/lit/ - Literature

Chapter 38, Derek Lin

High virtue is not virtuous
Therefore it has virtue
Low virtue never loses virtue
Therefore it has no virtue
High virtue takes no contrived action
And acts without agenda
Low virtue takes contrived action
And acts with agenda
High benevolence takes contrived action
And acts without agenda
High righteousness takes contrived action
And acts with agenda
High etiquette takes contrived action
And upon encountering no response
Uses arms to pull others

Therefore the Tao is lost, and then virtue
Virtue is lost, and the benevolence
Benevolence is lost, and then righteousness
Righteousness is lost, and then etiquette
Those who have etiquette
are a thin shell of loyalty and sincerity
And the beginning of chaos
Those with foreknowledge
Are the flowers of the Tao
And the beginning of ignorance
Therefore the great person:
Abides in substance, and does not dwell on the thin shell
Abides in the real, and does not dwell on the flower
Thus they discard that and take this

------------
What I want to ask is: can one contrived action be closer to the Tao than another? I think if I fail to have high virtue, I could begin by shooting for benevolence. But is this the wrong method? I think if I have Tao, then I have an essence that creates a virtuous life. Can I go the other way, and try to copy a virtuous life, and thereby get closer to the essence? Will contriving to be good while striving to have no agenda (aiming for benevolence) bring me closer than having an agenda (being righteous), or are they just different shades of wrong?