Other Laozi Parallels in the Hanfeizi - Sino-Platonic Papers

Tae Hyun KIM, “Other Laozi Parallels in the Hanfeizi”
Sino-Platonic Papers, 199 (March 2010)
considering that “huo” was used twice repeatedly, and that in the parallels of YL, MWD, and GD,
the word “zui” was written, this could indicate that the JL author had been mistaken. However,
while the JL used the term “yuli” 欲利, the YL, MWD, GD said “yude” 欲得, which is different
in meaning. Two consecutive differences between the JL and the YL in the same line, 5-10, can
hardly be seen as ordinary mistakes, especially when we assume that they have the same author
and are from the same Laozi PL. 70
Another difference between the two chapters is from JL 5-11: While the JL did not
mention the sentence at all, the YL referred to and commented on it. The reason the JL did not
state the concluding concept “knowing satisfaction” (zhizhu 知足), which might require more
sophisticated commentary or explanation, could be that the Laozi PL had not included the line.
As I will discuss, the way in which the author of the JL commented on and explained the Laozi
seems detailed and not insincere. Concerning the author’s way of commenting on the text, the
exclusion raises a possibility that the line on which it is necessary to add commentaries was not
included in his edition. In contrast, the YL did refer to the line.
In addition, it is necessary to check textual differences in the JL 10. In contrast to the
quotations of JL 10-2, which do not say “what is established” 善建, “what is embraced” 善抱
and “descendants” 子孫, those of the YL do mention them. Although those terms are not clear in
meaning, the author of the JL did not quote and explain them. In the case of the YL, this line is
quite similar to that of the MWD or GD, but in order to emphasize its meaning, the author added
the words “from generation to generation” 世世, which are not shown in any extant edition. Also,
except JL 10-2 (=YL 2-2), the YL does not mention any other lines. This typically shows that the
quotations of the YL are fragmented in nature.
Besides those textual differences, it should not be underestimated that the two chapters
are based on substantially distinct literary forms: while one is mainly explanatory and
demonstrative, the other is anecdotal and figurative. Like the clear distinction in literary forms
between the “Xiao Yao You” 逍遙遊 and the “Qi Wu Lun” 齊物論 of the Inner Zhuangzi, each
70
Ikeda Tomohisa understands this difference as evidence to prove that the parallels went through some textual
editing process, for the word replacement from ‘yuli’ to ‘yude’ seems to have been intended for constituting a serial
rhyme with other words like keyu 可欲 and zhizhu 知足. See Ikeda 2009, 73–76.
48