论老子之“道”非“有”非“无”亦非二者之统一

On Lao Tzu's "Tao" Meaning neither "Yu" nor "Wu" nor the Unity of Both

本文认为,人们对老子的“道”及其“有”“无”三概念之间的关系迄今还存在误解,有进一步澄清的必要。《老子》中的“道”有两个维度,一指向“存在”,即超验、终极、本真的存在;一指向“应为”,即现实世界中万物应遵循的规律。而其“有”“无”都只指向可感的经验世界,与“道”并非同质的概念。因此,从概念上来说,“道”非“有”非“无”,亦非二者的统一。

This thesis holds that there're misunderstandings about the relation between Lzo Tzu's concept of 'Tao' and his concepts of 'yu' and 'wu' and that this needs clarification. In Lao Tzu, the meanings of 'Tao' include two dimensions, one of which points to the 'being' and the other of which to 'ought-doing'. The former means the transcendental, ultimate and authentic being and the latter means laws obeyed by things, while, in Lao Tzu, the two concepts of 'yu' and 'wu' are not used transcendentally and only point to the sensible, emperical world and so are heterogeneous to the one of 'Tao' , so the 'Tao' neither can be called 'yu' nor 'wu', nor the unity of both from the concept.