Master Archaeologist

Beside this goose-shaped pendant, there is also a black pendant wrapped in mud.

It seems that it was originally supposed to be a component connected with a rope to the gauntlet.

After extracting the pendant, Chen Han set his sights on the black pendant.

He could tell that this round pendant was not originally black.

It's just that the pendant is covered with a thick layer of silt.

Like picking out a glass bead, Chen Han picked the mount out of the coffin, and then wiped it a little to remove the mud, revealing its true colors.

"Beautiful!"

"This is a crystal pendant!"

It turned out that this black lacquered round pendant is a crystal pendant that is crystal clear and has a hole through it!

This pendant is oval, about the size of the top of the thumb, with a hole in the middle for tying a rope.

It looks about the same as the oval beads on modern bracelets.

But this crystal pendant is very beautiful, the whole body is transparent, and the texture has some amber texture.

For the BC period, such a crystal pendant can be said to be a rare treasure.

Because this thing cannot be made artificially, it can only be found in natural crystal mines.

And it has to be the best piece of transparent ore in the crystal mine to make such a pendant.

This pendant was originally supposed to be tied under the butterfly-shaped pendant, echoing up and down, making it even more luxurious!

Only a jade pendant of the imperial level is worthy of such a pendant!

"Hey, this is the finest Hetian sheep fat jade!"

"Milk white, the best Hetian jade material!"

(It's too late, the modification will be completed within 10 minutes.)
In the existing Tao Te Ching, the phrase "Tao can be said, very Tao." is very famous.

However, the silk scripts and bamboo scripts released in Mawangdui archaeologically directly overturned the current version that has been handed down for a long time.

First of all, Mawangdui's "Laozi" silk script has two volumes, A and B. It is not known whether there is a title in the first volume, and the title of "Tao" is at the end of the article in the second volume.

"De" is supplemented according to "Tao", and "Jing" is added by later generations, so the titles of "Tao Jing" and "De Jing" are made by later generations. When Lao Tzu wrote the book, there was no "Tao Te Ching". "The title of the book.

Then, among them, there are differences between the silk script "Lao Tzu" and the current version of "Lao Tzu".

The first sentence of the current version is "Tao can be Tao, it is very Tao; name can be named, it is very famous", while the silk script version is "Tao, can be Tao, not permanent Tao. Name, can be named, not permanent name."

There is a well-known saying in Chapter 19 of the popular version of "Tao Te Ching": "If you abandon benevolence and righteousness, the people will return to filial piety and kindness."

This is also regarded as a typical conclusion of Lao Tzu's denial of Confucian benevolence and righteousness, but in Guodian's "Tao Te Ching", this sentence is "Abandon falsehood and worry, and the people will restore Jizi".

The current version of "Lao Tzu" 78 chapters is written like this:
Nothing in the world is weaker than water, but nothing can overcome the strong, because nothing is easy to overcome.The weak overcomes the strong, and the soft overcomes the strong. No one in the world knows or can do it.Therefore, the sage said: "If you accept the dirt of the country, you are called the master of the country; if you receive the bad luck of the country, you are called the king of the world."

However, in the Mawangdui silk book "Laozi" (version A) it is:

There is nothing in the world that is weaker than water, but nothing can overcome the strong because it is impossible to change.Water is stronger than rigidity, and weak is stronger than strong.There is no one in the world who knows, but no one can do it.Therefore, the words of the sages say: "Receiving the criticism of the state is called the master of the country; receiving the ominousness of the state is the king of the world."

This passage uses the properties of water to motivate rulers.

It is not difficult to see that the "weakness" in Laozi's heart is full of strength and vitality.

However, the popular version of the "Tao Te Ching" makes people feel that "weakness" is just another name for "inaction" and "indisputable".

In the original text, "No one can win against the strong" even bluntly stated that although water seems to be "weak", it has the essence of "strengthening the strong" and invincible. The "weakness" of water here is relatively active and aggressive.

In the current version, "Water prevails over rigidity, and weakness prevails over strength" to "Weakness prevails over strength, and softness prevails over rigidity", so that the aggressiveness of water disappears, and the transformation of the body makes the subject and the object out of position.

The "weak" water with active aggressiveness is only left with the "softness" of being passively beaten. The epistemological element replaces the methodology, so that the benefits of "inaction" and "indisputable" can be better promoted. There are many other themes.

Obviously, this is Lao Tzu's theory, which has been modified in the dissemination of later generations, weakening the strong meaning in Lao Tzu's theory, and strengthening Lao Tzu's arguments of "doing nothing" and "indisputable".

This is undoubtedly a way to weaken Laozi's theory, and it is obviously the result of some orthodox disputes.

It is even possible that some scholars of Confucianism deliberately changed it in this way, so that the spread of Confucianism can be strengthened.

After all, Laozi himself "does not fight" and "does nothing", so you who learn Laozi's theory, are you still ashamed to argue with Confucianism?

Among them, the most excessive revision is in Chapter 14 of the current version of the "Tao Te Ching":

"Adhering to the way of the past and using it to control the existence of the present, knowing the beginning of the past is called the discipline of the Tao."

In the Mawangdui Han tomb silk book, this sentence is:
"Practice the way of the present, use it to control the existence of the present, and be able to know the beginning of the past, this is called the discipline of the Tao."

Don't look at just changing a word, but the meaning of the whole paragraph has completely changed.

This is a typical word difference.

The current version emphasizes following the ancient law to govern the present, which is what the ancients often said "the law of the ancestors cannot be changed", and the usual "law of the ancestors" refers to Zhou rituals.

But Lao Tzu believes that the current society naturally needs to seek the current law to govern, to use the current way and to control the current existence.

It can be seen that there are completely different concepts between the ancient version and the present version.

As we all know, Confucius' ambition is to revive the so-called three-generation system and restore the well field system.

To put it simply, Confucius was a person who respected the ancients very much. He felt that all the decisions and systems formulated by his ancestors were correct, and that future generations should not change them, but should restore the ancient systems.

This is also the most important concept of later Confucianism.

This is why the so-called "laws of the ancestors cannot be changed", and since the Han Dynasty, it has been difficult for all dynasties to undergo reforms like the Warring States Period.

It should be said that the Warring States Reform was due to the chaotic war.

Then during the Northern and Southern Dynasties, the Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms, and even the Song Dynasty, the threats faced by all countries were not great?
Even the threats they face are even more serious than those in the Warring States Period!
But the Confucianists who dominated the government at that time never thought about reforming the law, let alone reforming. They still held the same old ways, even if they died.

It can be seen how much Confucianism is obsessed with maintaining the so-called "traditional system".

Of course, Lao Tzu doesn't like this, but Lao Tzu died a long time ago, so people can delete and modify his writings at will.

At that time, Confucianism, which controlled the "orthodoxy" of China, naturally had the power of academic interpretation.

Then they made Lao Tzu's theory conform to the Confucian philosophy.

In such cases, in the short 5000-word "Tao Te Ching", there are still many, all of which are changed by one word, and then the meaning is completely different.

Which of the two versions is more reliable?
It is undoubtedly an old version.