關鍵字: 清靜；《清靜經》；心性論；內丹；三教融通；道教經典詮釋

Abstract: As a core category in Daoism, “clarity and stillness” (qingjing) did not possess a fixed connotation from the outset, but rather accumulated and was continuously reinterpreted over a long period of evolution. Adopting an approach that integrates “conceptual history–formation of scripture–commentarial tradition,” this paper examines the development of its meaning. In Lao-Zhuang philosophy, clarity and stillness is both the essential attribute of the Dao and the practice of embodying the Dao; it also bifurcates into the Laozi’s orientation toward governing the self and the state (ontological-political) and the Zhuangzi’s orientation toward purifying the mind and subduing desires (mind-nature). From the Han to the Six Dynasties, through works such as the Huainanzi and the Laozi Xiang’er Zhu, as well as the Celestial Masters, Shangqing, and Lingbao Daoist communities, clarity and stillness was transformed from a philosophical category into operational religious practical norms and even identity markers distinguishing Daoists from laypeople. By the Sui-Tang period, the Taishanglaojun Shuo Changqingjing Jing appeared, using a fourfold structure of “Dao-essence–clarity and stillness–cultivation of virtue–meritorious fruits” to forge the successive meanings of clarity and stillness into a systematic theory of mind-nature cultivation, thereby becoming a foundational scripture. The subsequent commentarial tradition over a thousand years further deepened the meaning of clarity and stillness along three paths: internal alchemy (neidan), the Twofold Mystery perspective of realizing emptiness, and the integration of the Three Teachings. The Qingjing Jing is both the theoretical crystallization of the conceptual history of “clarity and stillness” and the hermeneutical starting point for its continued unfolding.

Key words: Clarity and stillness; Qingjing Jing; mind-nature theory; internal alchemy (neidan); integration of the Three Teachings; Daoist scripture hermeneutics