Beyond the Ontology–Cosmogony Dichotomy: Qi and the Worldview of the Laozi Zhigui

Abstract

This study examines the Laozi Zhigui—a key text of Han dynasty Huang-Lao thought—and reconstructs the categorical status of qi to reassess received primordial qi-centered cosmological interpretations and clarify the text’s distinctive worldview. The Laozi Zhigui explains the relation between Dao and the myriad entities through four stages of wu (nothingness)—Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony—and previous studies, working within inherited qi-centered cosmological frameworks, have generally assimilated these stages to qi. A contextual reading of key passages on cosmology, mind–nature, and self-cultivation clarifies that in the Laozi Zhigui, qi does not belong to the same ontological category as these four stages of wu. Instead, it functions as a mediating substance through which the order of wu is carried over into you (somethingness). Furthermore, the four stages of wu are likewise not as the internal differentiation of qi but as a non-substantialist account of the “generation of order.” On this basis, the worldview of the Laozi Zhigui can be reconstructed as a triadic schema of wu–qi–you (nothingness–qi–somethingness), which yields a distinctive model of qi cosmology that, unlike Han dynasty primordial qi-centered accounts, does not presuppose the generation and fission of a single primordial qi.

1. Introduction

Attributed to Yan Zun 嚴遵 (also recorded as Zhuang Zun 莊遵 and styled Junping 君平), the Laozi Zhigui (老子指歸; hereafter Zhigui) is generally dated to the late first century BCE (late Western Han period, 206 BCE–9 CE), and is one of the earliest extant commentaries on the Daodejing.1 In the Western Han, the Huang-Lao worldview was influential within the court-centered ideological landscape, presenting the world as an integrated and organic order. Often articulated in terms of qi-transformation (qihua 氣化), qi discourse within this milieu readily served as an explanatory framework for articulating both continuity and differentiation across the cosmos, the body, and the political order. Against this backdrop, it is critical to recall that the tension between Dao’s ultimacy and qi-based accounts of world-processes structures Huang-Lao discourse. Although Han dynasty Huang-Lao thought considers Dao the ultimate origin in the Daoist framework of the relation between Dao and the myriad entities (wanwu 萬物), it also characteristically introduces qi as a formless material category, interpreting the cosmos, the human body, and political order as a continuous structure of qi-transformation (qihua 氣化). The Zhigui likewise, through expressions such as “becoming differentiated through qi-transformation” (qihua fenli 氣化分離) and “being linked together and made continuous through qi-transformation” (qihua liantong 氣化連通), repeatedly describes the generation and transformation of the myriad entities through qi. Accordingly, it has often been regarded as a paradigmatic formulation of Han dynasty Huang-Lao qi cosmology.2 Yet what is usually called “qi cosmology” is not a single, uniform model. In particular, depending on how the relation between Dao and qi is conceptualized, the Huang-Lao worldview splits into divergent schemata, ranging from cosmogonic interpretations to readings that emphasize the ontological primacy of Dao.

The distinctiveness of the Zhigui becomes apparent precisely at this point. The Zhigui subdivides wu 無, which, in the Daodejing, had served as the primary way of characterizing Dao, into four staged concepts—Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination (shenming 神明), and Great Harmony (taihe 太和)—and thereby offers an original interpretation of the “Dao–myriad entities (wanwu 萬物) relation.”3 Although all four belong to the realm of wu, within that realm, they form distinct hierarchies and orders and disclose distinct implications. This “staging of wu” complicates the very framework within which the “Dao–myriad entities relation” is to be understood, rendering the problem of the relation between Dao and qi 氣, more specifically, the problem of how qi is to be situated with respect to a fourfold articulation of wu. This complication has led existing studies on the Zhigui to configure the relation between fourfold wu and qi differently and, consequently, produce divergent world-structural schemata.

This article takes this problematic as its point of departure and seeks to reconstruct the worldview of the Zhigui by reexamining the status of the concept of qi in the text. First, it classifies major interpretations of Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony into several types according to how they relate these four to qi and examines the theoretical presuppositions and limits of each type. Second, it analyzes various qi-related formulations and compound expressions that appear in cosmological contexts, aiming to clarify, on textual grounds, the categorical relation of qi to Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony, as well as to the myriad entities. Finally, on the basis of this analysis, it reconstructs the world-schema of “wu 無–qi 氣–you 有” and presents the worldview of the Zhigui as a complex cosmology in which a non-substantialist generation at the level of wu is superimposed on a qi-transformational process at the level of you, thereby qualifying and supplementing the conventional ontology–cosmogony dichotomy.

2. Major Types of Interpreting Qi in the Laozi Zhigui

How one understands the status of qi in the Zhigui decisively shapes both the overall world-schema and the characterization of Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony as belonging to the level of wu. Existing scholarship on this issue broadly takes four distinct approaches: (1) reducing all four—Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony—to qi (hereafter T1); (2) leaving Dao in place as a non-substantial law or principle, while taking De (One), Spirit-Illumination (Two), and Great Harmony (Three) as primordial qi and its differentiations (hereafter T2); (3) regarding Great Harmony alone as primordial qi and sees the process of qi-transformation as unfolding from this point (hereafter T3); and (4) consistently locating Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony within the level wu and assigning qi exclusively to the category of you (hereafter T4). The following subsections outline these four types by focusing on representative studies and clarifying how each draws boundaries among wu, qi, and you to construct a distinctive world-schema.

2.1. T1: “Qi Monism” That Reduces Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony to Qi

The first interpretive approach is exemplified in the works of Jin Chunfeng (Jin 1987), Zheng Wangeng (Zheng 1984), and Yuan Qing (Yuan 2024). While acknowledging that the Zhigui presents an ontological account of Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony, they ultimately take a qi-centered cosmogony to be the core of its worldview. In other words, they read all four as belonging to the category of qi and, thus, construe the Zhigui as advancing a qi-monistic cosmogony. This interpretive approach prioritizes the following passage:

All that which has form belongs to the class of entities and species. Entities have that which they take as their ancestor, species have that which they take as their progenitor. …The generation of Heaven and Humanity is as follows: Form depends on qi, qi depends on Harmony, Harmony depends on Spirit-Illumination, Spirit-Illumination depends on Dao and De, and Dao and De depend on Self-so. In this way, the myriad entities come to exist.4

Jin Chunfeng takes this sequence as outlining a series of generative stages running from “Self-so (ziran 自然) → Dao-De → Spirit-Illumination → Harmony → qi → Form (xing 形),” and understands the generation of Heaven and Humanity as the process by which one and the same qi is gradually differentiated and manifested step-by-step (Jin 1987, p. 406). As direct textual support for such qi monism, proponents of T1 refer to the following passages:

Dao and De, Spirit-Illumination, clarity and turbidity, Great Harmony, Heaven and Earth, Humanity and entities are as if they were tips and roots. These factors follow one another; they are linked together and made continuous through qi-transformation.5

Heaven and Earth, Humanity and entities all share the same primordial beginning and one common ancestor. Within the six directions and at the outer bounds of the cosmos, they are linked together as one body. They become differentiated through qi-transformation; running vertically and horizontally, above and below, they are split into two and apportioned into five.6

In the first passage, “Dao and De, Spirit-Illumination, clarity and turbidity, Great Harmony, Heaven and Earth, Humanity and entities” are set out in parallel. Then, “These factors follow one another; through qi-transformation they are linked together and made continuous.” Proponents of T1 take this to mean that all of them are mutually continuous because they are composed of the same underlying substance, qi. Thus, for example, Zheng Wangeng understands Dao and De, Spirit-Illumination, Great Harmony, Heaven and Earth, and Humanity as different stages in which one and the same qi is progressively differentiated and manifested (Zheng 1984, p. 49). The second passage is read similarly. Although “Heaven and Earth, Humanity and entities” each come to constitute different concrete entities after differentiation, they “share the same primordial beginning and one common ancestor” and are “linked together as one body.” This unity is explained as the result of their having been differentiated from one another through qi-transformation (qihua fenli 氣化分離). On T1’s reading, the “one body” in this context refers precisely to qi itself. On this basis, T1 combines the two passages to argue that “primordial beginning” (yuanshi 元始) and “ancestor” (zongzu 宗祖) refer to Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony, and that all four of these stages belong to the level of qi (Jin 1987, p. 406; Zheng 1984, p. 49; Yuan 2024, p. 242). The following passage is cited as more direct evidence that Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony all fall within the category of qi:

Dao has depth and subtlety, De has thickness and thinness, Spirit has clarity and turbidity, Harmony has tallness and lowness.7

T1 takes expressions such as “depth and subtlety” (shenwei 深微), “thickness and thiness” (houbo 厚薄), “clarity and turbidity” (qingzhuo 清濁), and “has tallness and lowness” (gaoxia 高下) to indicate differences of degree that can only be predicated of a substantial entity like qi, and on this basis interprets Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony as substances that, like qi, admit of such gradations (Jin 1987, p. 406). The same line of reasoning is applied to the following sentence in the same chapter:

A ruler of lower virtue receives, in his nature, upright qi of Dao.8

If one follows the basic logic of T1, “upright qi of Dao” (Dao zhi zhengqi 道之正氣) can be taken to characterize the very essence of Dao, and thus to imply that Dao itself is a kind of qi. Taken together, these interpretations yield the following picture: the realm of “wu” in the Zhigui—comprised of Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony—and the realm of “you”—Heaven and Earth, Humanity and entities—are both explained in terms of a single structure of “being linked together and made continuous through qi-transformation” and “becoming differentiated through qi-transformation.” The basic pattern in which “somethingness arises from nothingness” (you sheng yu wu 有生於無) is, thus, understood as the process by which one primordial qi is differentiated and manifests as the myriad entities. The difference between wu and you is likewise interpreted as merely a difference of stages within the continuous transformations of qi.

2.2. T2: Reading Dao as Principle and De, Spirit-Illumination, Great Harmony as Qi

The second interpretive approach leaves Dao in place as a non-substantial law or principle, while taking De (One), Spirit-Illumination (Two), and Great Harmony (Three) as primordial qi and the differentiated forms of that qi. The studies of Wang Baoxuan (B. Wang 2012), Wang Deyou (D. Wang 1984), and Wang Junyan (J. Wang 2015) are representative of this approach. Focusing on passages that describe Dao as “formless and shapeless” (wuxing wuzhuang 無形無狀) and as characterized by “non-action” (wuwei 無為), they assign Dao to the level of law or principle distinct from qi and take De (One) as the actual starting point of the generation of the myriad entities. The rationale for taking De (One) as primordial qi is as follows.

There is something in a state of undifferentiated chaos; its dwelling appears in the dim and indistinct. …Having neither above nor below, neither left nor right, it penetrates and reaches into the boundless, which is the principle and order of the Dao. …Vast in Great Sameness, without beginning or end, the dwelling place of the myriad entities, it is the initial point of Great Beginning, therefore it is called One.9

Wang Baoxuan and Wang Junyan take phrases such as “There is something in a state of undifferentiated chaos” and “it is the initial point of Great Beginning, therefore it is called One” as referring to De (One) and understand them as descriptions of primordial qi in an undifferentiated state (B. Wang 2012, p. 250; J. Wang 2015, p. 52). The following passage can be read similarly.

One is the child of Dao, the mother of Spirit-Illumination, the ancestor of Great Harmony, and the progenitor of Heaven and Earth. In relation to Spirit-Illumination it is nothingness; in relation to Dao it is somethingness. In relation to Spirit-Illumination it is great; in relation to Dao it is small. Therefore, as a thing, it is empty yet solid, nothingness yet somethingness.10

Here, De (One) is defined as the child of Dao, the mother of Spirit-Illumination, the ancestor of Great Harmony, and the progenitor of Heaven and Earth. On the basis of the expressions “empty yet solid, nothingness yet somethingness” (xu er shi 虛而實, wu er you 無而有), Wang Deyou understands One, in comparison with Dao, as primordial qi that already possesses a particular degree of substantiality (D. Wang 1984, pp. 62–63). The following passages provide the grounds for reading Dao as law or principle:

Dao’s way of creating is this: …it is by acting through non-action that the myriad entities arise; it is by attending to them through having no affairs that the myriad entities come to fulfillment. Therefore, non-action is the very body of Dao and the beginning of Heaven and Earth.11

It is neither nothingness nor beginning, and so it cannot have substantial existence. It is formless and soundless, and so it cannot be seen or heard. It receives nothing, yet gives something. It is not possible to describe the Dao. The nothingness of the nothingness of the nothingness of nothingness, the beginning that has not yet begun to begin: this is that from which the myriad entities originate and on which their nature and life are grounded. That which is devoid of what can be named is called Dao.12

These passages characterize Dao as non-substantial and as the law of “non-action” (wuwei 無為) that provides the ground on which the myriad entities and their nature and life depend (D. Wang 1984, p. 62). In this way, T2 leaves Dao in the position of a non-substantial ontological ground and law, while assigning De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony to the level of substantiality (that of qi), as strata that differentiate on the basis of Dao; these are understood as successive states of qi that undertake the work of generating the myriad entities. Unlike T1, which reduces Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony all to qi, T2 maintains a categorical distance between Dao and qi, thereby more sharply displaying a dual structure of Dao-as-root and qi-transformation and highlighting the ontological and normative primacy of Dao.

2.3. T3: Reading Only Great Harmony as Undifferentiated Primordial Qi

T3 takes Great Harmony alone to be primordial qi in an undifferentiated state and holds that it is only at this point that the transition from wu 無 to you 有 takes place; Chen Jing’s (J. Chen 2016) article is representative of this line of interpretation. According to this reading, the stages up to Dao, De, and Spirit-Illumination all belong to the realm of pure wu, differing only in the degree of emptiness or in the degree of manifestation, whereas primordial qi first emerges at the level of Great Harmony and becomes the link that connects wu and you. Chen Jing first draws attention to the following passages:

The emptiness of emptiness generates emptiness, the nothingness of nothingness generates nothingness, and nothingness generates that which has form.13

The generation of Heaven and Humanity is as follows: Form depends on qi, qi depends on Harmony, Harmony depends on Spirit-Illumination, Spirit-Illumination depends on Dao and De, and Dao and De depend on Self-so. In this way, the myriad entities come to exist.14

According to J. Chen (2016, pp. 8–9), the former phrases describe the stages of manifestation within the realm of wu, whereas the latter statement describes the process by which you arise out of wu:

Heaven and Earth arise from Great Harmony, and Great Harmony arises from empty darkness.15

This passage indicates that Great Harmony is the point at which the transition from the realm of wu (expressed here as “empty darkness” to the realm of you (expressed here as “Heaven and Earth”) takes place. Chen, therefore, argues that although Great Harmony still belongs to the category of wu, it nevertheless functions as the starting point of you; accordingly, she extends the term to encompass primordial qi (yuanqi 元氣) in an undifferentiated state, presenting it as the first substantial stage that links wu and you (2016, pp. 9–10). The following passage also serves as an important textual basis for T3:

Before Heaven and Earth had begun, yin and yang had not yet sprouted; cold and heat had not yet shown signs, and brightness and darkness had not yet taken form. There was something in which the Three stood forth: one of turbidity and one of clarity; clarity above and turbidity below, with Harmony at the center. With the Three arising together, Heaven and Earth were formed; yin and yang intermingled, and the myriad entities thereby arise.16

Here, the moment at which the myriad entities begin to arise from the realm of wu is described as the state in which “There was something in which the Three stood forth” (youwu sanli 有物三立). Given that the Zhigui identifies “Three” (san 三) with Great Harmony17, and that it is at the level of “Three” that the myriad entities begin to arise, it follows that Great Harmony marks the point at which the arising of the myriad entities begins; in this sense, it can be interpreted as primordial qi in an undifferentiated condition.

Three is nothingness; therefore, it can enable the myriad entities to arise. Clarity and turbidity become differentiated, tallness and lowness are arrayed, yin and yang begin to be distinguished, harmonious qi flows throughout, the three luminosities revolve; and the multitude of kinds thereby arise.18

Likewise, the passage above can be read similarly. If the sequence “harmonious qi flows throughout, the three luminosities revolve; and the multitude of kinds thereby arise” is a concrete elaboration of the claim that “Three is nothingness (wu 無); therefore, it can enable the myriad entities to arise,” then Great Harmony can be taken to refer to harmonious qi (heqi 和氣). Accordingly, one may infer that harmonious qi is the undifferentiated qi at which the myriad entities begin to arise. Chen goes further by arguing that the Zhigui itself frames its dual cosmology through canonical schemata, using the Daodejing Chapter 42 formula—“Dao generates One. One generates Two. Two generates Three. Three generates the myriad entities” (道生一, 一生二, 二生三, 三生萬物)—to account for the manifestation of wu and the Zhouyi formula from the “Appended Statements” (Xici zhuan 繫辭傳)—“Great Ultimate generates Two Modes. Two Modes generate Four Images. Four Images generate Eight Trigrams” (太極生兩儀，兩儀生四象，四象生八卦)—to account for the differentiation of you (J. Chen 2016, p. 10).

Within this T3 tendency, a more nuanced position is found in Qiu Leyuan’s (Qiu 2012) study. Qiu criticizes earlier scholarship that directly identifies Dao, De, and Spirit-Illumination with qi, and seeks to move beyond such reductions by offering a more sophisticated account of the close—yet non-identical—relationship between Great Harmony and qi. Qiu argues that qi becomes operative at the stage of Great Harmony and is already implicated within it. In this respect, Qiu’s interpretation remains close to T3, insofar as it treats the Great Harmony threshold as the hinge that links wu and you, and as the point from which the generation of the myriad entities begins—thus paralleling Chen’s view. Yet Qiu does not collapse Great Harmony into qi as an ontological identity; rather, Qiu distinguishes the ontological status of wu from the substantiality of qi. (Qiu 2012, pp. 65–66, 73–75). This distinction is noteworthy in that it gestures toward qi’s mediating role in the generation from wu to you.

In sum, T3 singles out Great Harmony as the only qi-characterized stage within the fourfold schema of wu. This interpretation still counts Great Harmony as wu but treats it as the first substantial threshold at the wu–you boundary, where undifferentiated primordial qi first emerges; through its subsequent differentiation, the myriad entities emerge.

2.4. T4: Reading Qi as Belonging to the Category of You

T4 does not place Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony—each of which belongs to the realm of wu—in the category of qi; rather, it understands qi as a concept that is discussed only within the realm of you. The discussions by Li Fufu (F. Li 2018) and Li Yijing (Y. Li 2024) take this approach. Refraining, as far as possible, from expansive interpretation, they seek to determine the cosmological status of qi by following the order and sequence of the text’s own descriptions. The most crucial textual basis is as follows.

The generation of Heaven and Humanity is as follows: Form depends on qi, qi depends on Harmony, Harmony depends on Spirit-Illumination, Spirit-Illumination depends on Dao and De, and Dao and De depend on Self-so. In this way, the myriad entities come to exist.19

The generation of a tree is as follows: The tips depend on the twigs, the twigs depend on the branches, the branches depend on the stem, the stem depends on the trunk, the trunk depends on the root, the root depends on Heaven and Earth, and Heaven and Earth receive it from the formlessness. (The generation of blossoms and fruits is as follows:) Blossoms and fruits arise from youqi; youqi arise from the four seasons; the four seasons arise from yin and yang; yin and yang arise from Heaven and Earth; and Heaven and Earth receive it from the formlessness.20

These passages make the cosmological status of qi explicit. According to the first passage, qi is not identical with any of the stages of Dao and De, Spirit-Illumination, or Harmony (Great Harmony), but appears only at the subsequent stage, after Harmony. In the second schema, the expression qi (“youqi 有氣”) appears only after the sequence of “Heaven and Earth”, “yin and yang”, and the “four seasons” (sishi 四時) has already been established. Taken together, these points suggest that Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony, on the one hand, and qi, on the other, belong to two different categories—wu and you, respectively (F. Li 2018, p. 48).

T4 seeks, as far as possible, to set aside textually ungrounded inferences and expansive interpretations concerning Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, Great Harmony, and qi, and instead determines their status in accordance with the order and sequence of the text’s own expressions. By sharply distinguishing the stages of wu (Dao–De–Spirit-Illumination–Great Harmony) from the appearance of qi, T4 pushes back against readings that draw qi into wu as one of its components. Accordingly, it construes qi as a substantial factor operative only within the realm of you and frames the cosmological structure of the Zhigui as a dual configuration of “wu as an ontological ground” and “you as a substantial realm.” Thus, the unfolding of wu through Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony articulates Dao’s ontological self-unfolding, whereas qi is understood as the material substrate at the level of you that, through Heaven and Earth, yin and yang, and the four seasons (sishi 四時) already established on that ground, composes form and the myriad entities. In short, T4 more strongly emphasizes the Zhigui’s ontological account.

2.5. The Tensions and Issues Revealed by the Spectrum of Interpretations of Qi

In sum, although all four types (T1–T4) ground their readings in the Zhigui, they interpret the relation between Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, Great Harmony, and qi differently and, thus, arrive at different schematic worldviews. Some readings take all four stages to be internal stages within qi; others assign only part of the fourfold sequence to the level of qi; still others keep the entire sequence within wu and restrict qi to the realm of you alone. Ultimately, the dispute converges on a single question: within the basic schema that “somethingness arises from nothingness” (you sheng yu wu 有生於無), at what level should qi be situated? Clarifying this question is a prerequisite for understanding the Zhigui’s worldview.

This tension becomes apparent in two respects. First, although the four types take some key passages as shared textual bases, their interpretive focuses are entirely different. A representative example is the line quoted above: “Form depends on qi, qi depends on Harmony, Harmony depends on Spirit-Illumination, Spirit-Illumination depends on Dao and De”21. T1 reads this as grounding a cosmogonic account of qi-transformation that proceeds through a sequence such as “form–qi–Harmony–Spirit-Illumination–Dao and De.” On this view, not only Heaven and Earth, Humanity, and the myriad entities, but even Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony belong to a single process in which one qi differentiates in stages; accordingly, the question of where qi is situated within the wu–you structure is a relatively minor one. T3, by contrast, reads this line together with the preceding line—“Nothingness generates that which has form”22—and, thus, holds that qi first becomes manifest only at Great Harmony, the final stage among the four stages of wu and the link that connects wu and you. T4, meanwhile, focuses on qi being explicitly positioned after “Harmony” (or Great Harmony) and takes this as a basis for restricting qi to the realm of you, distinct from the four stages of wu. Thus, the same cited line yields three different schemata: “Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, Great Harmony as internal stages of qi” (T1), “Great Harmony as the starting point of qi” (T3), and “qi as the material substrate at the level of you after Great Harmony” (T4). That the same passage can support divergent schemata suggests the need to reexamine the Zhigui’s account of qi comprehensively.

Second, each type foregrounds the textual evidence most favorable to its own position, while failing to offer an adequate response to materials that serve as the basis for other types. For example, T1 reads “Dao has depth and subtlety, De has thickness and thinness, Spirit has clarity and turbidity, Harmony has tallness and lowness”23 as indicating gradations in the qualities of Dao, De, Spirit (or Spirit-Illumination), Harmony (or Great Harmony) themselves, and takes this as a basis for a qi-monist reading; yet, it does not mention passages that explicitly distinguish the stages of Harmony and qi, such as “qi depends on Harmony” (氣因於和). The same is true of T2. T3, meanwhile, emphasizes Great Harmony’s dual and mediating character between wu and you and interprets it as undifferentiated primordial qi; however, it overlooks that the Zhigui attributes the implication of “undifferentiated chaos” (hundun 混沌) to De (One), whereas it attributes to Great Harmony the implication of “Three” (san 三) as the conjunction of “clarity” (qing 清), “turbidity” (zhuo 濁), and “Harmony” (he 和).

A further difficulty concerns two formulations reserchers of T1 frequently treat as decisive textual support for qi-monist readings, namely “becoming differentiated through qi-transformation” (qihua fenli 氣化分離) and “being linked together and made continuous through qi-transformation” (qihua liantong 氣化連通). Although T1 understands these phrases to imply that Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony are subsumed within qi, the wording alone does not support this inference. Instead, understanding qi as a mediating or relational category helps clarify that these formulations describe processes or modes of interpretation, not ontological identity. Once we attend to the phrasing at the level of the passage and to the ontological valences of the key terms at stake, we understand the same formulations differently. Such interpretive openness constitutes an additional point we must address if we are to clarify qi’s categorical status within the Zhigui’s overall schema, particularly in relation to textual support for qi-monism versus mediating or relational views.

Taken together, these interpretive tensions and issues indicate the need for a comprehensive examination of the passages and usages of qi in cosmological contexts throughout the Zhigui. Paradoxically, the sharp divergence in understandings of qi suggests that the text does not permit a single, self-evident interpretation. The following section respecifies, on textual grounds, the categorical status of qi by comparing and critically assessing the schemata proposed by each type and their textual bases.

3. Textual Analysis of the Concept of Qi in the Laozi Zhigui and a Reassessment of Its Categorical Status

3.1. Two Schemata That Explicitly Specify Qi’s Status in the Cosmological Sequence

Throughout the Zhigui, few passages clarify where qi is situated within the cosmological sequence. Among them, the most crucial are the following two schemata.

The generation of Heaven and Humanity is as follows: Form depends on qi, qi depends on Harmony, Harmony depends on Spirit-Illumination, Spirit-Illumination depends on Dao and De, and Dao and De depend on Self-so. In this way, the myriad entities come to exist.24

The first schema traces backward from “form” (xing 形) through the sequence “form–qi–Harmony–Spirit-Illumination–Dao and De–Self-so.” Given that the Zhigui repeatedly describes Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony as the four stages of wu and characterizes them with the expression “wu + X” (無 + X), qi in this schema is placed outside the four stages of wu while remaining prior to any concretization into specific “form” (xing 形). That is, qi has the characteristic of being formless, yet it constitutes a substantial category distinct from the order of wu articulated through Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony.

This conceptual characterization also resonates with the way early Daoist texts understand qi.25 The Zhuangzi chapter “The Human World” (Renjianshi 人間世) states:

Qi, as such, is that which is empty and awaits things. Dao only gathers in emptiness.26

Here, qi symbolizes a state of emptiness that enables it to penetrate among the myriad entities, thereby characterizing Dao’s capacity to pervade all things. In the chapter “Perfect Enjoyment” (Zhile 至樂), the stages of the arising and transformation of human life are set out explicitly in a cosmogonic register:

I examined its beginning, and originally there was no arising; not only was there no arising, there was originally no form; not only was there no form, there was originally no qi. Mingled amid the hazy and indistinct, it transforms and there is qi; qi transforms and there is form; form transforms and there is arising. Now it transforms again and goes to death.27

Here, qi is distinguished from “form” (xing 形), described as a formless existence, while “form” is said to arise through the transformation of qi. With this perspective in mind, if we examine the Zhigui’s account, the fact that the Zhigui places qi prior to “form” indicates that qi is a substantial factor that affords the possibility of the formation of the myriad entities. Still, not including qi within the four stages of wu implies that qi is a distinct substantial category, differentiated from wu as an abstract order. In short, rather than being reduced to either wu or you, qi can be summarized as the first substantial conduit and material through which the order of wu passes over into form and the living emergence of the myriad entities. By contrast, the second schema is structured somewhat differently from the first:

The generation of a tree is as follows: The tips depend on the twigs, the twigs depend on the branches, the branches depend on the stem, the stem depends on the trunk, the trunk depends on the root, the root depends on Heaven and Earth, and Heaven and Earth receive it from the formlessness. (The generation of blossoms and fruits is as follows:) Blossoms and fruits arise from youqi; youqi arise from the four seasons; the four seasons arise from yin and yang; yin and yang arise from Heaven and Earth; and Heaven and Earth receive it from the formlessness.28

Here, the text traces backward from formed entities—such as a tree, blossoms, and fruits—toward “formlessness” (wuxing 無形), articulating in detail the sequence at the level of you. If the earlier portion employs the structure of a tree as an analogy and explains by tracing back toward the ground from which life originates, the latter portion likewise explains by tracing back toward the conditions and grounds for the arising of blossoms and fruits. In this context, “youqi 有氣” is closer to qi as vital energy immanent in the myriad entities—that is, qi that, conditioned by the operation of the “four seasons” (sishi 四時), enables the myriad entities to grow and come to fruition—than to qi as a mediator standing at the boundary between wu and you. In other words, whereas the first schema explains the “somethingness arises from nothingness” (you sheng yu wu 有生於無) structure by focusing on the sequence at the level of wu, the second schema does so by focusing on the sequence at the level of you.

With this in mind, the reading that simply links the two schemata into a single linear sequence—“Dao → De → Spirit-Illumination → Great Harmony → Heaven and Earth → yin and yang → the four seasons → youqi 有氣 → blossoms and fruits”—and accordingly construes qi as belonging only to the category of you (F. Li 2018, p. 48), flattens the Zhigui’s account excessively. Two points emerge from the two schemata. First, in neither schema is qi included within the four stages of wu represented by Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony. Second, even so, qi precedes—or operates behind—you in the sense of “form” (xing 形) and the myriad entities. In sum, fixing qi’s status exclusively as either wu or you is inappropriate; rather, qi should be understood as a substantiality prior to “form” (xing 形) that mediates between the order of wu and the formed entities. In the next subsection, taking this position as a premise, I specify qi’s categorical status by examining other passages concerning qi that appear in cosmological contexts.

3.2. Reinterpreting Other Uses of Qi in Cosmological Contexts

The two schemata discussed in the previous section show that qi is both excluded from the four stages of wu—Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony—and operative as a substantial factor prior to the establishment of specific “form” (xing 形) of the myriad entities. With this premise in mind, if we revisit passages in cosmological contexts that describe the generation from wu to you and that may bear on qi, we can more clearly identify the interpretive assumptions and limits through which T1–T3 connect qi to wu.

Three particularly representative examples are as follows.

Two are the nothingness of nothingness; therefore, they can enable Three to arise. With the Three arising together in the vast and the indistinct. …One is clarity, and the other is turbidity, and they move together with another, which is Harmonious. They are the beginning of Heaven and Humanity. They do not yet have form or shape, nor borders and boundaries. They are rooted in and bound to One. Those who receive their allotted life from Spirit are called Three.29

Three is nothingness; therefore, it can enable the myriad entities to arise. Clarity and turbidity become differentiated, tallness and lowness are arrayed, yin and yang begin to be distinguished, harmonious qi flows throughout, the three luminosities revolve; and the multitude of kinds thereby arise.30

Before Heaven and Earth had begun, yin and yang had not yet sprouted; cold and heat had not yet shown signs, and brightness and darkness had not yet taken form. There was something in which the Three stood forth: one of turbidity and one of clarity; clarity above and turbidity below, with Harmony at the center. With the Three arising together, Heaven and Earth were formed; yin and yang intermingled, and the myriad entities thereby arise.31

Of the three passages quoted, the first explains the process by which “Two generates Three” (er sheng san 二生三), while the second and third explain the process by which “Three generates the myriad entities” (san sheng wanwu 三生萬物). The first passage explicates the meaning of “Three” (san 三) in concrete terms: in this account, Three is characterized as wu and, yet, is also described as the point at which Heaven and Humanity begin. T3’s identification of Three—namely, Great Harmony—with undifferentiated primordial qi likewise results from an expansive reading of this kind of description. The latter two passages shift their focus from Three itself to the process by which the myriad entities arise from it. The second passage presents the sequence—“clarity and turbidity become differentiated, tallness and lowness are arrayed, and yin and yang begin to be distinguished”—as culminating in “harmonious qi flowing throughout” and “the three luminosities revolve”; this culminating configuration serves as the condition under which “the multitude of kinds arise.” The third passage likewise suggests that “with the Three arising together” constitutes the immediate condition for the emergence of Heaven and Earth, yin and yang, and the myriad entities. If the “harmonious qi” (heqi 和氣) specified here is equivalent to Great Harmony, then T3’s position gains correspondingly stronger textual support.

However, T3 maintains that two cosmological sequences coexist within the Zhigui: (1) a sequence in which wu is progressively disclosed—from Dao as the most radical emptiness and nothingness, through De and Spirit-Illumination, to Great Harmony as a comparatively more manifest stage, and (2) a sequence of you’s differentiation, beginning from Great Harmony and unfolding into Heaven and Earth, yin and yang, the four seasons, and ultimately the myriad entities.

Accordingly, Great Harmony functions as the hinge between the two sequences and, therefore, bears a double implication: as “Three” (san 三), it is the culminating stage of wu; yet, as “One” (yi 一), it is one undifferentiated primordial qi from which the differentiation of you begins. However, while the claim that Great Harmony implies “harmony” (he 和), symbolized as “Three,” accords with the Zhigui’s own descriptions, direct textual support for the further claim that it also implies “undifferentiated chaos” (hundun 混沌), symbolized as “One,” is lacking. Moreover, given that the Zhigui, in its exposition of the four stages of wu, primarily assigns the character of “undifferentiated chaos” (hundun 混沌) to De (“One”), reassigning that same character to Great Harmony runs against the text’s internal articulation.

For example, consider the following passages.

Dao is the emptiness of emptiness; therefore, it can enable One to arise. There is something in a state of undifferentiated chaos; its dwelling appears in the dim and indistinct.32

As Dao and De transform, they mold and refine the primordial initial point; within the Great emptiness and amid dark and mysterious, each being is endowed with its nature and allotted life. Thus, the myriad entities begin in a state of undifferentiated chaos. When Spirit-Illumination intermingles, clarity and turbidity become differentiated; Great Harmony then flows through the vast expanse and into the finest and most subtle realms, and it is here that the myriad entities arise.33

Crucially, in the second passage, the Zhigui distinguishes between the ground from which the generation of the myriad entities begins and the condition under which that generation is concretely actualized. That is, the myriad entities begin in a state of “undifferentiated chaos” (hundun 混沌), and when “Great Harmony flows” (taihe xing 太和行), they begin to arise. The former points to the ultimate ground of the generation of the myriad entities, whereas the latter specifies the immediate conditions under which that generative process unfolds. Considering the passages cited above together, these passages strongly suggest that the connotation of “undifferentiated chaos” is assigned to the stage of De (or to Dao and De). Accordingly, T3’s claim that Great Harmony itself is undifferentiated primordial qi is better understood not as a description grounded directly in the Zhigui’s text, but as an expanded inference drawn from T3’s own prior understanding of the Zhigui’s worldview.34

Meanwhile, the compound term “harmonious qi” (heqi 和氣), which appears in the Zhigui’s cosmological account, likewise warrants reexamination. On a surface reading, this collocation could suggest that qi is an attribute of Great Harmony (taihe 太和), potentially supporting T3. To assess this possibility, let us consider another Zhigui passage relevant to qi.

From what lies beyond Heaven and Earth to what lies within a hair’s breadth, beings are endowed with different qi and thereby diverge in form and kind. Yet all alike arise by receiving from One a share of its oneness, and all reach fulfillment by fully undergoing One’s transformative power. Therefore, One is that by which the myriad entities are guided—the crucial hinge of transformation and change; the standard for the myriad directions, and the measure by which the hundred transformations are weighed.35

Dao, De, and Heaven and Earth each have their own distinctive patterns; among entities, there are differences of high and low, and within qi, there are differences of short and long.36

In the first passage, the phrase “beings are endowed with different qi and thereby diverge in form and kind” could suggest that the myriad entities take on different forms and kinds because they are endowed with different qi. Here, “bing 禀” means “to be endowed with,” and its subject is the myriad entities. Read together with the phrase “that which is the emptiness of emptiness opens and guides their endowment”37, the structure becomes clearer: “emptiness of emptiness (xu zhi xu 虛之虛)—that is, Dao—is what “opens and guides” (kaidao 開導), or governs, the process by which beings are endowed with qi. Because they are endowed with different qi, they possess different forms and kinds. In other words, the proximate reason the myriad entities can be distinguished as different forms and kinds lies in their differentiated endowment with qi, while that very “difference” ultimately derives from Dao. The passage, thus, suggests that Dao is the ground of the myriad entities’ differentiation—not by directly bestowing distinct forms upon them, but by guiding the process by which they are endowed with qi, through which such differences are concretely realized. Taken together, these descriptions allow qi to be understood as a mediating substantiality that is differentially endowed in particular beings under Dao’s guidance, and as the bearer through which the ordering differentiation conferred by Dao is carried and instantiated.

Moreover, in the second passage, “among entities there are differences of high and low, and within qi there are differences of short and long” likewise indicates that qi is a substantial factor operative within the realm of you. In this line, “entities” (wu 物) and “qi 氣” are presented in parallel, each described as bearing properties such as “high/low” and “short/long.” As T1 also notes, properties such as “high/low” and “short/long” can apply only to concrete, substantial entities—things that admit of measurable differences in extent or intensity—rather than to a purely ontological ground. Accordingly, the line clarifies that qi is a substantial existent that admits of such quantitative and qualitative differences.

Taken together, these two passages reaffirm the cosmological status of qi in the Zhigui examined in Section 3.1. In short, qi is not in an internal stage of wu—represented by Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony—but a substantial mediator required for the already established order of wu to pass over into the world of “form” (youxing 有形). On this basis, the statement “harmonious qi flows throughout, the three luminosities revolve; and the multitude of kinds thereby arise” can be read as a compressed depiction of how the order of harmony implied by Great Harmony concretely unfolds within the realm of you through the material mediation of qi. That is, “harmonious qi” (heqi 和氣) does not mean that Great Harmony itself is qi; rather, it designates a state in which the order of harmony constituted at the level of wu circulates, by way of qi, within the realm of you. Here, “Harmony” (he 和) and “qi 氣” remain categorically distinct: “harmonious qi” (heqi 和氣) names only the juncture at which the two realms meet, and it does not, by itself, provide grounds for straightforwardly reducing Great Harmony to “primordial qi.”

Building on the foregoing analysis of qi usage and function, we now reconsider two key formulations on which T1 relies: qihua liantong 氣化連通 and qihua fenli 氣化分離. T1 takes these phrases to indicate that the four stages of wu (Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony) are subsumed within qi (i.e., a qi-monist framework). If the reader could only interpret these passages in that way, they would indeed constitute decisive support for T1’s interpretation. In contrast, the wording admits multiple plausible construals, permitting alternative views that do not equate qi with the entire ontological structure and facilitating a more nuanced understanding. When tested against the surrounding context, T1’s reading appears closer to an interpretive leap than a necessary inference. The following remarks revisit these lines, considering the mediating account of qi presented above, and clarify why the wording alone does not compel a stronger qi-monist inference.

The first passage reads: “Dao and De, Spirit-Illumination, clarity and turbidity, Great Harmony, Heaven and Earth, Humanity and entities are as if they were tips and roots. These factors follow one another; they are linked together and made continuous through qi-transformation.”38 This passage certainly places the named factors within a single explanatory framework; however, it does not explicitly state that each factor is ontologically identical to qi. The metaphors “as if they were tips and roots” and “follow one another” instead foreground an ordered dependence and a relational articulation among heterogeneous terms. Thus, qihua liantong 氣化連通 is most succinctly understood as naming the means or mode by which this articulated series is rendered continuous. A comparable reading is suggested by Qiu Leyuan, who emphasizes qi’s mediating function as the hinge through which heterogeneous terms are “linked and made continuous” in the generation from wu to you. (Qiu 2012, p. 75) That is, the way in which distinct domains combine to form a single chain, rather than claiming that the series is ontologically homogeneous with qi. It is therefore most natural to translate qihua liantong 氣化連通 as “they are linked together and made continuous through qi-transformation.”

The second passage reads: “Heaven and Earth, Humanity and entities all share the same primordial beginning and one common ancestor. Within the six directions and at the outer bounds of the cosmos, they are linked together as one body. They become differentiated through qi-transformation; running vertically and horizontally, above and below, they are split into two and apportioned into five.”39 Rather than establishing the T1-style qi-monism, the line highlights the clear ontological hierarchy between Heaven and Earth, Humanity, and entities as formed things in the realm of you, and the primordial beginning (yuan shi 元始), and the common ancestor (zong zu 宗祖) as an ontological ground encompassing Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony. These formed things are said to constitute “one body” as they share a common ground; yet when they are concretely instantiated within the realm of you, they emerge as separate and manifest in distinct forms. In this interpretation, “becoming differentiated through qi-transformation” (qihua fenli 氣化分離) specifies that this process occurs through qi, without identifying qi with the primordial beginning or the common ancestor. A more expansive reading suggests that qi functions as a mediating term linking these two realms, thereby enabling the differentiation of formed things.

Interpreted in this more minimal and textually conservative sense, these qihua 氣化 formulations do not compel the stronger qi-monist inference. Rather, they are consistent with the mediating account of qi argued in Section 3.

3.3. Qi in the Context of Mind–Nature and Self-Cultivation

Thus far, I have examined the status of qi primarily in a cosmological context—that is, in relation to the wu–you structure. In the Zhigui, however, cosmology does not merely describe the structure of the world. Within its Huang–Lao integrative framework, cosmology is extended analogically to human life and mind–nature, as well as to the ruler’s moral character and political practice. In other words, the relations among Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, Great Harmony, and qi provide a common framework that runs through the cosmos, Humanity, and politics alike. A representative passage that illustrates this is as follows.

Dao, De, and Spirit-Illumination, clarity and turbidity, and Great Harmony—all merge into muddled unity and thereby constitute a single body, and the myriad entities thereby take on form. That on which form relies is radiant and flourishing; its distinguishing marks cannot be seen, so we name it “sheng.” As existence, “sheng” is neither yin nor yang; it cannot be reckoned nor measured. It is so deep and subtle that it defies description, and so dark and marvelous that it defies naming. Luminous yet indistinct, it has no form and no sound. Without configuration and without image, its movement and stillness have no fixed course. It roams in the wilds of empty stillness and dwells in the land of nothingness. Those who obtain it endure; those who lose it perish.40

Now, as for sheng’s abiding within “form”: spirit is its calyx-stalk; essence is its root. The heart is its palace and chambers; the nine orifices are its doors and gates. The sensory faculties serve as its envoys and messengers; feelings and intentions are its carriage. The hun and po souls attend it at its sides; blood and qi41 are its laborers.42

The argument of this passage unfolds along two parallel levels. From the section that begins “As existence, ‘sheng’ …” (sheng zhi wei wu 生之為物), the passage describes “sheng 生” at an originary level; in this level, sheng can be interpreted as “generativity,” meaning it has not yet manifested and exists only as non-substantive order. The latter part—introduced by “Now, as for sheng’s abiding within ‘form’ …” (sheng zhi yu xing 生之於形)—explains how that “generativity” is structured within an entity that has already taken on “form” (xing 形), above all the human being. The opening cosmological account clarifies the relation that the non-substantial, ontologically operative order—represented by Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, clarity and turbidity, and Great Harmony—bears to the myriad entities. These are not separate from one another but form a single ontological body, precisely that which is the ground on which the myriad entities obtain “form” (xing 形) and become manifest (“that on which form relies,” xing zhi suo tuo 形之所託). The Zhigui specifically names this ground of “form,” or of the myriad entities, sheng; this can be understood as a link for rearticulating, through the ensuing discussion of “sheng’s abiding within ‘form’” (sheng zhi yu xing 生之於形), the wu–you relation previously set out at the cosmological level within the structure of human life.

According to this analogical mode of exposition, the relation between wu and you in cosmology—namely, that between Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, clarity and turbidity, and Great Harmony (as wu), on the one hand, and the myriad formed entities (as you), on the other—reappears in a similar pattern within a living individual that has already taken on “form.” Just as “sheng 生,” interpreted here as “generativity,” and “form” configure the wu–you contrast at the cosmological level, so within the life of such an entity does an “inside/outside” configuration emerge, between inner spirit and outward embodiment. The originary ground of life within the human interior is identified as “spirit” (shen 神) and “essence” (jing 精)—“spirit is its calyx-stalk; essence is its root”—a figurative way of marking their status as the originary ground of life. What surrounds this from without, the heart as “palace and chambers” and the nine orifices as “doors and gates,” constitutes the site in which that inner activity resides and through which it passes in and out. The subsequent series can be read similarly: the sensory faculties, likened to “envoys and messengers,” express responsiveness to what is outside; feelings and intentions are the “carriage” that bears this activity; and the hun and po souls are attendants at the sides. Significantly, “blood and qi” (xueqi 血氣) appear last, as “laborers.” This placement indicates that qi is not on the same level as spirit and essence but stands in a subordinate relation: blood and qi are the rank-and-file agents that directly carry out, within embodied form, the life-order established by the inner spirit. In this way, the mediating status of qi identified at the cosmological level is reaffirmed at the level of mind–nature and self-cultivation. From this perspective, the following passage may also be read anew:

Dao has depth and subtlety, De has thickness and thinness, Spirit has clarity and turbidity, Harmony has tallness and lowness. Clarity becomes Heaven; Turbidity becomes Earth. Yang becomes male; yin becomes female. Humanity and entities receive what is endowed and conferred upon them; what they receive varies in amount, and accordingly, their nature may be fine or coarse, their allotted life may be long or short, their feelings may be beautiful or ugly, and their intentions may be great or small. Some become petty persons, some become exemplary persons; through transformation and differentiation, they are split apart and sorted into several grades. Therefore, there are persons of Dao, persons of De, persons of humaneness, persons of righteousness, and persons of ritual propriety.43

T1 takes the terms “depth and subtlety,” “thickness and thinness,” “clarity and turbidity,” and “tallness and lowness” in this sentence as evidence for reading Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Harmony all as substantial existents—qi—that admit of differences of degree. Yet, if we attend to the immediately following context, these expressions more naturally convey not the intrinsic qualities of Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Harmony themselves, but rather how, and to what extent, the myriad entities receive and appropriate them. The line “Humanity and entities receive what is endowed and conferred upon them; what they receive varies in amount, and accordingly their nature may be fine or coarse, their allotted life may be long or short, their feelings may be beautiful or ugly, their intentions may be great or small” makes this logic explicit; on this basis, the text proceeds to grade human beings—here, specifically rulers—as “petty persons” and “exemplary persons,” or again as “persons of Dao, persons of De, persons of humaneness, persons of righteousness, persons of ritual propriety.” Given that the object of “receive” (shou 受) in this passage is qi, the order implied by Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Harmony is conferred upon Humanity and the myriad entities through the mediation of qi. Accordingly, the passage invites a fourfold distinction in the logic of “endowment and conferment” (bingjia 禀假). First, Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Harmony name the wu-order that functions as the ultimate ground of endowment. Second, the content of endowment is qi—indeed, differentiated allotments of qi. Third, the bearers of endowment are “Humanity and entities” (renwu 人物), whose endowments differ and who, thereby, come to differ. Fourth, the outcome of endowment is the ensuing variation in “nature” (xing 性), “allotted life” (ming命), “feelings” (qing 情), and “intentions” (yi 意), which in turn grounds the text’s subsequent gradations of rulers. Accordingly, the following passage can be interpreted similarly.

A ruler of lower virtue receives, in his nature, upright qi of Dao; in his allotted life he is granted only the lower–middle share of One. Thus, his nature and allotted life still accord with Self-so; his feelings and intentions nearly reach Spirit-Illumination; his movements and actions come close to Great Harmony; and in what he accepts or rejects, he embodies the pattern of perfect virtue.44

From T1’s standpoint, the phrase “upright qi of Dao” might appear to support the move to equate Dao with qi. Yet, in context, the phrase emphasizes what the ruler of lower virtue takes as the basis for his endowments—his nature, allotted life, feeling, intention, etc.—and, thus, what he receives and how that reception takes place. The line should, therefore, be read in self-cultivation terms: the ruler’s character takes in the order of Dao in the form of “upright qi”. Likewise, the next phrase, “in his allotted life he is granted only the lower–middle share of One”, should also not be taken to mean that he “is granted” One (yi 一) itself; rather, he receives only the lower–middle portion of the order implied by One. What he actually receives—such that it differentiates into variations in nature, allotted life, feeling, intention, etc.—is qi.

3.4. The Status of the Concept of Qi and Its Significance for the Zhigui Worldview

Taken together, the foregoing discussion suggests that the status of qi presupposed by the Zhigui cannot be straightforwardly fixed under any one of the four existing interpretive approaches (T1–T4). The Zhigui consistently describes Dao–De–Spirit-Illumination–Great Harmony as four stages of wu 無 and explicates their implications in detail, yet it never explicitly designates these stages as “qi 氣.” In its cosmological exposition, qi is located between Great Harmony and embodied “form” (xing 形); and in the analogous discussions of mind–nature and self-cultivation, qi is never identified with “spirit” (shen 神) and “essence” (jing 精), but always appears as the stratum that mediates them and acts upon “form.” In sum, qi is a mediating entity positioned between wu and you. However, qi cannot be understood as a merely “in-between” term. Compared with you, which is defined as that which possesses “form,” qi belongs to a prior, formless stage. Precisely because it bears the features of the formless, it possesses the material potential through which the myriad entities can be constituted. Additionally, qi is ontologically distinguished from wu—Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony—as the ultimate ground of the existence and becoming of the myriad entities; but it remains subordinate to wu, in that it bears the order proper to wu and, on that basis, confers it upon the myriad entities.

Determining the status of qi in the Zhigui is crucial for grasping the theoretical basis of its worldview, which develops the basic schema of “somethingness arises from nothingness” (you sheng yu wu 有生於無) distinctly from that developed in the Han dynasty primordial qi-centered qi cosmology. Once the categorical position of qi is clarified, the limitations of the schemata proposed by the four existing types—each of which first fixes the relation between wu and qi and then derives a worldview accordingly—also come into view. T1 and T2 reduce Dao–De–Spirit-Illumination–Great Harmony to internal stages of qi and interpret “somethingness arises from nothingness” within Han-style framework in which “primordial qi” (yuanqi 元氣) gradually manifests and differentiates; in doing so, they dilute the four stages of wu between which the Zhigui carefully distinguishes, along with their distinctive implications, and thereby weaken both the ontological meaning of wu and its function as the ground of the myriad entities. T3 offers an important insight insofar as it distinguishes a dual cosmology of wu and you and highlights the mediating role of Great Harmony; yet the moment it posits Great Harmony as undifferentiated primordial qi, it comes into conflict with the internal structure of the four stages of wu as described in the Zhigui, and ultimately projects the idea of Han dynasty primordial qi onto the text while effectively presupposing it. T4 is closest to the text in that it separates wu from qi and, thereby, underscores the ontological significance of wu; however, it does not fully capture the complex mediating relations and stratification through which qi operates between wu and you.

Nevertheless, these limitations do not mean that all four types “misread” the Zhigui. Rather, each type can offer a coherent account—within a restricted set of assumptions—by focusing on a particular cross-section of the complex worldview articulated in the Zhigui. Because Section 2 and Section 3 examine the presuppositions of each type separately and cross-analyze their textual grounds, the remaining task is to reposition these partial insights within a broader perspective. More specifically, this means reconstructing—within the triadic framework of wu–qi–you—(1) the cosmogonic implications of the four stages of wu emphasized by T1; (2) the law-governed character and ontological status of Dao highlighted by T2; (3) the dual structure of wu and you captured by T3; and (4) the categorical separation of qi and wu and the ontological significance of wu raised by T4. On this basis, the next section seeks to redraw the schematic of the Zhigui worldview.

4. Reconstructing the Worldview of the Laozi Zhigui

4.1. The Schema of the Four Stages of Wu: A Non-Substantialist “Order-Cosmogony”

In the course of interpreting the Daodejing’s cosmological schema—“The Dao generates One. One generates Two. Two generates Three” (道生一, 一生二, 二生三, 三生萬物)—the Zhigui newly introduces, in addition to Dao, De, Spirit-Illumination, and Great Harmony, and places all of them on the level of wu 無. From the structure of this schema alone, it can be easily read—much line in Han dynasty primordial qi-centered qi cosmology—as a process in which one undifferentiated substance gradually differentiates. Yet, a reading grounded more directly in the text suggests that these four stages are better understood not as an internal differentiation of qi as a substance, but as stages in the generation of order—that is, as an account of how the ontological meaning of wu is constituted and unfolded.45

To summarize their implications, various passages of the Zhigui treat Dao as a complete emptiness and nothingness in which no determinacy or fixed attribute is present; precisely for that reason, it remains, paradoxically, open to all possibilities. In this respect, Dao is ontologically the most fundamental existence. In terms of order, it may be described as an “order of non-order.” De signifies undifferentiated chaos prior to division. This does not designate a substantial state of “primordial qi”; rather, like Dao, it indicates an indeterminacy before any distinctions have yet arisen. Yet, because it bears a somewhat more determinate character than Dao, it is expressed as “One” (yi 一). It may be called an “order of undivided wholeness” or an “order of chaos.” Spirit-Illumination signifies the inception of separation and change. As the phrase “Spirit-Illumination intermingles, clarity and turbidity become differentiated”46 indicates, it denotes a state in which clarity and turbidity bifurcate from within undifferentiated chaos. It is, therefore, expressed as “Two” (er 二) and can be described as an “order of transformation.” Finally, Great Harmony denotes the state in which, in addition to clarity and turbidity, Harmony is also in place, thereby establishing the immediate conditions for the generation of the myriad entities. Because the triad of clarity–turbidity–Harmony is fully present, it is expressed as “Three” (san 三) and signifies an “order of balance and harmony.”47

When this structure is expressed as a numerical schema, it may appear as an “increase” or “generation” that proceeds from One (yi 一) to Two (er 二) and Three (san 三). Yet, what increases here is not a substance but order—that is, the formal and structural conditions that enable the phenomenal world to be constituted and to change; in other words, a law-like ordering is built up in stages. Accordingly, the Zhigui’s cosmogony of the realm of wu is not a substantialist account in which the myriad entities differentiate from one primordial qi, as previous studies have often presupposed. Rather, it is a non-substantialist cosmogony that traces how the order of wu is constituted as the ground of the phenomenal world, and no notion that corresponds directly to “primordial qi” is identifiable anywhere in the Zhigui. In this respect, the so-called “cosmology of wu” is not a system placed in parallel with a “cosmology of you” on the same level but should instead be understood as an ontological self-unfolding that makes substantial generation possible within the realm of you.

4.2. The Triadic Structure of Wu–Qi–You and an Integrative Schema of the Laozi Zhigui Worldview

If we now combine the status of qi 氣 clarified in Section 3 with the cosmogonic schema of wu, the worldview of the Zhigui can be reconstructed as a triad of wu 無–qi 氣–you 有—one that cannot be adequately captured either by a simple “wu–you dichotomy” or by a “qi-monism” (i.e., readings that treat qi as the single ultimate ontological substance, reducing wu and you to modalities of qi).

First, at the level of wu, Dao–De–Spirit-Illumination–Great Harmony together constitute a single ontological order. Although these four stages each carry distinct implications, they are not four separate ontological existences standing apart from one another, but rather multiple aspects of the order of wu that “all merge into muddled unity and thereby constitute a single body”48. This order points to a dimension of principles prior to generation—one that cannot be reduced to a concrete substance such as qi.

Second, the level of qi corresponds to the material medium through which the order of wu must pass in order to transition into the phenomenal world. The Zhigui does not directly define Dao–De–Spirit-Illumination–Great Harmony as qi, nor does it employ the terms “qi 氣” or “primordial qi” (yuanqi 元氣) in its explications of them. Instead, through statements such as “Form depends on qi, qi depends on Harmony”49 and “beings are endowed with different qi and thereby diverge in form and kind”50, it conveys only that the order of wu “is endowed” (bing 禀) to the myriad entities by way of qi. Qi is close to wu insofar as it is prior to embodied form; yet, it is distinguished from wu insofar as it is a substance to which quantitative and qualitative differences apply. Put differently, qi occupies a dual status: while subordinate to wu, it is also the material medium through which “form” (xing 形) and the myriad entities are constituted. Wu without qi cannot take on “form,” and qi not grounded in wu cannot possess direction or order.

Third, at the level of you, an account of the conditions, ground, and causes by which the myriad entities within the phenomenal world receive life and come to grow unfolds stepwise. This is a paradigmatic cosmogonic mode of explanation. Within the generative schema at this level, the concept of qi—here deployed in “youqi 有氣,” as the vital energy of the life of the myriad entities—again confirms qi’s mediating role as an intermediate material medium between the diverse entities of the phenomenal world and the more fundamental order of nature.

In sum, the worldview of the Zhigui comprises a triadic framework of wu–qi–you. Wu designates an ontological level of order-generation that unfolds as Dao–De–Spirit-Illumination–Great Harmony; qi is the mediating material medium through which that order is transmitted to the phenomenal world; and you is the level at which the generation of the formed myriad entities fully unfolds. The Zhigui often explains the relations among these realms through a single schematic sequence in which the processes of “arising” (sheng 生) and “depending on” (yin 因) recur. Such expression can easily lead one to misconstrue even the level of wu as straightforwardly “cosmogonic.” Yet, the “sheng 生” and “yin 因” described at the level of wu do not presuppose any substantialist notion—such as qi or primordial qi—and, in this respect, they differ from ordinary cosmogonic accounts. For this reason, this study terms the Zhigui’s account of wu an “order–cosmogony” account.51

5. Conclusions: A Distinctive Variation on Qi Cosmology

Previous studies of the Zhigui’s worldview have mapped out distinct conceptual terrains on the basis of differing understandings of wu and qi. Yet, if one’s account of qi—and, more specifically, of the relation between wu and qi—changes, one’s understanding of the worldview must change accordingly. This study took prior interpretations as its point of departure and subjected them to critical examination to produce a more plausible account, aiming to arrive—on that basis—at a renewed understanding of the Zhigui’s worldview.

Although existing studies construe the relation between wu and qi differently, they ultimately tend to follow the paradigmatic Han dynasty qi cosmology—that is, a primordial qi-centered cosmology—and treat it as a tacit premise for interpreting that relation. On the present reading, however, no cosmology of differentiation from primordial qi appears in the Zhigui. The schemata of differentiation and generation deployed at the level of wu are not specified in terms of any substantialist concept. They are, therefore, better understood as a non-substantialist, abstract process of generation, appropriately termed an “order–cosmogony”, that is, an account of order-generation. Within the Zhigui, qi should be understood as the material medium through which the order constituted at the level of wu is endowed to the myriad formed entities.

If this interpretation of the Zhigui is original and tenable, then the Zhigui does not simply reproduce the Han dynasty’s doctrine of primordial qi. Rather, in distinguishing an ontology of wu from a cosmogony of you, it proposes a new model of qi cosmology. In doing so, it establishes a distinctive theoretical horizon that cannot be straightforwardly assimilated to Han dynasty Daoist or Confucian tradition, and that instead stands closer to later developments such as Neo-Daoist Xuanxue 玄学and Neo-Confucian lixue 理学.

Due to space limitations, this study has pursued neither a systematic comparison between the Zhigui and other Han dynasty models of qi cosmology nor a fuller reconstruction of its intellectual-historical position in sufficient detail. Re-situating the Zhigui in the history of Chinese thought—precisely as a non-primordial qi model of qi cosmology—thus remains a promising task for future research.