these eight words appear in the forty-eighth chapter of Laozi in this edition, and its text says: to learn more and more is to lose the Tao. Damage and damage, so that inaction, inaction and everything. As far as the context is concerned, Lao Tzu does not take "losing the day for Tao" as a bad thing, but thinks that this is the way to the Tao. It is quite different from the above understanding. What Lao Tzu meant was that the way for Tao is different from that for learning. For learning, it is necessary to gain every day, while for Tao, it is necessary to lose every day until it loses to inaction. At this time, it is all for nothing. It's a philosophical proposition to be damaged for the sake of Tao, not to say that it is damaged at all. The explanation of "increasing learning" in the old book Laozi's Annotation written by Kawakami is: "Learning is also the study of politics, religion, etiquette and music. Increasingly, the erotic decoration is getting more and more. " The explanation of "losing the sun for Tao" is: "Tao is the way of nature." Those who lose in the day, lust and decoration in the day to eliminate the loss. " According to his explanation, what gains and loses is not "learning" and "Tao" itself, but "lust decoration". Modern Zhu Qianzhi's "Lao Zi's Interpretation" defines learning here as learning ceremony, and the scope is even smaller. Zhu also quotes "Zhuangzi? Zhibei? ""Rituals are the first to be chaotic. Therefore, it is said that the Tao will lose its day (Zhonghua Book Company, 198, p. 124). Chen Guying's Notes and Comments on Laozi said: "Learning for learning refers to the knowledge activity of exploring foreign things. The' learning' here is narrow in scope and only refers to the pursuit of benevolence, righteousness, wisdom and etiquette. This knowledge can increase people's knowledge and ingenuity. " "Being the Tao is the Tao to understand the undifferentiated state of things through thinking or experience. The' Tao' here refers to the' Tao' of nature and the' Tao' of inaction. " (Zhonghua Book Company, 1984 edition, 25 pages) The solution is the closest to He Gonggong. Zhang Rusong's Interpretation of Laozi said: "This annotation (On the River) is quite to the point, and it really reveals the essence of' learning' and' Taoism'", which shows the gradual deviation between etiquette and Taoism in the historical development process (Qilu Bookstore, 1989, pp. 311-313). Gao Ming's Annotation on Lao Zi's Silk Script is very convinced of the explanation given by Hegong, saying, "Its truth is true. "for learning" refers to studying knowledge, and knowledge is becoming more and more profound over the years. Smell the Tao (the second edition of the silk book is the Tao, but the second edition of Laozi in Guodian Bamboo Slips is still the Tao, and it seems that it is still the Tao-the guide)' Relying on self-cultivation, it requires a quiet view, emptiness and inaction, ignorance and no desire, so it is self-destructive and simple. " (Zhonghua Book Company, 1996, page 54) Although the understanding of "increasingly learning" is broader than that of Shanghe Gong, the theme is the same. Xu Kangsheng's Annotation, Translation and Research on Silk Book Laozi understands "learning" as "specific knowledge (mainly referring to learning benevolence, learning righteousness, learning ceremony and learning culture, etc.)" (Zhejiang People's Publishing House, 1985, 2 pages), which is equally broad. [Wei] The second part of Wang Bi's Notes on Laozi interprets "learning day by day" as "doing what you can to benefit from what you have learned." Interpret "it's a loss for the Tao and the sun" as "the desire to fight against nothingness." Obviously, the understanding of learning is broader, including all knowledge and skills. However, it is also more clear that learning and Tao are two categories. The way to be a scholar is to gain more benefits every day, while the way to be a Tao is to lose more. That is, Ren Jiyu said, "(Lao Zi) points out that there should be different ways to know the general law and individual things" (see Lao Zi's Philosophical Discussions, quoted from Chen Guying's Lao Zi's Notes and Comments). It doesn't mean that if you read too much, your Daoism will be impaired. Therefore, [Qing] Zhang Erqi wrote "A Brief Introduction to Laozi" and said: "For scholars to seek knowledge, they want it increasingly; Those who do the Tao are returning to their roots, so they want their daily losses. Those who are damaged, do not want to go, and do not forget without reason. Loss and loss, so that nothing is done, and then it fits with the Tao. If you do nothing for the Tao, you can pay for things, and you should do everything for nothing. " [Qing] Xu Dachun wrote "Tao? Under the volume of Jing Zhu, it is also said: "Being widely read and widely seen means learning, and learning lies outside, so it is necessary to benefit from learning every day. The emptiness is called Tao, and the Tao lies inside, so it will be cut down every day. " The word "zhe" is found in the second edition of Laozi on Guodian bamboo slips and the second edition of Laozi on Mawangdui silk, and it is also found in Fu Yiben and Fan Yingyuan. The meaning of the word "zhe" is obvious. There will be no misunderstanding like the above. The phrase "increasing for learning, losing for Tao" is not due to the relationship between results, nor is it that "increasing for learning" leads to "losing for Tao", but the relationship of coexistence and opposition, which means that scholars and Tao-seekers have opposite ways. If "learning" is interpreted in the broadest sense, it is quite clear in Wu Linbo's New Interpretation of Laozi: "Learning is contrary to Taoism. Seek wisdom for learning, and increase' benefit' for' day', then it is more but not refined, and it is a mere sham; Seeking true knowledge for the Tao and subtracting' loss' from' day' are few but fine. " (Jinghua Publishing House, 1997 edition, page 113) Ren Jiyu's Laozi's New Translation is very straightforward: "Engaged in learning, [knowledge] increases day by day, engaged in' Tao', [knowledge] decreases day by day." (Shanghai Ancient Books Publishing House, 1985 edition, 163 pages). Although Ren Shi's evaluation of Laozi's philosophy is not universally accepted by the academic circles, his translation is generally correct. Laozi's New Translation was an extremely popular book in those days, and everyone who came into contact with Laozi knew it, and the above author didn't seem to take it to heart. It seems that books should be read carefully, not too much. The ancients also unified these two sentences to understand. Such as [Song] Ye Daqing wrote "Archaeological Query" Volume 4 by "Zhuangzi? The Great Master, Yan Hui forgot something and understood Lao Tzu's meaning that "learning is getting worse, and Tao is getting worse". Zhuangzi? The Great Master said that Yan Hui learned to gain benefits, gained benefits to forget benevolence and righteousness, then gained benefits to forget rites and music, and gained benefits until he forgot. Sitting and forgetting is the origin of "falling off the branches, being smart, leaving the shape to know, and being the same as Datong". Even Confucius should learn from him. Ye Daqing said: "Looking at this chapter, the old man's words are half-thought." Cover the old man's words as a meaning. And where do you see it for learning? Taking it as a way is also a daily loss. Learning is a place where the Tao is damaged day by day, such as Yan Zi's forgetting benevolence and righteousness, etiquette and music, and even sitting and forgetting. Yangzi said,' Yanzi takes retreat as progress.' What does it know about this? "It is believed that the benefit of learning is the loss of Tao, and every gain of Yan Hui's learning is a loss of Tao, and every loss is a step closer to the origin of Tao. After Yan Hui's forgotten story, Zhuang Zi Fa Wei, a close friend of Zhong Tai's, also affirmed the meaning of these two sentences in Laozi: "It is beneficial to learn words; To speak with the Tao is to call it a loss. Loss and gain are not two things. Guo Zixuan's remark that "loss is good" can be described as knowing what to say. " (Shanghai Ancient Books, 22 edition, page 164) As for why the order is forgetting benevolence and righteousness, forgetting etiquette and music, and forgetting to sit, the book makes it very clear. In the Song Dynasty, Li Gang wrote "Liang Xi Ji" Volume 142 "Learning Proverbs": "Learning the Tao accumulates in the bow. People who don't learn are blind and deaf. Every hundred gentlemen learn and then know less. What is more valuable than jade unless it is finished? Learning is growing, and the Tao is losing. Benefit is the loss of capital, and learning is the foundation. If you haven't learned anything, why not? A naked child can crawl, but he can run. Tell your son clearly and learn to get together. " It is emphasized that there is a basis for the loss and the Tao after learning. These, I can only see as philosophical interpretation, not linguistic exegesis. This philosophical understanding is also quite different from the above understanding. Today, due to some scholars' lack of knowledge in preliminary preparation, or their arrogance, this sentence has some strange explanations. For example, Yin Zhenhuan's "Analysis of Laozi in Chu Bamboo Slips" must say that the word "scholar's daily loss" in Guodian Chu Bamboo Slips B does not take off the word "for", and this paragraph is translated as: "The number of scholars increases day by day, [the desire for fame and hypocrisy will also increase and spread], so the number of people who follow the avenue will decrease day by day, decrease and then decrease, and they will always return to selflessness, and they will do everything. (Zhonghua Book Company, 21 edition, pages 277-278) is outrageous, and I know it from the above, so it goes without saying. Zhang Jiliang's Lao Dan Laozi Taishixian Tao Te Ching says: "Scholar" refers to those who study for Tao, and the sentence of "for Tao" is interpreted as "seeking truth and analyzing it every day", which is translated as "those who study gain knowledge every day, and those who seek truth and materials are analyzed every day. Analysis and re-analysis, so that there is no subjective component. Without a little subjective element, nothing can't be done. " (Qilu Bookstore, 21, pp. 78 and 212) Where does "loss" come from? Is "inaction" "nothing subjective"? This kind of understanding is completely divorced from language. Nowadays, some unconventional and unconventional explanations are similar to this, which is not enough for the law.
are you satisfied with my answer? Hope to adopt, thank you!