Bao Pu

Laozi 55

1 含德之厚者比於赤子。
2 蜂蠆虺蛇不螫，
3 猛獸不據，攫鳥不摶。
4 骨弱筋柔而握固。
5 未知牝牡之合而全作，
6 精之至也。
7 終日號而不嗄，
8 和之至也。

1 One who harbours De’s fullness can be compared with a newborn infant.
2 Wasps, scorpions and poisonous snakes do not sting or bite it,
3 Fierce beasts do not seize it, nor do birds of prey pounce upon it.
4 Its bones are fragile and muscles are soft, yet its grasp is firm.
5 It does not know about the sexual union of male and female, and yet it can be aroused,
6 Such is the height of its potent essence (virility).
7 It can cry a whole day and yet does not get hoarse,
8 Such is the height of its harmony.

Lines two and three seem to be hyperbole, intending to suggest the pacifying “power” an infant can possess. In the Zuozhuan, De is said to “pacify, comfort” (Sui 綏) the feudal lords, “comfort” (Fu 撫) the people and “harmonize” (He 和) the people. The infant does this, not by “dispensing benefits” (Shi Hui 施惠), but by it’s demeanour of non-contention and calm (and innocence). Or, I am wondering, can two and three be referring back to “the one who harbours De’s fullness” rather than the infant? If he or she can be like an infant, described next (lines 4 to 8), they will have a pacifying power.

Here’s an important passage from the Guanzi:
德者，道之舍。物得以生，生知得以職道之精。故德者得也。得也者，其謂所得以然也。以無為之謂道，舍之之謂德，故道之與德無閒，故言之者不別也。閒之理者，謂其所以舍也。

Allyn Rickett translates:
“Power is a dwelling of the Way. Things must obtain it in order to live. The living must know how to obtain it in order to grasp the essence of the Way. Therefore, Power is obtainment, and obtainment refers to obtaining the means for things to be what they are. When nonassertive, we call it ‘the Way.’ When dwelling in things, we call it ‘the Power.’ Therefore, the Way and Power cannot be separated, and so those who talk about them treat them as the same. The reason for distinguishing between them is to indicate that in which the Way dwells.” (Rickett p. 77)
– Note: Rickett follows Guo Moruo in emending 其謂所得以然也 to 謂得其所以然也 and follows others in deleting the “以” in 以無為之謂道”.”

Harold Roth translates:
“Inner Power is the lodging place of the Way. Things attain it and are thereby born. The living attain it and thereby understand the vital essence of the Way. Therefore ‘Inner Power’ is to attain. ‘To attain’ means to attain the means by which things are so. It is what does not act that is called the Way. It is what lodges (the Way), that is called Inner Power. Therefore, there is no gap between the Way and Inner Power. Therefore to speak of them is not to separate them. That there is no gap between them addresses how Inner Power lodges the Way.” Harold Roth (Sources of Chinese Tradition p. 262)

There’s a few differences. I’m unsure about the translation of a few things, for example “It is what lodges (the Way), that is called Inner Power” (舍之之謂德). Does anyone reading this (if there is anyone), have any comments?

Note: She 舍 a dwelling, abode; to dwell, to lodge, to rest also is used in the Guanzi to refer to the heart-mind, which needs to be kept clean.