriety appears. The rules of propriety are the semblance of loyalty and faith, and the beginning of disorder.
38.6 Traditionalism is the flower of Reason, but of ignorance the beginning.
38.7 Therefore a great organizer abides by the solid and dwells not in the external. he abides in the fruit and dwells not in the flower.
38.8 Therefore [they discard] the latter and [chose] the former.
38. ‘About the Attributes.’
38.1 (Those who) possessed in highest degree the attributes (of the Tao) did not (seek) to show them, and therefore they possessed them (in fullest measure). (Those who) possessed in a lower degree those attributes (sought how) not to lose them, and therefore they did not possess them (in fullest measure).
38.2 (Those who) possessed in the highest degree those attributes did nothing (with a purpose), and had no need to do anything. (Those who) possessed them in a lower degree were (always) doing, and had need to be so doing.
38.3 (Those who) possessed the highest benevolence were (always seeking) to carry it out, and had no need to be doing so. (Those who) possessed the highest righteousness were (always seeking) to carry it out, and had need to be so doing.
38.4 (Those who) possessed the highest (sense of) propriety were (always seeking) to show it, and when [people] did not respond to it, they bared the arm and marched up to them.
38.5 Thus it was that when the Tao was lost, its attributes appeared; when its attributes were lost, benevolence appeared; when benevolence was lost, righteousness appeared; and when righteousness was lost, the proprieties appeared.
38.6 Now propriety is the attenuated form of leal*-heartedness and good faith, and is also the commencement of disorder; swift apprehension is (only) a flower of the Tao, and is the beginning of stupidity.
38.7 Thus it is that the Great [person] abides by what is solid, and eschews what is flimsy; dwells with the fruit and not with the flower. It is thus that [they put] away the one and [make] choice of the other.
*Loyal.
the long of it.
Chapter 38 starts the second book of the Tao Te Ching, the Book of Te (Virtue). Some scholars believe this book may have come first, while some combine both books into one.
Regardless of the organization, Chapter 38 feels like we’ve walked in on somebody’s argument. And we have. Lao Tsu is systematically listing and dismantling the Five Ways of Proper Conduct found in Confucianism1.
In The Analects of Confucius (his most popular and revered work), Confucius inundates the reader with specific examples of what he labels “perfect virtue2.”
In fact, Confucius uses the word so broadly that he has trouble defining it, and invents a new term (ren3). To paraphrase, ren3 is an amalgamation of virtuous qualities everyone should aspire to (leaders especially). And he lists those qualities.
Lao Tsu shouts a resounding no to this logic. He says, as soon as you write down a virtue, it loses its meaning. Even worse, as soon as you start writing down virtues, you create different categories of “improper” behavior which slowly spiral down into confusion and chaos.
Wang Bi comments:
“…straightening cannot make people sincere, [because] there appear those who turn cultural institutions and ceremonial etiquette into superficial ornamentation. Because those who esteem cultivation and etiquette interact by wrangling and faultfinding, anger arises where opinions conflict. Thus it is, ‘when a person of superior propriety takes action and no one responds, he pushes up his sleeves and leads them to it’” (Wang 121).
In other words, forcing people to be benevolent only teaches them how to force other people to be benevolent. They don’t know how to cultivate the rainbow of experience needed to navigate the wild unpredictability of the Universe, much less teach someone else how to do it.
extra credit:
Lao Tsu says if we want to find out what virtue isn’t, define it, and we’ll know exactly that (everything that falls outside the definition).
So instead of running around pruning the variety out of life, Lao Tsu advises us to focus on the fruit of virtue rather than its beautiful labels (the flowers).
For instance, what is benevolence? Does it matter? Just be benevolent, and leave people alone. Because defining benevolence is not true benevolence. Only being benevolent is true benevolence.
-TB
works cited
1“Confucianism.” Wikipedia, Jan 17, 2022. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confucianism.
3“Ren (Confucianism).” Wikipedia, Jan 22, 2022). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren_(Confucianism).
