【正文】 hich does not exist to exist. The (illusions of) assuming something which does not exist to exist could not be fathomed even by the divine Yu:。 how much less could we?For speech is not mere blowing of breath. It is intended to say some thing, only what it is intended to say cannot yet be determined. Is there speech indeed, or is there not? Can we, or can we not, distinguish it from the chirping of young birds?How can Tao be obscured so that there should be a distinction of true and false? How can speech be so obscured that there should be a distinction of right and wrong? {10} Where can you go and find Tao not to exist? Where can you go and find that words cannot be proved? Tao is obscured by our inadequate understanding, and words are obscured by flowery expressions. Hence the affirmations and denials of the Confucian and Motsean {11} schools, each denying what the other affirms and affirming what the other denies. Each denying what the other affirms and affirming what the other denies brings us only into confusion.There is nothing which is not this。 there is nothing which is not that. What cannot be seen by what (the other person) can be known by myself. Hence I say, this emanates from that。 that also derives from this. This is the theory of the interdependence of this and that (relativity of standards).Nevertheless, life arises from death, and vice versa. Possibility arises from impossibility, and vice versa. Affirmation is based upon denial, and vice versa. Which being the case, the true sage rejects all distinctions and takes his refuge in Heaven (Nature). For one may base it on this, yet this is also that and that is also this. This also has its 39。right39。 and 39。wrong39。, and that also has its 39。right39。 and 39。wrong.39。 Does then the distinction between this and that really exist or not? When this (subjective) and that (objective) are both without their correlates, that is the very 39。Axis of Tao.39。 And when that Axis passes through the center at which all Infinities converge, affirmations and denials alike blend into the infinite One. Hence it is said that there is nothing like using the Light.To take a finger in illustration of a finger not being a finger is not so good as to take something which is not a finger to illustrate that a finger is not a finger. To take a horse in illustration of a horse not being a horse is not so good as to take something which is not a horse to illustrate that a horse is not a horse {12}. So with the universe which is but a finger, but a horse. The possible is possible: the impossible is impossible. Tao operates, and the given results follow。 things receive names and are said to be what they are. Why are they so? They are said to be so! Why are they not so? They are said to be not so! Things are so by themselves and have possibilities by themselves. There is nothing which is not so and there is nothing which may not bee so.Therefore take, for instance, a twig and a pillar, or the ugly person and the great beauty, and all the strange and monstrous transformations. These are all levelled together by Tao. Division is the same as creation。 creation is the same as destruction. There is no such thing as creation or destruction, for these conditions are again levelled together into One.Only the truly intelligent understand this principle of the levelling of all things into One. They discard the distinctions and take refuge in the mon and ordinary things. The mon and ordinary things serve certain functions and therefore retain the wholeness of nature. From this wholeness, one prehends, and from prehension, one to the Tao. There it stops. To stop without knowing how it stops this is Tao.But to wear out one39。s intellect in an obstinate adherence to the individuality of things, not recognizing the fact that all things are One, that is called Three in the Morning. What is Three in the Morning? A keeper of monkeys said with regard to their rations of nuts that each monkey was to have three in the morning and four at night. At this the monkeys were very angry. Then the keeper said they might have four in the morning and three at night, with which arrangement they were all well pleased. The actual number of nuts remained the same, but there was a difference owing to (subjective evaluations of) likes and dislikes. It also derives from this (principle of subjectivity). Wherefore the true Sage brings all the contraries together and rests in the natural Balance of Heaven. This is called (the principle of following) two courses (at once).The knowledge of the men of old had a limit. When was the limit? It extended back to a period when matter did not exist. That was the extreme point to which their knowledge reached. The second period was that of matter, but of matter unconditioned (undefined). The third epoch saw matter conditioned (defined), but judgments of true and false were still unknown. When these appeared, Tao began to decline. And with the decline of Tao, individual bias (subjectivity) arose.Besides, did Tao really rise and decline? {13} In the world of (apparent) rise and decline, the famous musician Chao Wen did play the string instrument。 but in respect to the world without rise and decline, Chao Wen did not play the string instrument. When Chao Wen stopped playing the string instrument, Shih K39。uang (the music master) laid down his drumstick (for keeping time), and Hueitse (the sophist) stopped arguing, they all understood the approach of Tao. These people are the best in their arts, and therefore known to posterity. They each loved his art, and wanted to excel in his own line. And because they loved their arts, they wanted to make them known to others. But they were trying to teach what (in its nature) could not be known. Consequently Hueitse ended in the obscure discussions of the hard and white。 and Chao Wen39。s son tried to learn to play the stringed instrument all his life and failed. If this may be called succes