So right at the beginning it says this -- you can talk about Tao, but not the eternal Tao[1]. From a philosophy perspective, it is a good idea to read differen

So right at the beginning it says this -- you can talk about Tao, but not the eternal Tao[1]. From a philosophy perspective, it is a good idea to read different versions because there isn't really a "right way to put it". This kind of Taoism is meant to make you think and relate to the universe in a certain way. If you're more interested in studying an authentic version of the text though, almost all of the English "translations" are inadequate and misleading. This was a book about dynastic China. The oldest sources appear to have been compiled from multiple sources themselves, and then underwent further revision, eg the order of Tao and Te was probably reversed at some point, the text became less regionally specific as it traveled across China, acquired different vocabulary and grammar, was appropriated by Confucians, separated into chapters, etc. So in this sense it's interesting to read multiple translations and analysis. To get the full picture you have to consider the sinology around the text too. [1] John C. H. Wu's translation: https://terebess.hu/english/tao/wu.html#Kap01 https://terebess.hu/english/tao/wu.html#Kap01