History of TaoTehChingTalk

	Revision 3 . . February 13, 2001 12:50 am by AyeSpy
	Revision 2 . . February 13, 2001 12:42 am by AyeSpy
	Revision 1 . . February 8, 2001 7:56 am by AyeSpy

---

Difference (from prior major revision) (no other diffs)

Changed: 6c6

COMMENT: There is no justification for any such categorical statement. (unsure what is meant here - either that diverse authorship is in question, or that Li Erh existed -- AyeSpy) To take but the matter of Ssu-ma Ch'ien, I quote:

COMMENT: There is no justification for any such categorical statement. To take but the matter of Ssu-ma Ch'ien, I quote:

Changed: 16c16

Indeed, the author of the 'Historical Records' himself expresses doubt about the authenticity of the available information. Thus, although you may of course personally hold the opinion that Lao Tzu existed and the Tao Te Ching is the work of one man, it is altogether inappropriate to present these views as accepted fact.

Indeed, the author of the 'Historical Records' himself expresses doubt about the authenticity of the available information. Thus, although you may of course personally hold the opinion that Lao Tzu existed and the Tao Te Ching is the work of one man, it is altogether inappropriate to present these views as accepted fact.