#wang bi

He identifies that most Laozi chapters argue for something by expanding on two parallel phenomena that either represent a contrast or are both impacted in the same way by the topic and he decides to represent this very simple and catchy rhetorical structure that, and I can not emphasize enough, is very easy to understand from reading the text like a normal person, by printing all words of his translation he associates with the parallelism on either the left side or right side of the page (the translation of Wang Bi's commentary is rendered in italics):

And also, I know he says he wants to make his translation as falsifiable as possible, but his comments are often unnecessary and borderline insulting:

天地不為獸生芻而獸食芻不為人生狗而人食狗無為於萬無物而萬物名適其所用則莫不贍矣若惠由己樹未足任也

Translation:

Heaven and Earth do not produce grass for the benefit of cattle, but the cattle [still] eat grass. They do not produce dogs for the benefit of men, but men [still] eat dogs. As they are without interference concerning the ten thousand kinds of entities, each of the ten thousand kinds of entitites fits into its useso that there is none that is not provided for. Would they [Heaven and Earth] confer kindness on their own [initiative], they would be unable to let [the entities' That-which-is-of-itself-what-it-is] come into effect.

Compare with Liezi 8.30 (from ctext):

齊田氏祖於庭，食客千人。中坐有獻魚鴈者。田氏視之，乃歎曰：「天之於民厚矣！殖五穀，生魚鳥，以為之用。眾客和之如響。鮑氏之子年十二，預於次，進曰：「不如君言。天地萬物，與我並生類也。類无貴賤，徒以小大智力而相制，迭相食；非相為而生之。人取可食者而食之，豈天本為人生之？且蚊蚋噆膚，虎狼食肉，非天本為蚊蚋生人、虎狠生肉者哉？」

Translation by A. C. Graham:

T'ien o f Ch'i was going on a journey; he sacrificed in his court­yard to the god of the roads, and banqueted a thousand guests. Someone was serving fish and geese at the seat of honour. T'ien looked at them; then he sighed and said: 'How generous heaven is to mankind! It grows the five grains and breeds the fish and birds for the use of man.' All the guests answered like his echo. But a twelve year-old boy of the Pao family, who had a seat among the guests, came forward and said: 'It is not as your lordship says. The myriad things between heaven and earth, born in the same way that we are, do not differ from us in kind. One kind is no nobler than another; it is simply that the stronger and cleverer rule the weaker and sillier. Things take it in turns to eat each other, but they are not bred for each other's sake. Men take the things which are edible and eat them, but how can it be claimed that heaven bred them originally for the sake of man? Besides, mosquitoes and gnats bite our skin, tigers and wolves eat our flesh; did heaven originally breed man for the sake of mosquitoes and gnats, and his flesh for the sake of tigers and wolves?'

第四章 Chapter 4:

凡物之所以存，乃反其形；功之所以尅，乃反其名。夫存者不以存為存，以其不忘亡也；安者不以安為安，以其不忘危也。故保其存者亡，不忘亡者存；安其位者危，不忘危者安。善九舉秋毫，善聽聞雷霆，此道之與形反也。安者實安，而曰非安之所安；存者實存，而曰非存之所存；侯王實尊而曰非尊之所為；天地實大，而曰非大之所能；聖功實存，而曰絕聖之所立；仁德實著，而曰棄仁之所存。故使見形而不及道者，莫不忿其言焉。夫欲定物之本者，則雖近而必自遠以證其始。欲明物之所由者，則雖顯而必自幽以敘其本。故取天地之外，以明形骸之内；明侯王孤寡之義，而從道一以宣其始。故使察近而不及流統之原者，莫不 誕其言以為虛焉。是以元元者，名申其說，人美其亂。或迂其言，或譏其論，若曉而昧，若分而亂，斯之由矣。

[Had to copy this by typing so there might be some mistakes in there. In print they use a really fance variant of 尊 I can't find anywhere. etc etc.]

Generally [speaking], that by which beings persist is the negative opposite indeed to their form. That by which achievements are performed is the negative opposite indeed to their name. It is a fact that he who persists does not take persistance for [the cause] of his persisting, but [his persisting is due] to his not forgetting about [the danger of] perishing! he who is secure does not take security for [the cause] of his being secure, but [his security is due] to his not forgetting about perils! That is why [to paraphrase the Sage, Confucius, in the Xici,] "he who guards his persistence" "perishes," while he who [like the Gentleman] "does not forget about [the danger of] perishing" "persists"! "he who secures his position" "is in peril," while he who [like the Gentleman] "does not forget about peril" "is secure"! [That] he who is [truly] good at strength [restricts himself to] lifting an autumn down, [That] he who is [truly] good at hearing [restricts himself to] listening to the thunderclap, this is the negative opposite between Dao and form. He who is secure is secure indeed, but [the Laozi] says he is secure through his refusal of [treating] security [as a given]. He who persists persists indeed, but [the Laozi] says he persists through his refusal of [treating] persistance [as a given]. Dukes and kings are elevated indeed, but [the Laozi] says this [their status] is by [their] rejecting elevation. Heaven and Earth are great indeed, but [it is] said that it [their greatness] is achieved throuh [their] rejection [of acting] great. Achievements of [a ruler's] wisdom persist indeed, but [the Laozi] says they are established by [his] "discarding wisdom." The capacity for benevolence is manifest indeed, but [the Laozi] says it persists through “discarding benevolence.” Therefore, among those who see the form but do not reach as far as the Dao, there is no one who does not loathe his [Laozi’s] words. It is a fact that he who wants do defime the root of entities must, though they [the entities] be near from afar give evidence of their beginning. he who wants to elucidate the basis of entities must, though these [entities] be evident, start from the recondite in order to point out their root. That is why [the Laozi] takes things external like Heaven and Earth in order to elucidate that which is inside the shape and bones [that is, the body]. elucidating the meaning of [the fact that] "dukes and kings" [style themselves] "orphaned and lonely," starts the deduction from the Dao and the One [in Laozi 42.1] in order to display the origin of this. Therefore, among those researching that which is close at hand but not reaching to the source controlling the currents, there is none who does not dismiss his words as empty talk. Thus the babblers each proclaim their own theory while others enjoy their confusion. They either water down [the Laozi’s] words or ridicule [the Laozi’s] arguments. When the clear becomes obscure and the separate commingled—here is the reason!

Had to copy this by typing, too, and no offense to Mr Wagner, it's a great translation and the tracing of the history of the different editions is impressive, but his commenting style within the translation is fucking obnoxious.

Also note that he translates 反 as "negative opposite." Personally I would prefer something like "reversal", but that doesn't sound as philosophical, I guess.

Wang Bi was a longtime friend and confidant of Cao Cao’s. He became one of Cao Cao’s personal assistants back in 192, when Cao Cao took over Yan. At one time he served as an ambassador to Li Jue’s regime. By 198 he was Cao Cao’s registrar and provided tactical advice during the campaign against Lü Bu - Wang Bi was one of those who urged Cao Cao to execute him.

Eventually, Cao Cao made Wang Bi his Chief Clerk, the top clerical official in his military administration (Zhuge Liang held the same position in relation to Liu Bei). Because Cao Cao was often at Ye or out on campaign, he left Wang Bi in command of the capital.

Early in 218, Ji Ben and the others revolted and tried to seize Xu city, planning to turn it over to Guan Yu. Their first act was an attempt on Wang Bi’s life. However, Wang Bi escaped, rallied his forces and crushed the rebellion. He personally fought against them and was wounded many times. He managed to suppress the rebellion, though he died of his wounds a few days later.

The claim that nobody liked him seems to be simple slander.