1 Methodological Preface: xin 信 and Believe/Belief
Xin
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the basic meaning of believe (v) is “to accept something as true, even in the absence of proof,” and from this derives also the meaning of belief (n) as “faith, religious belief.”4 In a Christian-theological sense, believe/belief defines a “relation a human being assumes with regard to god,”5 which is considered central to Christian religiosity.6 The Western semantics of believe contain a tension between the secular meaning of “believe that,” which poses a problematic statement and implies lack of knowledge because of lack of empirical evidence, and the concept of “believe in” as religious belief or faith, which implies an assertoric statement, a truth claim accepted in the absence of empirical proof.7
Another aspect of the historical semantic field of believe was emphasized by Michel de Certeau in an article entitled “What We Do When We Believe.” Exploring the ancient Indo-European origins of the word believe, Michel de Certeau pointed out three basic meanings of believe, namely “having confidence in someone or something,” “believing in reality or what one sees,” and “trusting in what is said.”8 His analysis shows that in all three meanings, “belief posits a relationship to something Other,” and “implies the support of the other, which stands for what we have to rely upon.”9 In this perspective, he has pointed out the contractual nature of belief:
… belief occurs between the recognition of an alterity and the establishment of a contract. It disappears if one of the two weakens. Belief no longer exists when difference is effaced by a process tending to equalize the partners and give them mutual mastery of the contract; it no longer exists when difference becomes excessive through a breach of the pact.10
The establishment of a contract presupposes loyalty on the side of the partners, and thus “the shadow of the believer and its opposite, the renegade or traitor, is already evident.”11 While de Certeau’s analysis concerns the ancient Indo-European roots of the Western context of the term, nevertheless, his findings offer us an interesting angle to look at the Chinese usage of xin, to which we will return at the end of this paper.
2 Delineating a Semantic Field: xin 信 as a Way Humans Can Relate to Dao
In order to compare a use of xin in Daoism with the Western conception of “belief in an ultimate or absolute being” (like belief in God) as a primary way to relate to this ultimate, the term that we would hypothetically construe as a parallel in early medieval Daoism would be xin dao
If belief is a way to relate to “God” or an “absolute being,” and if Dao can be considered such an absolute entity or being, then we could—still working hypothetically—construe xin dao
as a (primary) way to relate to Dao,
as an acceptance of a truth claim that cannot be proven by empirical bodily or cognitive experience or deliberation, and
as a correct way in opposition to an incorrect or evil way.
However, with regard to xin as a way to relate the human being to Dao (expressed as V+O), we need to first note that xin is not the only possible means. A far more common way to relate to Dao would be to “obtain” it, de dao
A search in the Daoist section of the Kanseki repository14 for different V+O combinations, which specify human action or attitude versus Dao, produces the following quantitative results:
Covering Daoist texts of all periods, these statistics indicate that of the various V+O (Dao) combinations that specify what humans do in relation to Dao, xin dao is the rarest. And one in three times the term appears as a negative, a ratio much higher than in other combinations.15
The next step is then to look if clusters of the term xin dao occur with a high frequency in specific texts.16 In fact, we can find clusters of the term xin dao in three texts: in the third-century Heavenly Master commentary to the Daode jing
Having thus located texts in which xin dao, the term whose semantic field hypothetically comes closest to the Western connotations of belief/believe-in as delineated above, occurs with a high frequency, I will now employ a close-reading approach in the following.
3 The Heavenly Masters
3.1 Xin 信 in the Laozi Commentaries and the Xiang’er Commentary
Although many conceive of the Laozi, or Daode jing, as a philosophical text, Daoists of various lineages or traditions throughout history have read and interpreted it as a guideline for religious practice. The term xin appears in the chapters 8, 17, 21, 23, 38, 49, 63, and 81 of the Laozi, but it does not appear in combination with the object Dao.
The best known early medieval commentaries to the Daode jing are the Wang Bi
Neither the Wang Bi commentary nor that of Heshang gong use the term xin dao; instead the most frequent combination of xin is the verb/adjective compound zhongxin
We can note at first glance that with regard to the different ways of relating to Dao as tabulated above, the relative frequency of de dao and xin dao is inverted here: While overall the quantitative search indicated de dao as the most frequent occurrence and xin dao as the rarest, in the Xiang’er commentary xin dao appears most frequently as a V+O combination that describes what humans do in relation to Dao.
To illustrate the usage of the term xin dao in the Xiang’er Commentary, I will present an excerpt from chapter 20:20
DDJ:
「人之所畏，不可不畏，莽其未央。」 “That which human beings fear, they cannot but fear—yet vast the number of those not yet ready.”Commentary:
道設生以賞善，設死以威惡，死是人之所畏也。 仙王士與俗人，同知畏死樂生，但所行異耳。俗人莽莽，未央脫死也。俗人雖畏死，端不信道，好為惡事，奈何未央脫死乎！仙士畏死，信道守誡，故與生合也。 21The Dao established life to reward the good and death to threaten the evil. Death is something that all humans fear. Transcendent kings and nobles, like common people, know fear of death and delight in life. It is just that their actions differ. Ordinary people are “vast in number” and “not yet ready” to escape death. Although they fear death, they still do not xin*22 DAO, but delight in evil. Is it any wonder that they are not ready to escape death? Transcendent nobles fear death but they xin*23 Dao, maintaining its precepts and thus joining with life.
Here, xin is a way humans should relate to Dao. Xin dao is associated with keeping precepts, with life, and with noble transcendents; and it is juxtaposed with acting in evil ways, death, and common people. The same associations are elaborated also in other parts of the commentary where the term xin dao occurs, in particular chapter 21.
The association of xin dao with following specific regulations becomes even more pronounced in a slightly later Heavenly Master text, the Dadao jialingjie
3.2 Xin 信 in the Dadao jialingjie 大道家令戒 25
The text begins with a description of Dao in its cosmic dimensions:
大道者，包囊天地，系養群生，御萬機者也。無形無像，混混沌沌，然生百千萬種，非人所能名。自天地以下，皆道所生殺也。
The great Dao is that which encompasses heaven and earth, is joined with and nourishes all forms of life, and controls the myriad initiatory mechanisms. Without shape or image, it is undifferentiated and yet spontaneously gives birth to the million species. Though it is something to which humans cannot put a name, from heaven and earth on down everything is born and dies26 through the Dao.27
Then follows a longer exposition of cosmogony, and after that a description of a (presumably current) situation of decay and insecurity. Lack of xin dao is named as the reason for the decay.
夏商周三代，轉見世利。秦始五溜，更相克害。有賊死者，萬億不可勝數。皆由不信其道。
The three eras—Xia, Shang, and Zhou—saw a turn to desire for worldly profit. Then the Inaugural Thearch of the Qin and the Five Hegemons attacked and injured one another and banditry arose. Millions died— more than can be counted. All of this occurred through not xin* this Dao.28
Next, the text offers a history of Daoism, where the personified Dao, Taishang Laojun, is a major actor wanting to save human lives.29 After bestowing the Dao on Gan Ji
This episode emphasizes reciprocity: Humans must xin dao in order to be saved by Dao, yet Dao also actively helps to produce the conditions that enable the relation or attitude of xin dao. Thus, in the passage above, when the barbarians were unable to xin Dao, Dao transformed into a visible shape to convert them.
Overall, in the context of the Xiang’er commentary and the slightly later Dadao jialingjie, the conceptual connotations of the term xin in the V+O phrase xin dao suggest a semantic overlap with some elements of the Western concept of belief, in as much as (1) xin is the primary way to establish a relation between humans and a higher, or ultimate, being, in our case Dao. Furthermore, (2) this ultimate being (Dao) is not knowable with empirical knowledge (it is “without shape or image”), wherefore xin must necessarily occur in absence of empirical proof. (3) Xin dao is further associated with obeying specific regulations for human behavior given by Dao; and (4) xin dao is a criterion for demarcation: People who do not xin dao are depicted as evil, greedy, socially low-standing, and adhering to other teachings, whereas xin dao is associated with “noble transcendents” and life.
However, this specific usage of xin as a primary way to relate to Dao, which in my opinion can be rendered as “believe in” because of the rather large semantic overlap with the connotations of the Western term, cannot be considered representative for all early medieval Daoism, as a look at the usage of the term xin in another early medieval Daoist text from a different environment documents.
4 Xin 信 in Ge Hong’s 葛洪 Baopuzi 抱朴子
Ge Hong (283–343), a prominent representative of the Jiangnan Daoist tradition, represents a different type of Daoism:33 that of the immortality seekers, whose methods were alchemical, physiological, sexual, and dietetic exercises transmitted in secret recipes.
The term xin dao appears in his book Baopuzi nine times out of 176 occurrences of the word xin, five of the nine occurrences being negative references to those who do not xin dao.34 In the four remaining instances, he uses the term as an attribute to xin
Using xin as a verb, Ge Hong mostly employs it in the negated form bu xin in the sense of “not believing that”36 something exists, because of a lack of empirical proof. Where the Xiang’er commentary states that a lack of visibility, that is, lack of empirical proof through the bodily senses, should not be a reason to slight Dao, and urges its reader to xin dao,37 Ge Hong seems to propose a very different approach to the issue:
Ge Hong, Baopuzi, j. 2: (13)
鬼神數為人間作光怪變異，又經典所載， 多鬼神之據，俗人尚不信天下之有神鬼，況乎仙人居高處遠，清濁異流，登遐遂往，不返於世，非得道者，安能見聞？而儒墨之家知此不可以訓，故終不言其有焉。俗人之不信，不亦宜乎？
Spirits and ghosts often produce strange phenomena and anomalies among humans, even the classics record many proofs of spirits and ghosts, [yet] the common people do not believe that (xin) there are ghosts and spirits in the world; how much less [will they believe in] immortals, who live in a high and remote place…. and never come back to this world; those who have not obtained the Dao, how could they see or hear them. And the Confucians and Mohists know that this cannot be taught, so they never speak about their existence. So is it not understandable that the common people do not believe in them?
The issue here is a belief in the existence of ghosts and immortals (“belief- that,” a problematic statement), not a question of establishing a relation to them. Ge Hong explains that immortals are not visible and audible for commoners, but only for people who have “obtained” Dao.38 The primary way to relate to Dao is therefore to “obtain” it (dedao
Thus, we find here a juxtaposition of common people who do not believe that (xin) spirits or immortals exist, because they cannot get empirical proof through their bodily senses, and those who have obtained the Dao and can get exactly that bodily sense-related proof, and thus know or see, presumably because obtaining Dao changes the human faculties of perception.39
Thus, while in the cited Heavenly Master texts xin dao implies relating to Dao as the highest deity (believe in Dao) and following specific rules, and demarcates life from death, good transcendent people from evil common people, in Ge Hong’s text the demarcation achieved by the term xin is between common people who do not believe that (bu xin) spirits and immortals exist because they cannot verify them with their own senses, and transcendents (immortals) who have obtained Dao and therefore can see that they exist. Or else, between people who do not trust (xin) in the specific Dao of alchemical methods, but opt for alternative “Daos” or methods of practice, and the alchemists. Dao in this context is not understood as a personal deity.
5 The Taishang Dongyuan shenzhou jing 太上洞淵神咒經
We find another cluster of the term xin dao in the Dongyuan shenzhou jing (DZ 335):40 Here the term xin occurs 132 times, and forty-two of them in the phrase xin dao, mostly in the first ten chapters,41 which are the earliest layer of this text. Twenty-nine of the forty-two occurrences are in the negative formulation “people who do not xin dao.” Apart from Dao, jing
This text originated at the end of the fourth century in the southern Jiangnan region, most probably from a sectarian movement.42 It presents an apocalyptic scenario, where the world is invaded by hordes of disease-bringing demons. The scripture promises that the demon kings, who supervise the marauding disease-bringing demons, will interfere and restrain their subordinated demons to protect those who xin dao and xin jing.43 The quantitatively almost equal occurrence of xin dao and xin jing shows that in this particular Daoist sect salvific power is ascribed not only to Dao as a personified deity, but also to the scriptures, which afford access to special divine protection for their legitimate owners.44
Taishang Dongyuan Shenzhou jing 1.21:
道言: … 蜀漢之中，有赤鬼三萬，唯殺人民，為人不信道 . Dao said: … In Sichuan (Shuhan) there were 30,000 red demons,45 all they did was kill the people; this is because the people did not xin dao.1.22:
道言: 庚辰之年，…，天下浩浩，無不畏也。小人相苦，貴人 無道。天下九十種病，病殺惡人。 …。當爾之時惡人多，多有不信道。受經者，其有受三洞者，大魔王等四十九億萬人悉來下護，助此法師耳。 Dao said: In the gengchen year … there will be a great flood in the world, nobody who does not fear. The small people treat each other harshly, the noble people have no Dao (morals), Heaven will send down 90 diseases, and the diseases will kill the bad people. … At that time the evil people who do not xin dao are many. Among those who receive the scriptures, there are those who receive the Sandong scriptures. The Great Demon kings, 49 billion of them, will all come down and protect them to help these dharma-teachers.
Taishang Dongyuan Shenzhou jing 1.2.:
明羅 46等曰: 世人積惡，不信道法。但聞有哭尸之音，不聞有仙歌之響。 Mingluo and others said: The people of the world accumulate evil, they do not xin in the teaching of Dao. This is why we only hear the sound of wailing corpses, but not the echo of the songs of the immortals.
Here we have again the motif of the earlier Xiang’er commentary: Those who do not xin dao act evilly and are associated with death (corpses).
These few examples shall suffice: We can see in this sectarian text again the association of the absence of xin dao or xin jing47 with death, illness, disaster, and decay. The people who do not xin dao/xin jing are evil, common, or worldly. In all cases, they are juxtaposed to people who xin dao/xin jing. The latter will be spared in the coming apocalypse because the all-powerful demon kings will protect those who have received the Sandong scriptures.48
6 Pledges of Gold and Silk: the Nominal Use of xin 信
The emphasis on the salvific powers of scripture in this text from the late Eastern Jin dynasty shall serve as a bridge to another important use of the term xin in early medieval Daoism: the nominal use of xin as a designation of pledges for scriptural transmission.49
Many Daoist textual lineages50 were esoteric, with ritual regulations covering the transmission of the scriptures from master to disciples. Scripture transmission rituals, in early Daoism and in particular in the alchemical tradition, required the adept to “swear a covenant (meng
The model for this covenant designated with the terms shi
Legge 1885, 112, emphasis mine, FA
諸侯使大夫問於諸侯曰聘，約信曰誓，蒞牲曰盟。 When one prince sends a great officer to ask about another, it is called ‘a message of friendly inquiry.’ When there is a binding to mutual faith, it is called ‘a solemn declaration.’ When they use a victim, it is called ‘a covenant.’
Just like the feudal lords in Zhou dynasty established a bond between their overlord and among each other, so did the adept when he received a scripture establish a bond between the deities that guarded the scripture, and with the Master that transmitted the scripture (Kohn 2003, 382). The ancient rituals for the covenant involved blood of a sacrificial victim (usually a white rooster), a practice we still find documented in scriptures of the alchemists tradition,54 and in Ge Hong’s Baopuzi.55 Early medieval Daoists, beginning with the Heavenly Masters, rejected blood sacrifices as a major demarcation of their own community from popular local religion as well as from the imperial religion.56 Thus the rituals which established the covenant between men and gods abolished blood sacrifices in favor of offerings of silk, metals, and other items, as for example this citation from the Shangqing scripture Dongzhen taishang feixing yu jing
凡受九真玄經者，皆先歃血累壇，剪髮立盟，為不宣不洩之信誓，
後聖以歃血犯生炁之傷，剪髮違膚毀之犯，謹以黃金代刺血之信，青柔之帛三十二尺當割髮之約。
All who wanted to receive the Jiuzhen xuanjing, before had to make a blood oath, establish an altar and cut their hair to establish a covenant (meng
Wushang biyao DZ 1138, 34, 13a57盟 ), as a pledge-oath (xinshi信誓 ) not to spread and divulge [the scripture]. The latter sage thought a blood oath would commit the violation of harming the rising (life-giving) qi, and cutting the hair would contravene by committing the crime of hurting the skin, he urges to take gold to replace the pledges (xin信 ) of pricking the hand for blood, and thirty-two feet of green soft bo-silk to replace the bond (yue約 ) of cutting the hair.
We can see in this paragraph the terminology of the ancient covenants associated with the ritual for scriptural transmission: meng
For example, the Dongxuan lingbao changye zhi fu jiuyou yugui mingzhenke
飛天神人曰受靈寳眞文十部妙經以金龍三枚投於水府及靈山所住宅中合三處爲學仙之信不投此三官拘人命籍求乞不達法依玉訣之文有違考属地官九都曹 . (37b)
The divinity flying in heaven said: In order to receive the Wondrous Scripture of the True Writ of the Lingbao in ten parts, take three figurines of golden dragons and throw them in water, in a numinous mountain and in the place you live, in these three places, this is the pledge (xin) for studying [the methods of] the immortals. If one does not throw these three, then the three officials will detain the person’s life records, and even imploring them after will not help. The method is according to the oral Jade instructions, those who violate this will be judged by the officials of the nine departments of the underworld.
飛天神人曰受靈寳眞文十部妙經法用上金五兩以盟五嶽爲寳經之信闕則犯慢經之科五嶽靈山不頌人學籍違者考属隂官曹 . (38a)
The divinity flying in heaven said: For the [ritual] method to receive the Wondrous Scripture of the True Writ of the Lingbao in ten parts use five liang of high quality gold as a pledge (xin) to treasure the scriptures. If these [pledges] are amiss then this violates and disregards the rules of the scripture, and the spirits of the five sacred mountains will not praise the person [as one who is] registered as a student [of the said scriptures]. Those who disobey will be judged by the underworld officials.
In the fifth century, the Daoist Lu Xiujing (
The practice was so pervasive that the important sixth century encyclopedic compilation Wushang biyao (DZ 1138) contains a lengthy section, entitled Faxinpin
當以文繒五方之綵各四十尺以關五帝爲告誓之信 (DZ 1138, 34, 7b) “One should take forty feet of patterned silk of the colors of the five directions as pledges (xin) for announcing the oath that the five emperors should receive,”or
法用上金五兩以盟五嶽爲寶經之信 (7b) “the [ritual] method is to use five liang (ca. 69.9 g) of high-quality gold to make a covenant with the [deities of the] five sacred mountains as a pledge (xin) for treasuring the scriptures.”Or else
凡受外國放品經弟子齎上金九兩襟文之繒三十六尺爲信 (15b) “All disciples who receive the Waiguofangpin jing give nine liang (ca. 125.82g) of high-quality gold and thirty-six feet of patterned silk60 as pledges (xin).”
These few examples shall suffice here; there are many more to be found in Wushang biyao and other early medieval Daoist texts.
The Wushang biyao also offers an interesting interpretation of the use of xin pledges:
天文祕重非信不寶故上聖以信效心無信則爲賤道無盟則爲輕寶 (7b) “The heavenly scriptures must be valued, if there are no pledges (xin) then they are not treasured. Therefore the highest sages take pledges (xin) to display [the truthfulness] of their mind-heart. If there are no pledges, then this is disdaining Dao, if there is no covenant then this is disesteeming the treasure.”
According to this last citation, the pledges (xin) are visible proof of the [generally invisible] trust (xin) of the inner mind of the adept, and as such they are an important part of the covenant between humans and deities.
We should note though, that the covenant where this trust needs to be made visible is not with DAO or any other entity conceived of as a high deity, origin and rule of all being and a personal god, but with different minor deities with specific mansions, in the cases cited above with the deities of the five sacred mountains. The adepts promise secrecy, and offer material objects (xin, xinwu, faxin, etc.) to the gods. The remuneration for them by the gods is a promise of protection and long life in the future.
6 Conclusion
To conclude this array of different interpretations of xin in various early medieval Daoist texts and contexts, we should ask if some form of coherence of understanding of the term xin can be construed—after all, the Chinese character xin is always the same. Key to a coherent reading of the usages could be the conception of a contractual nature of the relations of humans with the divine. If the verb xin is interpreted as entering a contract, or covenant, with divine beings, and the nominal use of xin as a pledge, given to sustain the contract, such a coherence of understanding can be achieved. This understanding would warrant the translation “to believe” for the term xin, but with a strong emphasis on the term’s contractual nature. Following de Certeau’s analysis,61 it rests on recognition of alterity (the gods) and a contract (made visible with material objects as pledges).
However, we must pay attention to the nature of “the alterity.” In most cases of the pledges for scriptural transmission, the divine contractual partners are minor deities with specific mansions. Considering that the covenant rituals’ terminology clearly derives from ancient models for contracts among human beings, we could argue that the boundaries between human and divine here are somewhat fluid. Nevertheless the divine partners to the contract or covenant are perceived as superior to the human side; thus, there is difference (in power, or better in “mastery of the contract”), which is an essential condition for “belief to occur.”62
What about Dao, as ultimate reality or personified manifestation of ultimate reality? Conceived as ultimate reality, Dao differs fundamentally from both humans and the various deities with whom human beings might enter a contractual relationship. Thus, the observation that xin (“believing,” interpreted as entering a contractual relation) is the least frequently mentioned way to relate to Dao is significant. As the examples from Ge Hong’s Baopuzi and the statistics cited in the beginning document, many Daoist texts identify the most important way to relate to Dao as striving to “de” (obtain) Dao. Obtaining Dao implies becoming one with Dao. While this can certainly be considered a form of salvation in as much it allows the human who obtained Dao to gain immortality, this process or practice cannot be understood in terms of “belief” with a contractual nature, because with “obtaining Dao” the difference between Dao and human is effaced, and thus one of the necessary conditions for belief, “alterity,” is eliminated. In this context, Dao is conceptualized not as a personified savior deity, but rather as something that an adept might “obtain” through practice. For this practice he will need instruction and help—from human masters, from divine beings, and from sacred scriptures. In order to practice, the adept needs to “xin” Dao, i.e., trust in the efficacy of the method (Dao—the ambiguity of the term Dao itself is relevant here). Divine beings, who protect the sacred scriptures and the human adepts legitimately owning them, can be enlisted for help by establishing a covenant and offering pledges (xin).
Yet we also found clusters of the usage of xin dao, proposing xin as the main way to relate to Dao, understood as a personified deity, in the earliest texts of the Heavenly Masters and in the Taishang dongyuan shenzhou jing. These texts originated in sectarian environments; they were communitarian, with more or less pronounced eschatological tendencies.
It is in these texts’ usage of xin in the phrase xin dao that we find the largest semantic overlap with the Western notions of “belief” and “believe-in,” in as much as xin is here the primary way for human beings to relate to Dao, which is conceived as an ultimate reality and personified deity. We could speculate that it was the aspect of personified savior deity that brought the abstract reality of Dao close enough to the “human plane” (because as personified deity it shared some features with humans or gods) to allow human beings to “xin” Dao—to “believe in Dao” in the sense of entering a contractual relation with Dao.
Bibliography
Dictionaries, Encyclopedias, and Databases
Academia Sinica Computer Center (ASCC), Taiwan 漢籍電子文獻 (Scripta Sinica), http://erf.sbb.spk-berlin.de/han/ScriptaSinica/hanchi.ihp.sinica.edu.tw/ihp/hanji.htm, (via CrossAsia) (accessed 27 May 2022).
Chinese Text Project, edited by Donald Sturgeon. 2006, http://ctext.org (accessed 27 May 2022).
Daojiao xueshu zixun wangzhan道教學術資訊網站. Hong Baijian 弘百堅, http://www.ctcwri.idv.tw/INDEXA5/indexa5d.htm (online and CD-ROM) (accessed 27 May 2022).
Dokisha 道氣社 Homepage (Tōyō Gaku kenkyūsha no tame no dennō shihō 東洋學研究者のための電腦四寶). Mugitani Kunio, Kyoto University, http://www.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~dokisha/ (accessed 27 May 2022).
Encyclopedia of Religions, 2nd edition, edited by Lindsay Jones, Mircea Eliade, and Charles Adams. 15 vols. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2005.
Hanyu da cidian 漢語大詞典, edited by Luo Zhufeng 羅竹風 et al, edition for Lingvo v.2.0. 1993–1996.
Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie, edited by Joachim Ritter. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1974.
Kanseki Repository (漢リポ kanripo). Kyoto: Institute for Research on Humanities, http://www.kanripo.org/ (accessed 27 May 2022).
Oxford English Dictionary. Online version. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018, http://www.oed.com/ (accessed 27 May 2022).
Zhongwen da cidian
中文大辭典 . Edited by Zhang Qiyun 張其昀, Chinese Culture University 中國文化大學 (Taiwan), 2006, http://ap6.pccu.edu.tw/Dictionary/ (accessed 27 May 2022).
Scholarly Literature
Assandri, Friederike. 2009. Beyond the Daode jing. Magdalena, NM: Three Pines Press.
Barrett, Timothy. 2008. “Laozi Heshang gong zhangju.” In The Routledge Encyclopedia of Taoism, edited by Fabrizio Pregadio. Oxon: Routledge, vol. 2, 619–620.
Bokenkamp, Stephen R. 1997. Early Daoist Scriptures. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Bumbacher, Stephan-Peter. 1995. “Cosmic Scripts and Heavenly Scriptures: The Holy Nature of Taoist Texts.” COSMOS: The Journal of the Traditional Cosmology Society 11, no. 2: 139–153, http://www.uni-tuebingen.de/uni/ans/sino/personal/bumbacher/texte/cosm_scr.htm (accessed 28 April 2008).
Bumbacher, Stephan-Peter. 2012. Empowered Writing: Exorcistic and Apotropaic Rituals in Medieval China. Dunedin, FL: Three Pines Press.
Certeau, Michel de. 1985. “What We Do When We Believe.” In On Signs, edited by Marshall Blonsky. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 192–202.
Ebeling, Gerhard. 1959. Das Wesen des christlichen Glaubens. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr.
Kleeman, Terry. 2008. “Tianshi dao.” In The Routledge Encyclopedia of Taoism, edited by Fabrizio Pregadio. Oxon: Routledge, vol. 2, 981–986.
Kleeman, Terry. 2016. Celestial Masters. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.
Kohn, Livia. 2003. “Medieval Daoist Ordination: Origins, Structure, and Practice.” Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 56, no. 2/4: 379–398.
Legge, James. 1885. The Li Ki I–X. Sacred Books of the East, volume 27, The Texts of Confucianism, part 3. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Online available at https://www.sacred-texts.com/cfu/liki/index.htm (accessed 9 August 2019).
Lewis, Mark Edward. 1990. Sanctioned Violence in Early China. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Li Ling. 1995–1996. “An Archaeological Study of Taiyi (Grand One) Worship.” Translated by Donald Harper. Early Medieval China 2: 1–39.
Mollier, Christine. 1990. Une Apocalypse taoïste du Ve siècle: Le Livre des incantations des grottes abyssales. Paris: Collège de France.
Mollier, Christine. 2004. “Taishang Dongyuan Shenzhou jing.” In The Taoist Canon: A Historical Companion to the Daozang, edited by Kristofer Schipper and Franciscus Verellen. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, vol. 1, 269.
Nickerson, Peter. 1996. “Abridged Codes of Master Lu for the Daoist Community.” In Religions of China in Practice, edited by Donald Lopez. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 247–359.
Pregadio, Fabrizio. 2006. Great Clarity. Daoism and Alchemy in Early Medieval China. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Pregadio, Fabrizio, ed. 2008. The Routledge Encyclopedia of Taoism. Oxon: Routledge.
Price, H.H. 1965. “Belief ‘In’ and Belief ‘That’.” Religious Studies 1, no. 1: 5–27.
Puett, Michael. 2004. “Forming Spirits for the Way: The Cosmology of the Xiang’er Commentary to the Laozi.” Journal of Chinese Religions 32: 1–27.
Rao Zongyi 饒宗頤. 1956. Laozi Xiang’er zhu jiaojian 老子想爾注校牋. Hongkong: Tong Nam.
Raz, Gil. 2012. The Emergence of Daoism: Creation of Tradition. New York: Routledge.
Schipper, Kristofer. 2000. “Le pacte de pureté du taoïsme.” École pratique des hautes études, Section des sciences religieuses. Annuaire 109 (2000–2001): 29–53.
Schipper, Kristofer. 2004. “Dongxuan lingbao shoudu yi.” In The Taoist Canon: A Historical Companion to the Daozang, edited by Kristofer Schipper and Franciscus Verellen. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, vol. 1, 255–257.
Schipper, Kristofer and Franciscus Verellen, eds. 2004. The Taoist Canon: A Historical Companion to the Daozang. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Smith, Thomas. 2020. Declarations of the Perfected. Part Two: Instructions on Shaping Destiny. St. Petersburg, FL: Three Pines Press.
Strickmann, Michael. 1977. “The Mao Shan Revelation, Taoism and Aristocracy.” T’oung Pao 43, no. 1: 1–64.
Strickmann, Michael. 2002. Chinese Magical Medicine, edited by Bernhard Faure. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Wang Ka 王卡. 1993. Laozi Daode jing Heshang gong zhangju 老子道德经河上公章句. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju.
The other common translation of the term is “trust” or “trustworthiness,” see the Introduction to this volume.
I use the term “classical Chinese” as a translation of the Chinese wenyanwen
The Oxford English Dictionary lists seven meanings for “believe” and eight for “belief,” http://www.oed.com/ (accessed 27 May 2022). The Encyclopedia of Religions (2005, 2954f) lists eleven related meanings for “faith.” Zhongwen da cidian lists twenty different meanings under the pronunciation xin, and a further three meanings under the pronunciation shen, http://ap6.pccu.edu.tw/Dictionary/ (accessed 27 May 2022).
See also the chapters by Meisterernst and Gentz in this volume.
Compare also the lemma faith in the Encyclopedia of Religions, 2955–2958.
Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie, vol. 3, G–H, 627; cit. Ebeling 1959, 31ff.
Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie, vol. 3, G–H, 627; cit. Ebeling 1959, 31ff. For a detailed discussion of this notion, see Jiang’s chapter in this volume.
Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie, vol. 3, G–H, 627. Cf. also Price 1965.
De Certeau 1985, 192.
De Certeau 1985, 192.
De Certeau 1985, 192. He emphasizes that in the contract the believer gives a gift, or “something” in the hope or certainty of receiving something back in the future. This deferred remuneration is what distinguishes belief from, e.g., economic exchanges, but also from knowing and seeing: “[T]he difference that distinguishes it [i.e., believing, FA] from seeing or knowing is not at first notable for the truth value for which a proposition is susceptible—to which an entire epistemology has been devoted—but by this inscription of time in a subject-to-subject relationship” (1985, 193). Cf. also Price (1965, 19) with the observation that when “belief-in” is used with a that-clause instead of a noun, the verb of that clause usually takes the future tense.
De Certeau 1985, 192.
We should take note that long before the divinization of Laozi as a deity and incarnation of Dao, the V+O expression xin dao appears in the Lunyu, chap. 19, Zi Zhang
See, e.g., Xunzi
Kanseki repository, key-term search in texts, undifferentiated hits (i.e., there will be many doubles), filter KR5 (i.e., Daoist texts, including Daozang, Xu Daozang, Dunhuang Daoist texts, Qing dynasty Daoist texts). Kanseki Repository (
The only similar ratio is found with zhidao and buzhidao, but this ratio might be not comparable, because zhidao has not only the meaning of knowing Dao (V+O), but is also employed as a composite verb for “to know”; in particular in the negative “buzhidao.” This usage as a composite verb appears according to Hanyu da cidian (3.
With additional searches in the Dokisha database, http://www.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~dokisha/ (accessed 27 May 2022), and the Academia Sinica database, http://erf.sbb.spk-berlin.de/han/ScriptaSinica/hanchi.ihp.sinica.edu.tw/ihp/hanji.htm, (accessed 27 May 2022).
See Kleeman 2008, 982, for the Heavenly Masters, and Mollier 2004, 269, for the Taishang dongyuan shenzhou jing. Compare also the section “Xin in an Eschatological Context” in Goossaert’s chapter in this volume. It reminds one also of the eschatological context of believing in the Jewish tradition as well as New Testament and (early) Christianity (cf. Jiang’s chapter in this volume with a specific reference to Judaism and Paul).
See Wang Ka 1993, 3, and Barrett 2008, 620, for a critical discussion of the dating of the HSG. Although the text’s origins remain unclear, it seems certain that it was in circulation by the mid-third century CE.
See Gentz’s chapter in this volume.
I am citing from Bokenkamp’s (1997) translation; for the sake of my essay’s argument, I have replaced the English terms used to translate xin with pinyin xin*.
Rao Zongyi 1956, 27.
Bokenkamp 1997, 110: “do not keep faith with Dao.”
Bokenkamp 1997, 110: “keep faith with Dao.”
Cf. also Puett 2004, 11.
In Zhengyi fawen tianshe jiaojie ke jing
I cite Bokenkamp’s translation, yet we should note that sha means “kill,” or “bring to death”—which involves an active agency, here from Dao. Thus, a literal translation would be “all are born and brought to death by Dao.”
Bokenkamp 1997, 165.
Bokenkamp 1997, 167: “loss of faith with the Dao.”
Cf. Assandri (2009, 108–109) for a discussion of the importance of overcoming human mortality in Daoism.
The polemic connection to the west and the Buddha is obvious here.
Bokenkamp 1997, 170: “place their faith in the Dao.”
See Bokenkamp (1997, 170) for a translation of the paragraph summarized here.
His major work Baopuzi was written around 320. Ge Hong seems to have been aware of the Heavenly Masters (cf. Kleeman 2016, 64–66), yet the Baopuzi shows very little reference to them.
Meanwhile, the term dedao, obtaining the Dao, appears 24 times, xingdao
See, e.g., Baopuzi, j. 12:
Here I use the translation “believing” instead of the pinyin xin, because xin here refers to the “problematic” statement, which seems a clear correspondence to the Western term “believe that.”
Xiang’er commentary, chap. 21; Rao Zongyi 1956, 29; cf. Bokenkamp 1997, 113.
The rhetorical question
In a similar vein, in the chapter on Alchemy (“Jindan
Cf. Mollier 1990 and Strickmann 2002, 89–100.
Chap. 1, four times; chap. 2, four times; chap. 3, five times; chap. 4, three times; chap. 5, seven times; chap. 6, two times; chap. 8, three times; chap. 9, five times; chap. 10, four times; chap. 14, once; chap. 16, once, chap. 20, five times.
Mollier 2004, 269.
The scriptures here are explicitly named as the Sandong
This might be related to the specific concept of scripture as powerful spiritual objects that form part of the ultimate reality of Dao as proposed in the Lingbao scriptures. Cf. Bumbacher 1995 and 2012, 113ff.
In Buddhism, chigui refers to the red demons of purgatory.
Mingluo refers to the transcendent Yu Mingluo
The strong emphasis on scriptures as equal or almost equal to Dao in terms of their soteriological power in this text differs from that of the early Heavenly Master texts. It might be related to the particular different conception of sacred scriptures in the Jiangnan region (see Strickmann 2002 cited above and Bumbacher 1995, 2012).
While this text shares the eschatological outlook with the Xiang’er and the Dadao jialing jie, it shows no specific references to the Heavenly Masters.
For discussion of the pledges in Daoism, see Strickmann 1977 22ff, Schipper 2000, 42.
See Raz 2012, 4: He argues that Daoism evolved out of “an assemblage of intersecting textual and ritual lineages with a set of shared core beliefs or attitudes which formed a commonality as opposed to other traditions such as Buddhism, on the one hand, and the practices of common religion, on the other.”
Pregadio 2006, 80.
All four terms can occur as single terms or as binomes, in various combinations, see also section four of Gentz’s chapter in this volume.
For a discussion of these oaths and the accompanying rituals in Zhou dynasty, see Lewis 1990, 43–52. For a discussion of the covenants in early Daoism, see Raz 2012, 91ff.
The idea of covenant (confirmed by an oath) reminds also of biblical ideas of an—old and a new—covenant between God and his people where it is used as a juridical metaphor of a legally binding agreement between the two parties.
See Pregadio 2006, 79–82.
Compare Raz 2012, 98–101.
See Raz 2012, 97f.
Compare also Dongzhen taishang feixing yujing jiuzhen shengxuan shangji
See Schipper/Verellen 2004, 225–226.
Shipper/Verellen 2004, 255–257: the text is a Tang revision, but attribution to Lu Xiujing seems credible. Lu strongly promoted the Lingbao scriptures, and his liturgical writings are constructed around these.
For
De Certeau 1985, 192, cited above.
Ibid.