Translated Text
The man of superior virtue is not (conscious of) his virtue,
And in this way, he really possesses virtue.
The man of inferior virtue never loses (sight of) his virtue,
And in this way he loses his virtue.
The man of superior virtue takes no action, but has no ulterior motive to do so.
The man of superior humanity takes action, but has no ulterior motive to do so.
The man of superior righteousness takes action, and has an ulterior motive to do so.
The man of superior propriety takes action,
And when people do not respond to it, he will stretch his arms and force it on them.
Therefore, only when Dao is lost does the doctrine of virtue arise.
When virtue is lost, only then does the doctrine of humanity arise.
When humanity is lost, only then does the doctrine of righteousness arise.
When righteousness is lost, only then does the doctrine of propriety arise.
Now, propriety is a superficial expression of loyalty and faithfulness, and the beginning of disorder.
Those who are the first to know have the flowers (appearance) of Dao but are the beginning of ignorance.
For this reason the great man dwells in the thick (substantial), and does not rest with the thin (superficial).
He dwells in the fruit (reality), and does not rest with the flower (appearance).
Therefore, he rejects the one, and accepts the other.
Analysis
In this chapter, Laozi discusses the ways in which moral principles influence the evolution of society. In particular, he argues that conscious moral education, based on the tenets of Confucianism such as Humanity (Ren), Righteousness (Yi), and Propriety (Li), causes the decline of Dao and the corruption of social order.
Chapter 38 begins with:
The man of superior virtue (De) is not (conscious of) his virtue (De),
And in this way he really possesses virtue.
The man of inferior virtue (De) never loses (sight of) his virtue (De),
And in this way he loses his virtue.
What does Laozi mean when he says a virtuous man is unaware of his own ‘virtue’? How can one make sense of such an abstruse statement? First of all, note that the word ‘virtue’ was directly translated from the Chinese character ‘De (德)’. However, from a linguistic perspective, there was a subtle difference (which has often been ignored) between ‘De‘ and virtue in ancient times. While ‘virtue’ means high moral standards, ‘De‘ was more a less a neutral term: it refers to moral standards that can be evaluated (as good or bad). In ancient Chinese society, moral standards are evaluated based on what individuals got for the society (wealth, possessions, reputations, etc.), which ultimately boils down to what individuals got for themselves since there was very little distinction between individuals and a collective at that time. This is why in the Chinese language, ‘De’ is sometimes used as a homonym (德=得)[1].
We can now go back and unpack the text. It is clear that ‘the man of superior virtue’ refers to a ruler with high moral standards (and conversely, ‘the man of inferior virtue’ refers to a ruler who has low moral standards). The subsequent ‘De’ is used as a homonym, meaning ‘to get’. Therefore, a ruler who has high moral standards is not conscious of what he gets for himself, so he is indeed virtuous. However, a ruler who has low moral standards pays too much attention to what he gets for himself (instead of for his people), so he loses his status (of being virtuous).
As the distinction between a virtuous ruler and a non-virtuous ruler is recognized, the remainder of the chapter becomes rather straightforward. Next, Laozi says,
The man of superior virtue takes no action, but has no ulterior motive to do so.
The man of superior humanity takes action, but has no ulterior motive to do so.
The man of superior righteousness takes action, and has an ulterior motive to do so.
The man of superior propriety takes action,
And when people do not respond to it, he will stretch his arms and force it on them.
In this part of the chapter, Laozi argues that as civilization progresses, a ruler who adopts the Confucian moral teaching would no longer have his political principle based on high moral standards. He would rule in terms of Humanity first, then shift to Righteousness, and eventually to Propriety. As a result, his political system is in continuous moral degeneration.
Laozi argues that the ruler in a political system based on high moral standards takes no action and has no ulterior motive because he has no personal desire to interfere with social development. However, a political system based on Humanity requires the ruler to take action because it aims for moral cultivation. For example, the ruler may have to introduce policies such as three years of moaning period for the death of parents in order to ‘morally’ transform his subjects. However, such a ruler still places the benefits of his people as the priority, so he is said to have no ulterior motive. On the other hand, a political system based on Righteousness implies that the ruler would move on to further interfere with society by establishing more rules on behavior and conduct. For example, he would ask his subject to kneel in front of him to show respect. However, his ulterior motive might be to fulfill his vanity and personal desire. Eventually, the ruler becomes morally corrupted and starts to rule in terms of Propriety by imposing rigid laws and behavioral codes on his people in order to exploit them. As a result, he inevitably faces opposition from his people, so he would have to use forces and punishments to achieve his goal.
Next, Laozi summarises his argument:
Therefore, only when Dao is lost does the doctrine of virtue arise.
When virtue is lost, only then does the doctrine of humanity arise.
When humanity is lost, only then does the doctrine of righteousness arise.
When righteousness is lost, only then does the doctrine of propriety arise.
This part can be easily understood as a repetition of Laozi’s previous statements.
Last, Laozi says,
Now, propriety is a superficial expression of loyalty and faithfulness, and the beginning of disorder.
Those who are the first to know have the flowers (appearance) of Dao but are the beginning of ignorance.
For this reason the great man dwells in the thick (substantial), and does not rest with the thin (superficial).
He dwells in the fruit (reality), and does not rest with the flower (appearance).
‘Those who are the first to know’ is translated from ‘前识者’. In the context of the text, it means ‘the political system prior to the introduction of the later’, which refers to Humanity (Ren). So by the end of chapter 38, Laozi reaches an important conclusion: we need to recognize that although Humanity is similar to Virtue in terms of its form, it would inevitably lead to chaos of disorder. Therefore, the ruler should abandon Confucian teachings and adhere to the Daoist teaching of Virtue.
To sum up, in chapter 38 of Daodejing, Laozi argues that when the ruler rules in accordance with Dao, his original nature is unspoiled and he is removed from personal desires, so he is unconsciously good. The decline of virtues comes with the development of conscious moral knowledge, which leads to the moral deterioration of the ruler and eventually causes hypocrisy and chaos among the people.
Notes
[1] This can be verified using a Chinese dictionary.
Original Text
上德不德，是以有德。下德不失德，是以無德。
上德無為而無以為；下德為之而有以為；上仁為之而無以為。上義為之而有以為。上禮為之而莫之應，則攘臂而扔之。
故失道而後德，失德而後仁，失仁而後義，失義而後禮；夫禮者，忠信之薄而亂之首。前識者，道之華，而愚之始。
是以大丈夫處其厚，不居其薄，處其實，不居其華，故去彼取此。