Page 68 - The Encyclopedia of Taoism v1_A-L

28 T H E ENC YC L O PE DI A OF TAO I SM VOL. I

Quiescence). The combination of pre-Qin works with Song works indicates
that there is no single criterion of authorship or period that determines what
works are considered either as jing or as worthy of commentary.
The nature of Taoist exegesis changed over time, in many ways consistent
with changes in the Chinese exegetical tradition as a whole. Taking the Daode
jing as an example, the readings of various commentators reflect a wide variety
of points of view. The Song master Zhao Shi'an j\:!!t'j21~ (fl. II52) distinguished
three major concerns against which it had been read: non-action, longevity,
and politics. It was also widely commented on by Buddhists and Confucians.
This variety of exegesis has led some to distinguish Taoist exegesis from the
rest of the exegetical tradition. Isabelle Robinet has observed Taoist texts
"took their authority from revelation, which gave them an original stature and
released them from dependence on their antecedents . . .. It also explains why
[they] could have been commented on by people of such diverse orientations"
(1999b, 154-55).
Mark CSIKSZENTMIHALYI

m Henderson 1991; Kohn 1992b; Kohn 1998e; Robinet 1984, I: 107- 22 and
193-94; Robinet 1993, 19-28; Robinet 1997b, 125- 28; Thompson 1985; Wu Kuang-
ming2000

* DAOZANG AND SUBSIDIARY COMPILATIONS ; REVELATIONS AND SACRED
TEXTS; TRANSMISSION

Daozang and subsidiary compilations

What has popularly come to be known as the Daozang J1!~ (Taoist Canon)
is indisputably the foremost body of texts for research in the field of Taoist
studies. The Ming Canon of 1445, or so-called *Zhengtong daozang (Taoist Canon
of the Zhengtong Reign Period), lies at the heart of all modern editions of the
Canon. Its origins are closely linked to catalogues of Taoist writings prepared
more than a millennium earlier. Canonic collections to which the Ming Canon
is heir were produced under Tang, Song, Jurchen, and Mongol rulerships.
To some extent, each successive Canon may be regarded as the result of a
working relationship between church and state. Both parties may very well
have had particular needs in mind but if there was any motivation uniting
them on this mission, it would have been the desire for ritual order. By joining
forces to define a Taoist Canon imperial and clerical leaders could exercise their
respective powers of regulatory control. Like all such endeavors, the compila-
tion of every Canon in turn allowed the demarcation of textual authority to
be established anew.