Tao Te Ching, Verse 1, Part V

“The TAO, or Principle of Nature, may be discussed [by all]; it is not the popular or common Tao.

Its Name may be named [i.e., the TAO may receive a designation, though of itself it has none]; but it is not an ordinary name, [or name in the usual sense of the word, for it is a presentment or ειδωλον of the Infinite].

Its nameless period was that which preceded the birth of the Universe.

In being spoken of by name, it is as the Progenitrix of All Things.
It is therefore in habitual passionlessness that its mystery may be scanned; and in habitual desire that its developments may be perceived.

These two conditions, the Active and the Quiescent, alike proceed [from TAO]; it is only in name that they differ. Both may be called profundities; and the depth of profundity is the gate of every mystery.”
(Tao Te Ching, Verse 1, Balfour Translation)

In the spring of 2004, around the time I started including verses from the tao in my emails, a friend of mine wrote:

“I find the tao stuff creepy, to be honest, after all the tao that can be understood is not the true tao, so therefore isn’t the rest of lao tzu’s little book pointless? It’s like saying that the truth cannot be spoken, but the tragic thing is that you had to speak to me to tell me that…or like saying that there is no absolute truth…”

His comments were on the paradox in the passage above passage, but they make me wonder if he wasn’t also aware of the paradox in verse 56:

“Those who know don't talk. Those who talk don't know.”

The entire text, like life, is full of paradox. The question one must ask is why did Lao Tzu write this? This is the first verse of the tao and it’s functioning as an introduction and like many introductions, it includes a disclaimer. When Lao Tzu writes, “The tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao. The name that can be named is not the eternal Name. The unnamable is the eternally real. (or one of the various alternative among the various translations)” I don’t think that he’s claiming that the truth can’t be spoken or that there is no absolute truth. Quite the opposite, I think that he’s saying that there is absolute truth, but this truth transcends the maximum capabilities of mere words. In essence he’s saying, “look, I’m going to tell you what I know about the integral truth of the universe and the virtuous application of such high, subtle knowledge, but my words aren’t going to be the thing – the thing is out there, the universe and everything in it – the thing is in here, deep inside each one of us – the thing is not me or this book or the teachings in this book – those are all just arrows pointing the way.” A map of Albania is not Albania, but it can help you find your way. It’s also like Magritte’s painting of a pipe with the caption, “Ceci n’est pas une pipe” (This is not a pipe.). It’s also like Plato’s allegory of the cave. It’s what the apostle Paul was talking about in I Corinthians 13:12, “For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.” There is REALITY and TRUTH, but the reality we perceive and the truth we understand are not really THE REALITY and THE TRUTH. I mentioned earlier that I was initially drawn to the tao because I found it provocatively absurd and paradoxical. But the more I’ve read it and copied it and written about it, the more I find it truly practical. In verse 14, Lao Tzu declares that you can’t know the Tao, but you can be it. If I had to sum up verse 1, it would be: Words cannot describe the absolute REALITY of the universe, but they can point you toward it and you can experience it.

Siji Tzu was another ancient (possibly mythical) Chinese mystic like Lao Tzu, who wrote commentary on each verse of the Tao. He wrote the following for verse one:

“Green tea is wonderful. There are many words that can describe its aroma, its flavor. I can tell you of the temperature of the tea as I sip it from its cup. The smells that fill my nose just as my tongue tastes the first drips. I can explain to you the benefits of the tea. But, you still have not experienced the tea. You only have a rude concept of what it might be. Unless you sip from the cup yourself, you are not experiencing the real. And this is true with the Dao.”