Of old, these came to be in possession of the One:
Heaven in virtue of the One is limpid;
Earth in virtue of the One is settled;
Gods in virtue of the One have their potencies;
The valley in virtue of the One is full;
The myriad creatures in virtue of the One are alive;
Lords and princes in virtue of the One become leaders in the empire.
It is the One that makes these what they are.
Without what makes it limpid heaven might split;
Without what makes it settled earth might sink;
Without what gives them their potencies gods might spend themselves;
Without what makes it full the valley might run dry;
Without what keeps them alive the myriad creatures might perish;
Without what makes them leaders lords and princes might fall.
Hence the superior must have the inferior as root; the high must have the low as base. Thus lords and princes refer to themselves as solitary, desolate, and hapless. This is taking the inferior as root, is it not?
Hence the highest renown is without renown.
Not wishing to be one among many like jade nor to be aloof like stone.
The sage is neither limpid nor settled nor potent nor full nor alive nor a leader. She in virtue of the One is one; without what makes her one she might be heaven or earth or a god or a valley or a myriad creature or a lord.
If you wish, you may think of the superior as superior but it is not; if you wish, you may think of the inferior as inferior but it is not. If the superior must have the inferior, how can it be superior? Picture the One as a circle, the superior as sections in the upper half, the inferior as sections in the lower. A lord is not a lord because he is better; he is a lord simply because he is a lord. Only those splintered divorce parts of the circle from the other parts that make it a circle.
By making and giving and keeping, it is not meant that the One doles out limpidity, settlement, potency, fullness, aliveness, and leadership as a manager or the government might dole out funds, benefits, awards, or praise. Each exists as it is because of its context not because of itself. This is so though it may claim—as it often does—that it exists as it is largely or solely because of itself.
So the One came to be perceived as separate and history is the accumulation of separations and the increasingly audible derision of context. For as there is more to see so it becomes more difficult to see the One.