10 - Taking Stock

Summary

Abstract

Lagerwey’s essay reflects on the author’s journey as a scholar of Chinese religion, and especially his realization of the centrality of Daoism to Chinese religious life. Having completed his Ph.D. at Harvard (1975), Lagerwey encountered the study of living Daoism and realized that the dominant Euro-centric definition of religion and Confucian-centric vision of Chinese history, which were, and remain, the dominant paradigm of Chinese studies, occlude the historical social reality of Chinese religion, in which Daoism played a crucial role. This realization entailed moving away from the mainstream literary and historical canons, delving into the Daoist textual and, especially, the ritual tradition.

Keywords: Daoism, Confucianism, Religion, Chinese studies, ritual

Over forty years have passed since I first encountered Daoism. That encounter radically changed me, as it has changed us all. Indeed, what the encounter with Daoism has changed most radically is the field of Sinology and, thereby, the nature and conditions of a China–West dialogue. A volume like this one is a perfect opportunity for reflecting together on these changes. It is therefore my hope that, in addition to any discussion about my own remarks, there will be further statements—parallel or contradictory—to my own, that we can publish as a single piece: our letter to the world that never wrote to us.

Let me begin with several of what were for me the most radical transformations in my view of China and, therefore, of my own cultural heritage. The first changes had to do with the text I read with Kristofer Schipper in my first year (1976) in Paris, the Laozi zhong jing 老子中經. Every Wednesday night I would cross Paris from the 18th to the 14th arrondissement and translate orally this extraordinary text into French. I can fairly say that this text “blew my mind,” because it made me realize that: (1) the distinction I had assumed between inner and outer—subjective and objective—was so rigid as to be fundamentally wrong; (2) the process of interiorization lay at the heart of historical change; (3) the spiritual depth of Chinese culture encountered in this text made of the religionless China I had studied at Harvard a sick joke, that is, a modernizing “secularist” joke that had little or nothing to do with Chinese reality. Nothing I have learned since has overturned these basic changes.