Sunday, August 26, 2012
道家打坐入门
第一步 收心求静
法诀
初打坐，练静动，全身内外要放松。
二目垂帘守祖窍，舌闭天池津自生。
深细长匀调呼吸，心定念止是正功。
身心两忘万籁寂，形神俱妙乐在中。
掐子午，除杂念，祖炁修足玄关现。
脸似蚁爬丹田暧，口满津液要吞咽。
下座拂面舒筋气，浑身上下搓一遍。
筑基炼己全赖此，静极而动一阳现。
功法详解
收心求静，是道家的修身养性、打坐参禅，也是性命双修基本功。入坐前，先将衣服上的钮扣解开，宽衣解带，全身内外放松，心里预先要有一种愉快感，用舒畅愉快、乐在其中的情绪来帮助入静。
取坐势，在床上、沙发上、椅凳上皆可。身上披的衣服应根据自己的身体以及气候变化增减，慎勿着凉感冒。
打坐时的面向：面向正东或正南，夜间要面向窗户亮光处，以免神昏易睡。
坐功要领：盘膝端坐，脚分阴阳，手掐子午，二目垂帘，眼观鼻，鼻观心。闭口藏舌，舌顶上腭，呼吸绵绵，微降丹田。心神意念守祖窍，三花聚顶秋月圆。下座拂面熨双睛，浑身上下搓一遍。伸臂长腰舒筋气，静极而动一阳现。要领详解如下：
盘膝端坐：盘膝有单盘、双盘、五心朝天之分。初学者可采用自然单盘膝，不要勉强。所谓端坐，是上体自然正直，不前俯后仰，百会与会阴成垂直一线，但务必放松自然。须知松则气顺，经脉舒畅；僵则气滞，有碍气血流通。只有全身内外放松，才能给入静创造条件。
脚分阴阳：盘膝时左脚属阳在外，右脚属阴在内，为阳抱阴，但不是绝对的，如感到不舒服可改换。对此不要太拘泥。
手掐子午：左手拇指掐本左手中指午位，右手大拇指进入左手内掐住左手无名指的根部子位，两手相抱放在小腹部，这为阴抱阳。但必须说明：掐子午不等于掐诀念咒。因子午这两道脉通寸、关、尺，而寸、关、尺之脉通心，心通脑，掐子午是为减轻动脉撞心的力量，使其少生杂念，有助于入静。丹经云“手脚和合扣连环，四门紧闭守正中”是也。
二目垂帘：即是二目似闭非闭，微开一线同观鼻尖，看似对眼。太闭则神气昏暗，太光则神光外驰。故古人有云：“日月合并，金木和合，回光返照，返观内视。含眼光，凝耳韵，调鼻息”，“内观其心，心无其心；外观其形，形无其形；远观其物，物无其物；三者既悟，惟见于空；观空不空，是乃真空；观空乃空，是为顽空。”这是古人的所谓“长生久视之道”。
眼观鼻，鼻观心：二目垂帘，眼看鼻尖，神定则心定。两眼同看鼻准，活动的思维，纷纭复杂的意念就能安定下来。眼观鼻而心不在鼻，由观而达到忘观，外观其形，形无其形。所谓鼻观心，是为了下颌微收，使气嗓管调直，呼吸自然流畅。
闭口藏舌，舌顶上腭：上腭是天池穴，在上牙内寸许凹陷处，口念“儿”字时，舌尖所触部位。闭天池，一是方面是为了开玄膺（玄膺穴在巧舌之后），使真息往来畅通无阻；另一方面则是闭口免伤真炁。再则，舌根下有生津两穴，左为金井，右为石泉，闭上天池易于生津。静坐往往津液满口，并有清而甜之感，此时应用吞律法将津液吞入腹内。即舌顶上腭不动，将津液吮至舌根，待欲喷呛时引颈吞下。这样引吞，可直接入任脉，化为阴精，是造精之捷径，健身之妙法。
呼吸绵绵，微降丹田：调理呼吸，又谓调息，是初步入静的重要环节。用功时既然是闭口，无疑要用鼻呼吸，要求深、细、长、匀。不论是顺呼吸还是逆呼吸，都要求腹式呼吸，这样才能深。所谓细，即连自己也听不到呼吸声。长，是将呼吸拉长，要息息归根，下降丹田，不要憋气，要放松自然。匀，即快慢均匀，务要心息相依，不即不离，达到息不调而自调。甚至，至虚极，守静笃，会出现呼吸顿断。初学者，要用自然呼吸。呼吸绵绵，深、细、长、匀，能扩大肺活量，促进和加强内脏各个部位的功能，尤其对消化系统功效更为显著。
心神意守祖窍：祖窍，在二目中心，是过去经书不载、历代祖师秘而不传的一窍。余师千峰老人曰：“天下地上安祖窍，日西月东聚先天。玄关之后谷神前，正中有个空不空”。此窍是玄关出人、明心见性的门户，是锁心猿拴意马的桩柱，也是延年益寿的阶梯。初步炼性先守此窍。含眼光，两眼观此窍；凝耳韵，两耳听此窍。这即是古人所谓：“常有欲以观其窍，常无欲以观其妙”。守窍是为了忘窍，故有“知而不守是正功”之说。“以有心求则有相，以五心守则落空”。故云：无忘无助，似守非守。性要自悟，命要师传。心静念止是先天，意动神驰是后天。只有守定祖窍，才能使瞬息万变的活动思想安静下来。百尺竿头再进一步，做到心静念止，身如槁木，心若止水，意似寒灰，一念不起，一意归中，万籁俱寂，身心两忘，恍恍惚惚，杳杳冥冥，此时感到一股电流在身上奔腾咆哮，犹如触电，全身酥麻，其舒服感妙不可言。这正是形神俱妙，了在其中。此景过后，但觉眼明心亮，神清气爽，精神振奋。如能得到五分钟的真静，足能消除一天的疲劳。如能每日坚持坐功，即使得不到真静，有时也会感到手脚出汗、丹田发暧、脸似蚁爬、头顶气旋。这些现象，都是坐功的收获，日积月累，祖炁修足自然玄关出现。
三花聚顶秋月圆：三花即精花、炁花、神花。只有精炁神修足，才有三花聚顶秋月圆的现象。秋月即玄关。玄关与祖窍同样都是过去道家三口不说、六耳不传之秘。玄关与祖窍往往连在一起，实际玄关是玄关，祖窍是祖窍。可以说：祖窍是玄关出人的门户。玄关不在身上，祖窍不在身外。玄关者乃玄妙之机关也，不在身上，离身难寻。《节要篇》云：“一窍玄关要路头，非心非肾最深幽。膀胱谷道空劳力，脾肾泥丸实可羞。神气根基常恍惚，虚无窟穴细搜求。原来只是灵明处，养就还丹跨鹤游。”又道：玄关不在心肾，不在口鼻，不在肝肺，不在肚轮，不在尾闾，不在谷道，不在两肾中间一穴，不在腰间脐后，不在明堂泥丸，不在关元气海，不在脐下一寸三分。又道：“道发三千六百门，门门各执一苗根，惟有些子玄关窍，不在三千六百门”。又说，此玄关一窍乃人生死之穴，无极之根，太极之母，是父母未生前先天真一之炁。过去把玄关说得神乎其神，玄之又玄，好像谁能知道玄关所在之处，就能立地升仙似的。玄关到底是何物，又在何处呢？根据余祖师千峰老人及父亲继承道教龙门派传统的说法，通过收心求静，静极而动，炁发则收炁，精动则下手炼精化炁，补脑养神，精炁神足，坐静时，眼前出现一圆光，这即是玄关，又叫慧光、神光、灵光。历代修持者都把玄关看成超凡入圣的阶梯，故不轻易传人。虽然从经书上偶有透露，也只是一些不易看懂的隐语，况且其说不同，使人无所适从。
下座拂面熨双睛：每逢坐完功后，先将两手搓热，趁热用手捂住两眼，热散后两手猛然向两侧分开，两眼同时随之使劲一睁，如此三至五次，再左右转睛。左转9周，再向右转九周。经常坚持，不但保持眼球灵活不得眼疾，还使通眼脑气筋通畅，保持眼睛不花。拂面是用两手搓拂两颊，使脸色滋润，推迟生长皱纹及老斑。
全身上下搓一遍：全身干搓，又叫干沐浴，是非常行之有效的健身方法。紧接拂面熨眼转双睛之后，两手从头部开始搓起，继而由前额、两太阳穴、迎香、两耳前后，大脑、小脑、风池、风府、两臂内外至两手背，再由胸前肺部、两胁，两手并行搓小腹两侧、肚脐、两腰眼、两腿外侧内侧、膝盖、脚心。两手搓时必搓热，最后再揉睾丸。以上各点，搓时最好用数字来约束，以免点到从事。干沐浴倘能持之以恒，定有意想不到的功效。重点是鼻窝、脖颈、腰眼、睾丸、尾胝涌泉。搓完后舒筋气。
伸臂长腰舒筋气：干沐裕后，仍坐床上，上身坐正，两腿伸直，舌顶上腭，然后上身后仰，两臂随之向上伸舒。同时鼻子吸气，两眼向上翻看，脚尖前绷，脚跟后收，身体整个仰卧床上。然后，上身由仰卧坐起前扑，以头靠拢两膝，两手打两脚涌泉穴，两眼往下看，鼻子呼气，两脚尖向里勾，脚跟向前蹬。如此一仰一俯，反复七次为止。此法有舒筋活络，长腰增力，抻筋活腰，强肺健胃，通带踵、养大脑的作用。
收心求静，也是为了求动。这种动是通过坚持不懈的用功，并能经常入静，在坐静中大脑得到充足的调养，日积月累，脑气胞日渐充实，身体日渐强壮，面色日渐红润，精神面貌几有焕发青春之感。当然由于年龄、的不同，体质强弱的各异，以及用功的勤怠，入静的程度深浅，必然会在每个人的进度上出现千差万别。尽管在进度上每人有快慢之分，但从静中得来的心身日渐愉快和健壮必有同样之感。
静极而动，是在静坐时，心里清清静静丝毫杂念没有的前提下，外阳勃然而起，这即是活子时到。此时不等念起，急用转法轮收炁降龙法，将这初步静养来的养生至宝收归我有。具体做法详见第二步功法。
收心求静即是筑基炼己的功夫。所谓炼己即是炼心、炼性。炼即是锻炼的意思。心不炼不死，性不炼不活，神不炼不灵。只有炼得识死、性活，神自然会灵。吕祖云：“七返还丹，在人先须炼己待时。”柳华阳祖师曰：“若不炼己还虚，则临时熟景难忘，神驰炁散，安能夺得造化之机。”应该怎样炼呢？柳祖又云：“眼虽见色而内不受纳者曰炼，耳虽闻声而内不受音者曰炼，神虽感交而内不起思者曰炼，见物内醒而不迷者曰炼，日用平常如如，而先炼己纯熟”。上面吕祖所谓炼己待时之时，与柳祖所说的临时之时，同是指的阳举炁发活子时之时，下手采药炼精化炁之时。此时若炼己不纯，意志不坚，很容易顺熟路而去，前功尽弃。故古圣先贤（指善养生者）强调，修性养命，首先必须筑基炼己，打好基础，否则虽有所得，也容易得而复失。只有炼得识死性活，对景无心，常寂常静常觉照，性自圆明神自灵。在静中求动，动中采补，循序渐进，待精尽化炁，亏损补满，则筑基炼己才算告一段落。
初步收心求静，与各家静养功大致相同。所不同的是龙门派的静养功是小还虚，是吕祖沁园春词中的炼己待时。这个“时”正是静极而动一阳炁发的活子时，时来炁发为之命动，命动炁发即收回才算性命双修；不知炁动收炁、精动炼精，就不算性命双修。
第二步 收炁降龙、安炉立鼎
法诀
一阳初动本无心，收炁必须先提根。
吸从督脉升泥丸，呼由任脉降会阴。
以神领炁行周天，后升前降转法轮。
七口呼吸阳不缩，无孔笛吹要紧跟。
无孔笛，两头吹，一提一降自然回。
收炁古称是降龙，龙归大海不乱飞。
玄酒味淡休妄动，静等二侯响春雷。
珍惜自身活子时，逢动必收炁不亏。
功法详解
第二步功夫，按道家传统说法，是安炉立鼎。鼎，又谓玉鼎，在大脑中心，内藏一胞为先天真性所居之处，即元神室也。其两边各有一管，联于眼珠，下通于心，故曰：性者，心也，发于二目。实际鼎原无鼎，真炁发时与性合一而得名。炉谓金炉，又名真炁穴。前对肚轮后对肾，上有黄庭下关元，后有幽阙前命门，是存神养炁之所，又叫丹田。炉原无炉，气发则有此名。玉鼎、金炉是道家炼内丹假设的无形器具。
一阳初动本无心，收心必须先提根。
在初步收心求静的静坐中，当坐到一念不起，身心两忘，虚极静笃之时，自己的外阳勃然兴起，这是自身的活子时到来。因其无念，是先天性的产物，机不可失，不等念起，急用转法轮收炁法即刻收回。
收炁法：原坐式不动，收气必须先提根，即用力一提会阴，鼻根吸气，眼往上翻看，以神领气，心意随之。再由子位生死窍即会阴穴向后走尾闾、夹脊、玉枕至午位百会一停。吸时：鼻吸、眼看、神领、意随同时并举，协调一致。一吸由督脉上来稍停，再一呼鼻根呼气，眼往下看，以神领气，心意随之，由午位百会下来，走祖窍、绛官、炁穴（即丹田），直达会阴子位。后升前降正一圆周。简单说，一吸一呼转一遭为一次，如此三至五个呼吸，如用得准确，外阳即可缩回，这即是后升前降转法轮收炁法。日积月累，身体越来越强壮，精力越来越充沛，活子时越来越勤，而外阳兴起的力量也就越来越大。如果从一次呼吸至七次呼吸，外阳仍然不倒，应改用无孔笛颠倒两头吹降龙法来制之。
无孔笛颠倒两头吹的具体用法：当转法轮七次降服不住外阳时，原坐不动，立即凝神生死窍，会阴一提，鼻根吸气，意想由生死窍提到脐下一寸三分丹田穴，再用绛宫之气，下沉丹阳，鼻根呼气，心神意随之一沉，一提一降为一次，如此一至三次外阳立缩。
若用了七次仍不缩回，就应用第三步功法开通奇经八脉的。等二候到来，虎由水中生，似黄河决口，有一泄千里之势，就用下手炼精化炁的伏虎手段，将欲破关而出的元精化成元炁，仍为我所用。
阳生炁发的根源。通过坐功入静增长元炁，亏损的元炁得到补充。静极而动，脑中的先天炁走大脑、小脑、延髓、脊髓，到大推下第七脊骨节夹脊关；夹脊往内通心，心正中有一门，道家称之为戊门，气到门开，直达外阳。外阳得到真气，立刻勃然兴起。这时如果不管不问，也可自消自灭，但是，通过静功得来的养生至宝，就会付之东流。这即是只知修性，不知修命。凡讲性命双修者，无不百倍地珍惜它。故吕洞宾祖师对此写过这样一首诗：“一阳炁发用功夫，日月精华照玉壶，到此关头休妄动，恐防堕落洞庭湖。”性命双修的修性，实际命在其中。当静极而动一阳炁发即是命功。心动收心是修性，炁动收炁、精动收精是修命。
静极而动，是阴极阳生，一阳初动，在人身为活子时，在二十四节气为冬至。因一阳初动，是炁发而不是精动，只可用收炁降龙法收之，而不能用下手炼精化炁法来炼之。炁有足亏，药分老嫩，这即是“火候”。丹经云：“古人传药不传火，从来火候少人知。”张三丰祖师云：“性要悟，命要传，休将火候当等闲。”
大自然中的一切有形的东西都各有火候。如煎炒烹炸，都要掌握好火候，到什么火候用什么措施，即不过也不及，要恰到好处。功夫到什么阶段，用什么办法，不能用非所需，或需非所用，一定要恰如其分。
静极而动，不同于自然而动。因为前者是在一念不起的基础上静养来的炁发，是纯洁的，是先天的产物。后者是通过睡眠，大脑得到休息，当一觉醒来，一般说来外阳是要动的。静极而动，更不同于色情动。因为前者是清，后者是浊；前者是先天性的，后者是后天性的。外阳动，不能认为都是色心动。善养生者不等杂念丛生，即可用后升前降转法轮将炁收回。
练性命双修功夫者，把静极而动、一阳炁发视为至宝。每逢阳动炁发立即收归我有，积炁养身，炁越足则体越壮。外阳动得越勤其力越大，只待二候到来，方可下手。
静极而动，实际是情动，这情是道情不是人情，无念而来是道情。故龙牙禅师曰：“人情浓厚道情微，道用人情世岂知，空有人情无道用，人情能得几多时。”柳华阳祖师曰：“且此一情字自汉明帝到今注者纷纷，苟不得慧命之法，便谓之春情。识者见之无不笑也。”六祖坛经云：“有情来下种，无情果不生。”看来同是一个情字，就有两种不同的用法。一种是顺其自然用于人情。一种是逆着回来养生是用于道情。而六祖慧能、柳华阳、龙牙禅师，他们都是佛门弟子。他们当然是站在出家人的立场对待人情和道情，而且也是从养生道理上来加以说明。我们今天讲养生之道，既用人情，也用道情。用人情行人世法，生儿育女，使我们民族永远繁荣昌盛。用道情作为养生之道，使人人健康长寿。正因如此，当我们练功时，偏要将顺去的东西，想办法使它逆着回来。这是与一般人不同之处。只有这样，才能向自然规律夺取寿命。古人云，炁归元海寿无穷。这也是性命双修的特异之处。
曹还阳祖师云：返观凝神入炁穴，炼精百日黄芽生。
伍冲虚祖师云：烹炼铅汞于鼎炉，炼精炼神根本地。
柳华阳祖师云：和合凝集转法轮，吸呼薰炼性命存。
了空祖师云：督升任降成鼎炉，锻炼五谷化精炁。
千峰老人曰：前对脐轮后对肾，中间有个真金炉，十字街前安玉鼎，神炁之宅呼吸根。
先父牛金宝对安炉立鼎采小药收炁降龙曾作歌一首：
阳生炁发及时收，续命全靠勤添油；
后升前降凭意领，吸上呼下赖圆周。
笛声吹来龙服驯，剑指点去虎低头；
龙虎剑笛皆比喻，鼎炉莫向身外求。
第三步 开通奇经八脉
法诀
开八脉，聚精神，以意领气贯全身。
一吸督脉升泥丸，二呼任脉降会阴。
三吸带脉至肩窝，四呼阳腧到手心。
五吸阴腧胸前定。六呼至带归一根。
七吸冲脉到降宫，八呼阳蹻涌泉停。
九吸阴蹻升炁穴，十呼还原入窍中。
吸呼深长凭意领，水到渠成赖气行。
八脉开通身属阳，阴蹻开时百脉通。
功法详解
开通奇经八脉，又叫十口呼吸调八脉。初学者，因盘腿打坐，两腿受压不习惯，定有两腿麻木之感。用此法立即消除麻木。其功法的主要用途，是用以开通奇经八脉，驱逐阴邪之气，消阴长阳，进而达到全身属阳，百病全无。
奇经八脉，道家用以行炁、通关以达到延年益寿。通人脉，又称玉液炼形。
奇经八脉，即前任、后督、中冲、横带、阴维、阳维、阴蹻、阳蹻，也是道家行气八脉。开通八脉法，是用十口呼吸，以意领气，心到、意到、神到，气亦随之而到。平时必须经常练习，把心、神、意合而为一。八脉线路要记熟用灵，达到心想哪里，哪里就有所感触。最好每日清晨练习两遍，日久天长，就能随心所欲。
一吸督脉升泥丸，是先把心神意下注于会阴，鼻根呼气，心意随之，由会阴往后提起来，经脊骨正中督脉，上升至头顶泥丸即百会稍停；二呼由泥丸下来，走前边任脉，又回到会阴穴；三吸由会阴穴提到脐下一寸三分处之炁穴，分开双行走带脉，从两腰眼至两肩窝一停；四呼由两肩窝走两臂外侧阳腧脉，经中指到两手心劳宫穴稍停；五吸由手心劳宫穴走两臂内侧阴腧脉，到胸前靠近两乳处稍停；六呼从胸前双下至带脉炁穴归并一处，直达会阴处稍停；七吸由会阴穴上来，走任督二脉中间的冲脉，直上到心下一寸二分绛宫穴停住，不要过绛宫；八呼由绛宫下来到会阴分开，走两腋两腿外侧阳蹻脉，经两脚中趾到两脚心涌泉穴稍停；九吸从涌泉穴上升走两腿内侧阴蹻脉，到会阴归一，再上升炁穴稍停；十呼由炁穴，直达会阴生死窍。十口吸呼调八脉，是由生死窍会阴穴为起点，最后终点仍落在生死窍会阴穴，故而道家称它为八脉之总根。千峰老人称此窍：“上通泥丸，下达涌泉，真炁聚散皆以此窍为转移。血脉周流，全身贯通，和气上朝，阳长阴消，水中火发，雪里花开，实乃生炁之根。百姓日用而不知者此也。”十口吸呼调八脉，一吸一呼，升、住、起、止都必须与一意领气同时并举，协调一致；方能奏效。对此慎无忽略。以上是行气八脉。另有通精八脉（此是生精、化精、走精、炼精八脉），即前任，后督，中冲，横带，上通心、下通阳关，上前通脐，上后通肾，这里是以生死窍为轴心说的。道家的传统说法，往往与医家有所不同。
第四步 小周天、下手炼精化炁伏虎法
法诀
二候到，春雷动，猛虎怒吼要出洞。
顺则出去可生人，逆而回来延寿命。
手点虎额虎伏地，剑插三峡水倒行。
收炁定要收元炁，炼精必须炼元精。
顺减寿，逆添油，养生至宝莫外流。
下手点住生死窍，急用巽风六候收。
橐龠动时阖辟转，升住起止四正求。
会得还精补脑法，功夫更上一层楼。
功法详解
下手练精化炁是道家性命双修功法中的绝秘，非其人不传。即使传人，也必然伴随着一些清规戒律。余今具体详说如下，不经口传万勿轻用。
下手炼精化炁法，是在以下情况下采用的：在初步静坐的基础上经过静功的开源节流，增长元炁，日积月累，静极而动、阳生炁发，不等念起，用二步转法轮收炁法收之。当用完七口吸呼，后升前降转够七周，外阳不缩，继用无孔笛降龙法，也转够了七个提降，而外阳依然不倒，此刻应用勒阳关，调外药。调到药产神知，外阳不但不倒，反而似鲤鱼打挺一跃而起，元精突然欲破关而出，这即是二候。就在这千钧一发之际，火候不老不嫩之时，如依熟路顺去，则是生人之道；若逆而回来即是炼精化炁的养生之道。古人有云，顺生人，逆生仙，只在中同颠倒颠，正此之谓也。也正是在这一发千钧的关键时刻，不等思维活动，即不等念起，急速下手，剑插海底，向左侧身，左腿蜷曲，右腿伸直成半躺半坐势，用小周天炼精化气法诀，将这欲夺关而出的元精（因无思欲从静而来）化成元炁。古人所谓“巽风运坤火，风吹火化”，即以鼻呼吸（巽风即鼻中呼吸之气），头转眼随，由自身会阴子位起，向自身左上方旋转，用鼻连吸三吸，眼随头转，走子卯午，眼看头顶午位。从午位眼随头转向自身右下方向，鼻子呼气，连呼三呼，即午酉子。连吸三吸，是由子位向后，上走身后督脉三关，即尾闾、夹脊、玉枕，是为子进阳火。连呼三呼，是由午位向前，走前任脉三田，即祖窍、绛宫、炁穴，此为午退阴符。鼻子呼吸，眼随头转，必须同时并举，协调一致。下边一度一度地精撞阳关，上边则子卯午、午酉子地急收。来得急，收得快，来得缓，收得慢。如磁石吸铁，不即不离。精来多少度，而收炼多少度。待精不动时，即精已化炁，药已归炉。此时仍不撤剑指，身躯由半躺半坐而坐正，再用封固口诀，照前两步转法轮收气法，连收三次，是为牢封固。然后撒手撤剑，下边干干净净，一滴不漏，行将顺出的有形之精，经风吹火化已成为养生保命的无形之炁、这就是小周天下手炼精化炁法，也是道家千古不传之秘。
下手炼精化炁，必须建立在纯静的基础上。从静极一阳初动，到药产神知的二候到来，其来源必须是不加杂丝毫杂念，纯属先天性的。也必须按照术数的要求，即“和于术数”。必须转够七圆圈。当转够七周外阳依然不缩，方可用无孔笛颠倒两头吹法诀。无孔笛也用够七次，这即是火候。何谓二候呢？当静极而动，阳生炁发，龙从火里出为一候。当勒阳关调外药，调到药产神知，阳挺精动，虎自水中生为之二候，故有二候采牟尼之称。自古传药不传火，从来火候少人知。从历来丹经道书上看，确实找不到具体用法，更寻不着真正的口诀、火候。虽有的微露端倪，也只是藏头露尾的只言片语，以及隐晦莫解之词。
下手炼精化炁，又谓小周天。陈泥丸曰：“天上分明十二辰，人间分作炼丹程。若言刻漏无凭信，不会元机药不成。”所谓的大小周天，是道家借喻周天度数来阐述采药炼丹的道理，以及如何运用周天火候作为养生之道。在下手炼精化炁的过程中，充分地体现了这一点。但并非必须记住周天路线。二候一到，下手点窍，任督接通，方可采药，心静神清，非常重要。吸升呼降，眼随头转，前三后三，呼吸贯穿，火逼金行，左右盘旋，吸舐撮闭，坎离抽填，采药归炉，片刻之间，一字没有，记啥周天，千古绝秘，全赖口传。“吸舐撮闭”是下手采药炼精化炁的四字诀：吸是鼻内吸气，舐是用舌接督脉弦，撮是紧撮谷道，闭是闭任开督。
下手炼精化炁，在《黄帝内经》中有这样一段记载：“黄帝曰：余闻上古有真人者，提挈天地，把握阴阳，呼吸精气，独立守神，肌肉若一，故能寿敝天地，无有终时。”把握自身的坎离阴阳，而呼吸精气，当然是自身的精炁了。肌肉若一还可以，而寿敝天地，无有终时，则太夸张。
如果真能在静中产生的二候到来之时，按照炼精化炁之法，将有形之精化为无形之炁，并收归我有，则这时人的精神面貌就会产生很大的变化，从大脑中枢神经系统，到五脏六腑，尤其是五官面貌，都能出现异乎寻常的特征。比如，从前眼花，可以恢复视力，变成不花。智力、记忆力必有明显的恢复。精力充沛，面色红润，虽不能返老还童，也必有自觉年轻了十年之感。当然要达到这一步，绝非一朝一夕之功。不过只要坚持不懈，运用得法，必然会功到自然成。其进度快慢，要根据个人体质的强弱，和用功的勤怠来决定的。功夫不负有心人，只要有恒心，必定成功，那时推迟衰老，延长寿命，是不难做到的。
释家所说的断三淫是指淫身、淫心、淫根。三者最主要的是淫根。淫根不动则身心安静，淫根一动则牵连身心。断淫必须先断淫根，而下手炼精化炁，正是斩断淫根的利剑。道家把离中炁发称为火龙，把坎中精动称为水虎。故吕祖诗曰：“降龙须要志如天，伏虎心雄气似烟。痴蠢愚人能会得，管教立地作神仙。”又诗曰：“大道玄机颠倒颠，掀翻地府要寻天。龟蛇共穴孰能见，龙虎同宫谁敢言。九夏高山生白雪，三冬备火种金莲。叮咛学道诸君子，好把无毛猛虎牵。”李虚庵祖师云：“识得乾坤颠倒颠，金丹一粒是天仙。要寻不必深山里，所得无非在眼前。忙里偷闲调外药，无中生有采先天，信来认得生身处，下手功夫在口传。”以上所说都是指下手炼精化炁的功夫。
修性必须先炼心，心定则神安，心死则神活，修命必须先炼精，精是养性命之根源，故《金仙证论》云：精为万物之美，人身内有精则生，无精则死。精足而不知持满，即不能炼而化之，定有满而自溢丢失之患。精是命宝，极难生产而最易消耗。故炼性必先练心，七情不动，五贼不乱，六根大定，精难动摇，方有助于炼功。所谓七情即喜怒哀乐爱恶欲，五贼即眼、耳、鼻，舌、身。眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、心又为六欲。是以眼见色则爱起而贼精，耳听声则欲起而摇精，鼻闻香则贪起而耗精，口尝味则嗜起而走精，身意遇触则痴起而损精。人身之精能有几何，一旦精竭气枯，则命尽身亡。我们今天要讲的性命双修，既不主张断绝七情六欲，更不赞成夫妇隔离，不过善养生者应知精是保命至宝，万不可毫无节制地抛弃罢了。
下手炼精化炁，正是《黄帝内经》上所说的“把握阴阳，呼吸精气”，也是还精补脑，壮骨实髓，说来复杂，行之简便的延寿法。炼精化炁，在我要介绍的十三步功夫中，是非常重要、非常关键的一步。对于推迟衰老，延长寿命，能起决定性的作用。但欲想做到药产神知（这里所说的药产是指自家身内之元精欲突关而出，神知是指自己的元神立知），二候一到，便能下手点窍即下手采药，就必须行有为之法，存无为之心，运用自如，毫无勉强，夺天地之造化于片刻之间。要做到准确无误，应在用功之余，加以练习，方不致临时无所措手足。所谓练习是指意领神会，头手动作比划而已。切不可热火煮空铛，空转法轮，更不可以手淫作练习，应戒之，慎之。另有一种说法：以后升前降空转法轮为小周天，从百会到涌泉转一圈为大周天。完全以意领空转，在初练阶段作为止念法还可以，如果认为这即是性命双修的大小周天实大错而特错。这样空想空转无异于锅里无水，釜底加火。只有锅里有水，经火化才能成气，也只有坎中的精动（元精），才能用收精法炼而化之。正如丹经所说的“起巽风，运坤火”，风吹火化将元精化为元炁，进一步将元炁再化为元神。若有人问，精收回去能否成病呢？我的回答是不会成病，因为下手炼精化炁，风吹火化而成炁，是道家秘而不传的法子。只要照口传心授的法诀去做是万无一失的。不过只从书本里、文字上实难寻到妙处。据我几十年的亲身经验，不论是静中得来还是睡梦中得来，都可用下手法收回，也都是有益无损的。不过若不是由纯静与火候足得来的，只能养身而不能结丹。
千峰老人曰：“此诀是各丹经道书所谓的下手法。精顺出者是元精能生人，逆回者是元炁能生丹，正在中间颠倒颠，可不是采空气，炼的是真阳之精，将身补足可延年益寿。”其所著《性命法诀明指》有云：“身、心、意谓之三家，精、气、神谓之三宝，又谓之三元。以身心意为主，以精气神为用。三元合一而丹成。摄三归一在于虚静。虚其心则神与性合，静其身则精与情寂，意大定则三元混一。情合性谓之金木并，精合神谓之水火交，意大定谓之五行全。然而精化为炁者，由身之不动也。炁化为神者，由心之不动也。神化为虚者，由意之不动也。这即道家所谓的三花聚顶，三华即精花、炁花、神花。所谓的五气朝元，即身不动则精固而肾水气朝元，心不动则气固而心火气朝元，真性寂则魂藏而肝木气朝元，妄情忘则魄伏而肺金气朝元，四大安和则意定而脾土气朝元，这即是三花五气皆聚于顶成为这个元极，道家谓之炼已。以上是小周天下手炼精化炁法。欲穷千里目，更上一层楼，循序渐进，柳暗花明又一村。再接再厉将下手炼精化来之炁，再炼炁合神，使神炁合一，功夫更上一层楼（炼炁合神为采内药卯酉周天）”
下手炼精化炁是道家的绝秘，历来不著于文字，惟独千峰老人所著的《性命法决明指》与本书将此法合盘托出，但不经师传恐难使用。
（一）炼精化炁小周天，从古到今少人传。
比龙喻虎谈阴阳，指天划地论坤乾。
明明都是简易法，偏偏故意弄虚玄。
现将此法公于世，愿与同道共钻研。
（二）养生功法数千年，黄帝内经露真诠。
提挈天地斡坤乾，把握阴阳颠倒颠。
呼吸精气壮骨髓，独立守神自湛然。
比喻隐晦难猜测，说破消息在眼前。
（三）抽得坎阳离中填，二炁合一结金丹。
待到精尽化炁时，我命由我不由天。
下手炼精炁，必须口传，不经口传，万勿乱用以防出偏。因为此法从来不著于文字，用文也实难表达清楚。虽说简便，但差之毫厘，谬之千里，极易出偏。故再三强调，必经口传，甚至有的功法必须三番五次方能领悟。望后来之者慎之慎之。
第五步 外文武火金木合并法
法诀
两手捧香肩臂松，眼观香头二自睁。
聚精会神屏呼吸，涕泪交流即收兵。
闭目养神应求静，心存已炁门自生。
渣滓提净药方纯，泪管输通眼更明。
文火七，武三成，药采之后好用功。
日月同宫金木合，心火下降肾水升。
眼球常转眼不花，耳鼓常敲耳更灵。
常用此法除百病，能化五谷饮食精。
功法详解
外文武火，是用后天之火引出先天之火。二火合一，既能提出在炼精化气中的渣滓，澄洁药物，又能化五谷饮食之精，提出五脏之病，使人益寿延年。了空祖师曰：“外武火者是移火也；外文火者是以火也。”这是专为提出五脏内之渣滓化泪流出之法，又是炼四相和合、五行攒簇归根、回光返照、日月合并之功。其用法如下：
在初步静坐的基础上，收心入静十分钟后，夜间须燃香一炷（白天可用红头筷子一根），双手捧香或筷子，放在目前三寸许，高低与二目齐平，二目睁开同视香头。约两、三分钟后，两眼似辣椒水洗一样难受，此时必须坚持强睁二目，待眼泪鼻涕一同流出来为止，然后将香火捏灭，眼泪擦净，闭目养静，是为文火。坐到无人无我、身心两忘是为正功。久之心火下降，肾水上升，口中津液清而且甜，吞下入十二气嗓管，再降到炁穴化为阴精，由春弦入睾丸化为阳精。阳精出输精管，上至膀胱顶分两边，至尿道口入内肾，即藏精之所。善养生者百倍珍惜口中津液，津液常足，也证实肾水常足，肾水足而两眼炯炯有神，皂白分明，这样人身就健康无病。所以说：外文武火不但能使二目有光，保持眼睛不花，而且能提出五脏之病，治五脏之病于未发之前，除病根于未萌芽之时。
外文武火是专炼二目，生理学有云“父母初结胎时，细胞内先生二目，至十二日后用显微镜看内有黑睛。”古经亦云；“人初结胎时，天一生水生黑睛而有瞳仁通肾，地二生火而有两眦通心，天三生木而有黑珠通肝，地四生金而有白珠通肺，天五生土而有上下眼胞通脾，故五脏之精华皆聚于二目，而人之灵神在脑，亦发之于目。”人的两眼又谓心灵的窗户。道家认为，人之一身皆属阴，谁独两眼属阳（指男子），仰仗这点真阳，方能不被群阴所剥。修士必须由此入手修炼，利用这点真阳来战胜群阴，而进一步达到纯阳之体。
外文武火，有文七武三之别。比如从两眼同视香头到涕流用了三分钟，闭目静养时要用七分钟，当然静养时间越长越好。越是心静念止，越感觉神清气爽。炁从已门生，身如在云端，万籁俱寂，神形俱妙，事后眼睛特别清亮。
千峰老人曰：“外武火者，是将神火注于炉中，为火中火引也。古名移火。移者移动身内病管开张，即是移动内里真火，二火相磨相激，阳火必胜乎阴精，精融灌溉周身，而渣滓出净，病从何来。”外文火者，是温养恢复还原之法。因在用武火时，五行攒簇，内管张开，渣滓提出后，必须用文火使其恢复原状。文火又谓以火，以者以温养之法，闭目塞兑，意守正中，气降真炁穴，身空意空方为正功。
外文武火，是非常有效的炼眼法。但也要伴之以熨眼、转睛、眼呼吸等法。所谓熨眼法在初步养静中已谈到，不再重述。
转睛：每天晨起，坐立皆可，二目睁开，头颈不动，独转眼球。眼看极下方，由极下方向左上方转到极上方，由极上方向右下方转到极下方为一周。如此转九周一停，再继续转四个九周，共三十六周。再由右上左下转四个六周，共二十四周。如此使两眼的脑炁筋、输泪管活跃有力，畅通无阻，使两眼灵活而有神。
眼呼吸：用此法应在空气清洁之处，最好在树林内或河边。早晨面向东方，两脚并立，两臂下垂，浑身放松，二目平视前方。两眼与鼻根部同时吸气，徐徐将气吸足，然后两眼与鼻根同时呼气，连做九次吸呼。这样吸进氧气，呼出二氧化碳，吐故纳新，既锻炼眼睛，又增强五脏新陈代谢的功能。眼呼吸与转眼球，都是为了促使两眼通脑的脑炁筋灵敏活跃，畅通无阻，保持二目常明。久而炼之，还可用以上同样方法看早晨、中午、日落时之太阳。这必须有明师指导，自己不要无师自通。如照此法炼之，日久可目视中午的太阳如看月亮一般。少者可目视太阳一两分钟，久炼可目视半小时，斯时两目寒光四射，无人敢于对视。
外文武火图解
（—）燃炷真香棒目前，两眼看香目睁圆。
待到涕泪交流时，闭目养我炁浩然。
（二）文武二火莫看轻，专化五谷饮食精。
常用此法眼不花，二目炯炯亮晶晶。
（三）采药之后炼此功，去其渣滓要留精。
精华炼成舍利子，冲开三关上离宫。
（四）离宫即是泥丸顶，舍利原本神炁凝。
龙虎铅汞皆比喻，身上去找无此名。
第六步 卯酉周天进阳火退阴符
法诀
进阳火，退阴符，卯酉周天炁合神。
闭目四九子进阳，开关四六午退阴。
左旋上升照乾顶，右转下行照脐轮。
炉中有火金可化，釜内无水莫增薪。
铅投汞，炁合神，采内药，保命根。
周天三百六十五，卯酉沐浴始通心。
采药炼丹皆比喻，离开神炁别无真。
此是自身阴阳配，休向身外错问津。
功法详解
在下手炼精化炁采药归炉后，紧跟着用进阳火，退阴符，卯酉周天，炼炁合神，又谓采内药。千峰老人曰：“此法是采内药，左旋右转，一起一伏用目下照。从左上照乾顶，从右下照坤脐至中心为一度。如此三十六转是为进阳火。开关从午卯子酉转一回，如此二十四转为退阴符。”十六步功夫，一三五七九是单练，二四六八十是紧密相连用的。经四步下手炼精化炁采药归炉后，紧接着用六步卯酉周天采内药炼气合神的功夫。其用法：坐如初，收神内敛，闭目养神片刻，二目外闭而内睁，凝神下照坤脐，闭目转睛由下向左上右下转，睛转头随，转一周为一次，每转九次稍停，闭目看光。如此转四个九次为进阳火三十六，然后开关，即睁开眼从上往左下右上转晴，转四个六圆周，每转六次稍停，闭目看光。如此转四个六次为退阴符二十四。在外两个眼球左旋右转，在内则金本交并，阴阳和合，神炁合一。千峰老人曰：“外药（即炼精化炁）保身无病，内药保命；命者元炁也。卯酉周天之火，炼内药之法，亦为内交媾。系汝已系充足之外药，彼时因风火相激，真炁上升于脑，眼睛左旋右转一起一伏，脑炁筋与神经系和合，斯时脑髓充满发涨，顿觉荣光发现，有形无相采内药，俗名炼丹是也。”且药归炉后，非用阳火阴符周天三百六十五度四分之一火候，不能将精炁化为荣光，成为内丹之苗。在人身上：子是生死窍，午是泥丸宫，卯是夹脊关，酉是绛宫，卯酋通心，故稍停为沐浴。曹还阳祖师云：“子卯午酉定真机，颠倒阴阳三百息。”
子卯午酉为四正，是五行生死之位。且有系管以通五脏六腑，必停其息以意薰蒸之，脏腑方得滋润。故丹经以沐浴为火候之秘机，为炼精炼炁之要诀。金木水火土为五行，在世道中寓生死之理。
子卯午酉为四正、四生、四死之位，在性命双修养生功法全过程中起着非常重要的作用。故古人将看四正，或四正理摆在非常重要的位置。尤其在下手炼精化炁，转手炼炁化神的功法上，更视为火候秘机。千峰老人歌曰：“进阳火，退阴符，闭目四九转神轮，开关四六度数真，此是卯酉周天火，差之毫厘炁不生。”
功到此步，每到坐静时，眼前就会出现圆陀陀、光灼灼的一个圆光。这即是玄关，又叫慧眼开。这时人就会变得更聪明，精力更充沛，四肢百骸，身体发肤更加春气融融。
进行卯酉周天采内药，进阳火，退阴符，是在下手炼精化炁之后，万不可在采外药之前用此功夫。应知炉内有火金可化，釜中无水莫增薪。且忌烈火煮空铛。功夫到此，每当坐静时，眼前出现圆光，此光即是丹苗，又叫玄关，心定则神光凝，心动则神光散，心驰则神光飞。当神光欲飞时，应用第七步收光法收之。
四正即子、卯、午、酉，在整个内丹功中占主要地位，不明四正之理，是无法采药炼丹的。图像动作不太明显，仅做参考。
第七步 龙虎二炁翕聚收光法
法诀
龙虎精，乌兔髓，凝结翕聚炼光辉。
坎离交媾天地泰，戊己合时成刀圭。
三花聚顶三心天，四相和合万象飞。
皓月当空心宜静，慧光远去意莫随。
玄关走，眼莫追，休教前功一风吹。
凝神聚光急收剑，子卯午酉子收回。
津液为主气当伴，眼鼻同吸意同归。
送归土釜牢封固，日月合并照紫微。
功法详解
此七步功夫是日月合并，守中抱一，翕聚祖炁，聚光、炼光、收光之法，道家也谓之炼丹法。
千峰老人曰：“守中抱一是全功，祖炁聚会性命同，坎戊离已日月合，龙虎二体光中升。”又云“守中抱一，日月合并之功也。离己是日光，坎戊是月精，此龙虎二炁也。天地之交精，日月之交光，盘旋于祖窍之前为混元真一之精，此即是精炁神聚在一处，三家相见，四相和合归一，心空意空，无他无我，祖窍之前真气曰太极，曰金丹，曰元觉，先天乾坤，后天坎离，实为四个阴。”从初步收心求静到四步为下手法。从五步到九步为炼丹法。此七步功夫是在前六步的基础上通过小周天转法轮采药收炁降龙、开八脉、下手炼精化炁、文武火、卯酉周天进阳火退阴符等非只一次的自身采补。此时身上百病皆无，神清目明，精炁神足，三花聚于目前，如皓月当空，这即是玄关。玄关者，乃玄妙之机关也。丘祖云：“但著在形体上摸索皆不是，亦不可离形体而外向寻求，因其机发始成窍，机息复渺茫。”《性命圭旨》云：“空洞无涯是玄窍，知而不守是工夫。”千峰老人曰：“静极玄关出现，若有一念使落后天，倏然不见一无所有。如再求之，了不可得，因著色相之故。”此时必须存无守有。所谓存无是存无为，无人无我，忘心忘形，万籁俱寂。所谓守有，即守中抱一，在虚极静笃之时，一轮明月出现目前即玄关。
当坐静时眼前出现一圆光，此时务要心定念止。二目合并似含光凝神，此为回光返照，照见真炁之光，盘旋于祖窍之前，自然翕聚此炁不散。越翕聚炁光越圆。当翕聚此光圆陀陀、光灼灼时，即是戊已二土、龙虎二炁合并而刀圭成。千峰老人曰：“坎离交而天地奉，龙虎交而戊己合，戊己合为一体，则四象会合中宫大药生矣。”这里所谓的大药即是玄关。
当玄关性光盘旋于祖窍之前渐渐远去时，仍须以静待之，二目既不要随之而去，也不要立即收回。当玄光恍惚欲飞去时，火候已到，急用二目鼻根同时吸气，眼吸意随着四正，心意由下子位左上到卯至午，再右下到酉至子，再抬头开关吸收，用子卯午酉子，将炁光收回。此时金液满口，引吞下入十二重楼，送归土釜即真炁穴牢牢封固。千峰老人曰：“先天真一之炁自虚无中来，但见玄关忽动离远，而后方可翕聚此祖炁收入腹中炁穴，真气往来跳动，口中清香无比为证。”药有老嫩，光有圆缺即足与不足之分。经不断采补，日积月累，真炁内足发于外为光。当此炁光恍恍惚惚不定，或由小变大复归于无，这都属于嫩而不足。还要继续用功，必须炼至眼前出现圆陀陀、光灼灼，方是正玄关。红色者为血玄关，白色者才是正玄关。这即是修真养性的真性，性命合一的真性。精炁神足就出现眼前。吕纯阳云：“目前咫尺长生路，多少愚人不醒悟。”释曰：“终朝常对面，不识是何人。”实际都是指的出现在目前的先天真一之炁——玄关。
第八步 蛰藏炁穴
法诀
朝北斗，对明星，吸呼绵绵意守中。
回光返照炁自动，一点一点意引行。
下降不可过丹田，上升只能到绛宫。
久动而静炁入窍，大定得之蛰藏功。
心肾交，神炁凝，气归元海寿无穷。
乾坤日月要和合，戊己坎离交姤升。
小定七日不食睡，大定七七呼吸停。
识死性活根蒂固，形神俱妙四大空。
功法详解
蛰藏功法，是道家养生功法中的高级功法。所谓蛰藏，正像蛰虫冬藏于地下，不食不动，似死非死。小定数日，大定能达数十日。这种功夫只能适用于过去入庙出家之人。而对我们当代人来说，是不适宜的。今公诸于世，是让人们知道我们的祖先也有这步蛰藏功法，尤其给研究道家养生功法者，提供点参考罢了。
千峰老人曰：“此蛰藏之法，是将祖窍前翕聚那一点阳神炁收归于炁穴之内，名为凝神入炁穴。此炁穴有内外两窍；外窍为阴阳之宅，胎息之根，呼吸之祖；内窍者，长胎住息之所，入大定之室。内呼吸上不过心，下不过肾。久而久之，真气入窍，忽然大定得矣。”
用法：基于七步翕聚收光法，将远去欲飞之炁光，用子卯午酉子收回，送归土釜牢牢封固。此时如初坐，用回光返照朝北斗对明星，下视丹田。出息微微，入息绵绵。久视静极，但觉丹田有一股热流，蠕蠕融融动荡其中。此时心不外驰，以意引导，将此热流向上运于心下绛宫，再由绛宫运于肾位丹田炁穴。即上不过心，下至肾。久动而静，忽然入了窍中窍，真炁穴。此刻呼吸顿断，重入胎胞，再造乾坤。实乃心肾相交，神炁合一之功。尤如蛰虫之蛰藏，道家谓之入定，释家谓之禅定。小定数日，大定数十日，而自己的识神则茫然无知矣。古人所谓炁归元海寿无穷即指此步功夫。
对于丹田、炁穴的位置究竟在哪里，其说法不一，用我们的传统说法：是在脐下一寸三分处，上有黄庭下关元，前有幽阙后命门，前七后三中悬一穴即丹田。了空祖师说：“炁穴在动静二脉之中心，分出二脉合成一管，下通小肠之中心，有四层网脂油皆连络小肠，首层名曰黄庭，二层名曰金炉，三层名曰炁穴，四层名曰关元是也。”
另外佛教瑜珈功，有的功深者，埋在地里数十日，仍可复活。我国道家的蛰藏功，也能口鼻无呼吸，六脉皆停，大定七七四十九日。这与释家三禅脉住，同一道理。这说明道家也有这步功法，不过不易达到罢了。
蛰虫冬眠待春生，人能入定享高龄。
小定七日呼吸断，大定七七六脉停。
年老无事尚可用，在职工作行不通。
介绍此法无他意，说明道家有斯功。
第九步 大周天蒂踵呼吸法
法诀
大周天，神宜凝，呼吸往来在蒂踵。
消息引动相兼连，法轮自转是正功。
真气上升后天降，真气下降后天升。
四个呼吸不用鼻，功到气足自然灵。
细引气，慢扇风，息往息来神入中。
且忌烈火煮空铛，江里有水船可撑。
真人蒂踵呼吸法，道家称为炼丹程。
功夫到此防夜漏，闭关上锁再加封。
功法详解
蒂踵呼吸法，是道家内丹术的炼丹法，丹即是神炁的和合凝集。道家把下手炼精化炁谓采药，把炼炁合神谓之丹，是取其药能治病，丹能延命之意。实则也是强名而已。
蒂踵呼吸是在八步蛰藏功后，方可进行，否则就如烈火煮空铛，旱河撑船劳而无功。
其用法：坐如初，二目合并合光凝神，由祖窍吸气，心意由祖窍往里至玉枕。接着由玉枕再往祖窍呼气。吸呼往来于祖窍与玉枕之间。从祖窍到玉枕一吸为之消，从玉枕到祖窍一呼为之息，用这一吸一呼的消息来引动真人呼吸处。千峰老人说：“祖窍内一吸气，心意由祖窍至延髓梗（即玉枕）为消，后天真气由踵管上升到尾闾过夹脊、玉枕至泥丸宫，此为根生于踵。又呼于蒂，是由延髓至祖窍，下通任脉管根即生死窍。延髓至祖窍一呼气，心意由延髓至祖窍为息，后天真气由蒂管至祖窍过十二重楼、绛宫、炁穴至生死窍，此为发于蒂。此是后天两个吸呼。蒂踵消息，不用口鼻吸呼气。此踵蒂消息久练，自然先天真炁被后天气引动，先天真炁升，后天真气降，先天真炁降，后天真气升，此是四个呼吸不用口鼻之气，为大周天，无时无候无间断也。”此又谓法轮自转。
在用蒂踵消息吸呼时，吸呼越长越细越好。无论是吸还是呼都要发出壶水在火上似开未开的声音。这种从延髓到祖窍，由祖窍到延髓的一呼一吸是引子，如做饭拉风箱一样，待引得先天炁与后天气彼此升降时，法轮自转，引子也就失去作用。
了空祖师曰：“四个吸呼分先后，若用口鼻道不真，吸踵呼蒂连真炁，这个消息引转轮。”又曰：“后天吸呼在山根，先天真炁丹田升，二炁一合连上下，差之毫厘不转轮。”
千峰老人曰：“这踵之头在后脑海即延髓，下通脚后根，一吸踵处至山根即是蒂处，其后天气由脚后根上升至尾闾过夹脊、玉枕至泥丸宫，此是后天一吸踵之处。这蒂之头在山根即祖窍内，下通生死窍，一呼蒂处至后脑海，其后天气由泥丸宫下降，通上鹊桥、玄膺穴、十二重楼，过绛宫，下降真炁穴至生死窍，此为后天一呼蒂之处。此是后天两个吸呼。用蒂踵消息引动先天真炁由炁穴内生出，下通尾闾一度一度上升至乾顶，后天气一点一点下降至生死窍。先天炁由乾顶一度一度下降坤处，后天气由生死窍进尾闾关，一点一点上升至乾顶，此为先后天吸呼四个往来不用口鼻。”
八步蛰藏入定，九步踵蒂吸呼都是炼养舍利的功法。也是属于小周天即将完成，大周天即将开始，因为大小周天是一个整体，绝不能截然分开。当小周天炼精化炁而成舍利，大周天就是炼炁化神而结胎，所谓胎即神炁的结晶，即比舍利更高一级的精、炁、神三者的产物。
第十步 固精关门法
法诀
真炁动，响警钟，谨防夜漏失元精。
勤修苦炼来不易，休让命宝一旦倾。
睡用五龙盘体法，醒有降龙伏虎功。
龙虎穴，在掌中，两手中指点劳宫。
提根吸气转四九，舌接督脉鼓巽风。
头转眼随循子午，后升前降气归中。
功毕两手搓腰眼，关门上锁再加封。
会得固精关门法，益寿延年信非空。
功法详解
固精关门法，是道家养生功法中最重要的一步，是用来预防夜间睡熟后丢失元阳的方法，也是医治梦遗滑精非常有效的方法，万勿等闲视之。
当通过九步功法的勤修苦炼，筑基将成未成之时，须谨防夜间丧失元阳。原因是由于坚持不懈地练功，日积月累，精炁越来越足，身体越来越健康，百病全无，此时正是俗语所说的井满自流之时。但每逢夜间丢丹，白天必有真炁跳动之景，即淫根会阴穴处跳动。这即是夜漏的警钟，已预报夜失元阳的信息。白天得信息，晚上不要忽略。入睡前要用固精关门法将精门关闭，方能高枕无忧。最好是多用功少睡眠。
固精关门法：坐如初步，平心静气，将左手中指曲回，所点之处即龙穴，再用右手中指去点住左手中指所点之处，左手中指自然伸开去点右手劳宫处之虎穴。此时左手掌心向上手背向下，右手在上掌心向下，两手掌心合在一起，除两手中指相互点穴外，其余各指自然伸开，两手合掌横放在脐下。舌接上齿外唇内人中处之督脉弦。同二步转轮法收炁一样，提肛吸气，眼随头转，由会阴子位向左上泥丸午位，随之鼻子一呼气，从午位由上向右下复到子位为一圆周，如此转一吸一呼一圆周，转九圆周一停。每转九周一停，共转四个九周。大致用三四分钟左右。但务必上下相随，完整一气。转完四九三十六周，再静坐十至二十分钟，然后用两手掌心搓腰眼，发热为止，这即是关门上锁再加封。这样入睡就比较安全了。正是：关门再睡倒，免得丧真宝，久练能固精，自然身体好。
两手心的龙虎二穴之脉，通寸关尺之脉，寸关尺之脉内通心肾，即左手龙穴通心，右手虎穴通肾，将龙虎二穴点住，能闭心肾之炁不动，再用神气将精炁管封住，其精就不能自然而出。
五龙盘体法，是卧功，又谓卧禅。睡眠时侧身而卧，一手曲肱、一手摸脐，一腿卷曲、一腿伸开，舌顶上腭，行深呼吸，未睡心先睡目，心息相依，致虚极，守静笃，达到身心两忘，形神俱妙而至入定。
睡眠姿势：侧身卧，一腿伸开，一腿卷曲，一手捂睾丸，一手曲于面部，或双手捂睾丸。这样有两个好处，一是使睾丸发暖，二是睡熟后如精撞阳关一撞即醒，便于手点生死窍（用四步炼精化炁法炼而化之），而不致精撞阳关醒来手足无措。
宴息法，也是道家卧功的睡禅功。在入睡前用打咯法，将浊气略出，易于入睡。在睡前和坐前都应用打饱咯似的宴息法，七日后再入坐或入睡，对于入静入睡都有帮助。
关门固精是为了养精蓄锐，精足而炼精化炁，炁充而炼炁化神，神满而炼神还虚，故有精满不思淫，炁满不思食，神满不思睡之说。固精不是固守死精，必须使之运转不息，应知流水不腐，户枢不蠹，生命在于运动，这与炼精化炁同一道理。
固精关门法，正如古人所说：“运罢河车君再睡，来朝依旧接天根。”
精为炁之母，神为炁之子，有神无炁不能生，有炁无神不能死。
第十一步 虚室生白蟾光现
法诀
蟾光现，心莫惊，须知炉内丹炁充。
虚室生白非是幻，三花聚顶暗室明。
欲知舍利足不足，一盏明灯九转功。
转罢一九闭目看，丹足圆月亮晶莹。
有暗光，丹未成，继续温养再加烹。
寂静犹似龙养珠，谨慎处女怀孕同。
且戒十损勿伤炁，不思食睡神自灵。
神炁合一舍利就，六景现时丹已成。
功法详解
虚室生白，蟾光出现，是通过前面十步功夫即下手炼精化炁、转手炼炁化神以及文烹武炼神炁合一养成舍利，这时三家相见精炁神三宝养足，混融一团，道家谓之结丹。充于内必形于外，固能出现虚室生白的征兆。由于蟾是三足，故道家将精炁神三足发于外的光称为蟾光。
当夜间坐在暗无光亮的屋子里，忽然眼前白光一片，室内所有的东西清晰可见，但一闪即逝。如果经常出现这种景象，心里不必惊慌，这就是虚室生白，蟾光出现，是神炁合一丹已成的征兆。此时宜以至静为主，似龙养珠，如处女初孕，意思是要小心谨慎而已（龙养珠是道家一种术语）。
自己身内的舍利即内丹怎样才知足不足呢？检验的方法是：古时用棉油灯一盏，现在可改用一号手电筒将蒙子去掉，立起来，灯头朝上放在面前。二目高低与灯泡平，距离一尺三寸左右。心定念止，二目睁开注视灯光，头颈盘旋，二目仍视灯光，头转眼不转。头转时依然走子卯午酉四正路线，即由下子位向左上午位，由午位不停紧接着向右下子位这为一转。如此一气转九转，转时不一定配合呼吸。九转功完后闭目看光，若眼前是圆光，圆满晶莹亮如秋月，这即是内丹已足。如果眼前之光不圆或内有暗光，这是内丹不足之征兆，应继续用功，过一段时间再检验一次，只待此光圆陀陀、光灼灼，晶莹皎洁亮如秋月，方知自己内丹已足。但此功不宜太勤，练得太勤会感到头晕。
这步功夫道家谓之取火提火。取火者是取外界之灯火，提火者是提身内的真火，即神火。此是检验自身内丹足与否的办法。功夫至此应静坐滋养舍利为主。每日参禅打坐，两眼合并，下照坤腹，炼得脸上虫食作痒，又如珠网罩面，蚂蚁爬行，左耳龙吟，右耳虎啸，通身酥麻，其身如在云端，形神俱妙，乐不可言。练功坚持不懈，自然会神满不思睡，炁满不思食，精满不思淫，外阳缩如怀抱幼儿。此时谨防走失元炁，故有谨戒十损勿伤炁之说。
所谓十损，是久行损筋、久立损骨、久坐损血、久睡损脉、久听损精、久视损神、久言损气、久思损脾、久淫损命、食饱损心。以上所说都是指过劳而言，而对于行功、立功、坐功、卧功那是另外一回事。另外在坐功时还有六不可，即一不可起念，念起则火炎；二不可意散，意散则火冷；三不可外视，外视则神驰而伤魂；四不可外听，外听则精散而伤魄；五吸呼不可骤，骤则散漫无归；六吸呼不可停，停则继续无力。忽断忽续，或躁或寒，皆有害于舍利成就。必须安神于炁穴之内，勿忘勿助，似守非守，绵绵不绝，念兹在兹，先存后忘，入于混沌之中，这是滋养舍利惟一妙诀。
虚室生白现蟾光，绝非幻觉，而是精炁神三宝养足自然凝结成舍利。精足眼前出现的为慧光。舍利足出现的光为蟾光。慧光蟾光本属一体，蟾光是由慧光发展而来的。慧光如月光，蟾光似金光。蟾光是精中的真阴炁，二目合并发出的光是真阳炁，阴阳二炁和合所发出的宝光谓之金光。
第十二步 舍利养足现六景
法诀
舍利足，六景来，无根树上花正开。
金光一现择静地，早结道侣备法财。
二现止火不用风，四项不全花莫摘。
五炁朝元归祖窍，三花聚顶见如来。
龙又吟，虎又欢，仙乐齐鸣在耳边。
身涌鼻搐遍体酥，丹田火炽两肾煎。
马阴藏相老返童，金光三现过大关。
筑基炼己功成就，性命合一结金丹。
功法详解
这步功夫说的是景象以及为过大关而做的准备工作。
一切物体的本身，无不充实于内而表现于外。当一个人身内无病，精力充沛，其外貌必然是精神焕发，红光满面。相反，若身内有病，则必然面黄肌瘦，形容憔悴，精神萎靡不振。即连草木花卉、瓜果桃李，当其成熟时，其表面都会出现异样光彩。道家的养生功法亦然。
当精炁神三宝炼足，三花聚于顶，心肝脾肺肾五脏之炁朝元，舍利养足必然会出现六景。何谓六景？一眼前有金光，二脑后有鹫鸣即仙乐鸣，三左耳龙吟，右耳虎啸，四丹田火炽，五身涌鼻搐，六马阴藏相。此六景是舍利养足的征兆，也是道家历代养生功法实践经验的总结。现将六景详解如下：
眼前金光的出现：炼功至此当以静养为主。因为此时已达到精满不思淫，炁满不思食，神满不思睡，舍利子已足，淫根自缩，只有用虚静来温养舍利使之足之又足。在未现金光之前，有时眼前常发现刷的一道电光，道家术语谓金机飞电。这是金光出现之前的征兆。出现此征兆仍须静定，应终日二目下视丹田，当眼前出现皎洁如电的性光时仍须静定。在久久静定中忽然在眼前皎洁的性光中又出现金光，此即是金光一现，是真正的精炁神足，三花聚顶，五脏之炁聚，五炁朝元，舍利已足。此时须准备法、财、侣、地，做服食过大关的准备工作。
法：包括过大关的法诀，防危虑险的法器。
财：即钱财，是供道侣生活用的费用。
侣：即道侣二至三人，其中必须有精通过大关口诀的。
地：选择离城镇不远的偏僻处，当然庙宇山洞不受干扰之处，更为合宜。
龙吟：似隐隐气笛之声；虎啸：似呼呼的风声；鹫鸣脑后：似音乐之声。这是精炁神是之真火发出的音响，不同邪火上升的耳鸣。
丹田火炽：两肾汤煎，即身内三昧真火充于内而形于外。三昧真火即君火、相火、民火。精为民火，炁为相火，神为君火。
身涌鼻搐：是身在动，鼻在抽搐。
马阴：是外阳缩回如在胎胞；藏相：是脖下相骨缩回。相骨即气嗓管突出的疙瘩。
另外还有珠网罩面，浑身奇痒等等征兆。
金光二现当止火，止火是采药不用吸呼气之巽风。当止火而不止火，势必导致炉崩丹飞前功尽弃之患。比如水已烧沸、饭已做熟，还继续加火，岂不将饭烧焦锅烧化吗？爆羊肉、涮羊肉要掌握火候，不老不嫩，炼内丹是同一道理。
如果法财侣地四项没备好，当金光二现再采药时只能用意领，而不能用吸呼巽风，火逼金行的功法。只好用意领，继续补养舍利，并百倍注意夜间丢丹。正如正阳祖师所云：“丹熟不须行火候，更行火候必伤丹。”用传统的说法：此时应戒七情、九气、十损。十损在十一步已有。九气：怒则气上，恐则气下，喜则气缓，悲则气消，惊则气乱，思则气结，劳则气耗，寒则气收，热则气泄。
以上这些征兆，是证实舍利子已足。性命双修养生功法十六步，步步功能都有其各自的特征。不是空谈某某已达到如何境界，而是到什么火候，有什么特征，用什么办法，必须恰如其分。当然达到十二步六景出现已属不易。自古传功不传景。因为如先说景，恐怕初学者在坐功时，意念注于景，致生出幻景，被幻景所误。
第十三步 采大药服食过大关大周天
法诀
入静室，万念室，金光三现再用功。
六根震动产大药，五龙捧圣上离宫。
真宝遇阻动后引，侣搓髓解关自通。
羊鹿牛车各献力，吸舐撮闭吸托升。
过三关，升泥丸，上下鹊桥要堵严。
阳火阴符化甘露，润吞金液入丹田。
从此已得天上宝，神炁合一了大还。
男子马阴女缩乳，返老还童寿延年。
功法详解
当法、财、侣、地四项备齐，即可入静室用大功。此时此刻应万念皆空，入坐前用状如馒头的木底座，裹上丝棉，抵住谷道，以防鹊桥漏丹。每日盘膝端坐，二目下视丹田，静久六景自现。待眼前金光三现，正是采大药的火候已到，此时用六根震动的口诀，将舍利震出发动。谷道已有木底座抵住，舌舐上腭，再用吸舐撮闭、五龙捧圣、三车上牵之法，将舍利子升到泥丸宫，再用进阳火三十六，退阴符二十四，经金乌玉兔左旋右转地搅动，将祖窍内的真性炁与乐穴中的真命炁，阴阳二炁合一，化成真种子脱落，走鼻根玄膺穴，此刻上鹊桥漏丹处鼻窍已用木来年堵塞。只有润吞，下降十二重楼，过绛宫下入丹田温养于中，这是采大药过大关的全过程。
何谓六根震动、五龙捧圣？过关服食的具体做法又如何呢？
六根即眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意六根。如睡觉打呼噜，可使六根震动。舍利子被震动后，势必下行，下鹊桥前有五龙捧圣，即双手十指叠成五指，用两手中指抵住生死窍喻为五龙，捧圣是指捧舍利子。下边阳关、谷道已闭，舍利子只有沿着督脉上行，此刻道侣急搓尾闾，搓热髓解，等舍利自动撞关时，两手往上一捧，两眼慢慢地从左往上一转，如羊拉车，其力在尾。轻微上引，舌顶上腭，随其真宝自动之机，鼻内往回一吸气，腰眼一挺，但觉尾闾关咕嘟一下通过。且记必须真宝先动而后引，万勿先引而后动。尾间已过，道侣急搓督脉，真宝一度一度上升。至夹脊关真宝遇阻不动。真宝不动，一意不动，万勿不动先引。道侣轻搓夹脊，热而髓解。待真宝自撞夹脊关时，借真宝自动之机，两手往上一捧，两眼迅速地往上一转，如同鹿拉车，轻而快，其力在脊，舌顶上腭，随真宝自动之机，鼻子一吸气；腰眼往上一挺，咕嘟一下真宝渡过夹脊。道侣向上急搓，真宝一度一度上升，至玉枕关遇阻不动。真宝不动，一意不动。道侣急搓玉枕，热而髓解，真宝忽然自动撞关，随其自动之机，两手往上一捧，舌舐上腭，鼻子一吸气，两眼用力往上一转，如牛拉车快而猛，其力在项颈，但觉咕嘟一下渡过玉枕关。道侣仍急搓风府，真宝进人风府与延髓结合，过小脑、脑桥，进人大脑中心，性神室。此是真命炁之宝与真性神之宝，二宝神炁合一，道家谓之性命同宫。道侣此时用木来年堵塞鼻窍，以防上鹊桥鼻根漏丹。真宝进入神室后，再用进阳火、退阴符之功，即大周天炼炁化神功法。
男子藏相女缩乳，返老还童寿延年。采舍利子过大关，必有明显特征，即男子马阴藏相，女子两乳缩回。马阴即外阳完全缩回，如胎儿在母腹时外阳藏于腹内，出生后使劲一哭外阳才被努出来。藏相是下巴颏下气嗓疙瘩缩回，如五六岁婴儿。女子两乳缩回，像五六岁幼女，进而白发变黑，齿落重生，这方是真正的返老还童。
采大药过关服食，是道教性命双修养生功法中极高深的一步。是由初步修性开始，静极一阳来复，炁动收炁，精动则炼精化炁，是为下手法。经过日积月累地下手采炼，精满炁足神炁合一而产舍利。舍利养足，金光三现过关服食，为大周天转手炼炁化神。大功至此阳关自闭，应以温养为主，在定静中时有法轮自转之妙境。
下手炼精化炁，采药归炉后，眼前出现的光为慧光。经过卯酉周天与翕聚炼光封固蛰藏，蒂踵呼吸一系列温养锻炼后，出现的光为蟾光。当舍利养足，在月白的蟾光中出现金黄色的光为金光，又谓阳光。金光一现，准备法、财、侣、地。金光二现当止火。金光三现采大药过大关。如过三现不采，等金光四现即金逢望远不堪尝矣，所以古人以金光三现为不老不嫩的火候。金光四现是应该止火而没止火，舍利子遂被四现之火化成有形之精溢于外，而致前功尽弃，对此万勿忽视。
过关服食又谓金液还丹。金液不同于津液。前者是经过大周天乾坤交姤，阳火阴符化甘露，真种子脱落，甘甜如蜜。后者是在初步入静后，心火下降，肾水上升，由舌下金井石泉所生的津液，又名玉液。而金液是由真性炁与真命炁，阴阳二炁合一化成先天真种子脱落而来。所谓服食，正是吞服这先天真种子化成的金液、甘露。将这先天真种子，种在炁穴，使其开花结子，是谓养道胎。故有小周天炼精化炁而结丹，大周天炼炁化神而结胎。用现在的话来解释，丹与胎都是精炁神的化合物、结晶品。
采大药过关服食之后，关窍已通，此后不用意领，法轮自转。此时应以二目之神光时时刻刻下照坤腹，久而久之大定得之，息停，脉住，功夫更上一层楼，即佛家所谓初禅念住，二禅息住，三禅脉住。
了空师祖偈曰：“一意不动真种生，二炁和合神运功，三车牵上昆仑顶，四相合一空不空，五龙捧圣朝天贺，六根震动真宝升，天地交泰生万物，乾坤交姤产圣婴。”
十三步性命双修养生功法，都是我父亲得之恩师千峰老人口授心传，并由父亲口授心传于我。由于时代的不同，在阐述理论和名词上有所取舍与改革，但在具体功法上仍保持原诀未动。十三步功法概括地说只是两节：即小周天下手炼精化炁，大周天转手炼炁化神。只此十三步，即使有志之士，也一生用之不尽。
道家性命双修全部功法共四大手，即：一、下手炼精化炁。二、转手炼炁化神。三、了手炼神还虚。四、撒手炼虚化无。千峰老人又把每手分为四步功法，合四四一十六步。由于后三步养道胎、出阳神、粉碎虚空过于深奥、玄虚，用现代科学方法难以解释，所以本书没有作具体的叙述。但为了让大家对本功全貌有所接触，本书附录中特将千峰祖师的十六步口诀，全文录出，以供参考。
炼炁化神大周天，前人历来不轻传。
余今泄尽千古秘，献给同道做参研。
功法虽然十三步；正是养生延寿录。
登峰造极老还少，一生用之无尽处。
Saturday, November 26, 2011
《道德经》智慧与道商创意经济探析
创新是一个民族进步的灵魂。如何“提高自主创新能力，建设创新型国家”，这是当前中国国家发展战略的核心，也是提高综合国力的关键。
近年来，以创意为主导，文化产业发展为特征的创意经济作为一种新的经济形态，正以不可阻挡的力量影响着世界各国的社会发展。“创意资本”作为继物质资本、土地资本、人力资本和社会资本之后的第五种资本要素，正逐步成为推动经济发展的核心要素。
老子道学文化及《道德经》智慧是塑造中华民族精神的源头活水。在创意经济风靡全球的大变革时代，我们该如何从老子《道德经》中汲取“创意”智慧源泉，通过培养大量具有自主创新意识和善于在变革中发展的现代“道商”，推动科学发展，这是时代发展提出的迫切要求。
一、虚实相交：创意经济是时代发展的必然趋势
“创意经济”的概念诞生于20世纪90年代中后期，最早是由英国人提出的。它主要是指从个人的创造力、技能和天分中获取发展动力的企业，以及通过对知识产权的开发可创造潜在财富和就业机会的活动。
《道德经.第二章》讲：“故有无之相生”。当前，人类经济社会正在经历四个时代——农业经济时代、工业经济时代、信息经济时代、创意经济时代。这四大时代的发展转化完美体现了道的阴阳交演规律，即：从小到大、由动入静、由粗转精、从低就高、化坤为乾、从体力到智能，从物质到思想、从重有形到重无形……
在农业经济时代，以地主阶级为代表，谁拥有土地谁就拥有财富，“普天之下，莫非王土，率土之滨，莫非王臣。”随着瓦特蒸汽机的发明，人类社会进入工业经济时代，以“资本主义”工业化最为典型，谁拥有自然资源和机器成为拥有财富的象征，这期间诞生了拥有石油资源的洛克菲勒家族与拥有汽车制造生产线的福特家族。自英特网诞生后，人类开始进入信息经济时代，进入了重视知识的“知本主义”时代。在信息经济时代，知识就是财富，资讯就是财富，财富拥有者的必须有与众不同的思考方式，以及精深的专业知识与广博的相关行业知识。雅虎的崛起、微软的称霸、戴尔的网上直销、软银的大肆扩张……都一再证明信息化时代财富拥有者的特征。
事物发展的规律就是极则反、极则变。“大曰逝，逝曰远，远曰反。”；“反者道之动。”当纯物质的文明发展到极限，世人就要通过市场经济，通过文化与精神的消费来满足其深层次需求。所以，丹麦著名未来学家罗夫.钱森告诉我们：“继信息社会之后，人类正在迈入梦想社会。我们将从重视信息过渡到重视想象。”
罗夫.钱森提到的“梦想社会”，也就是创意经济时代。
二、有无相生：创意经济的核心动力是创意思维
追溯创意经济产生的渊源，著名德国经济史及经济思想家熊.彼得在1912年就指出，“现在经济发展的根本动力不是资本和劳动力，而是创新”。
创新的本质是创意，而创意并不是凭空而来的。斯坦福大学经济学家保罗.罗默早就认为，“伟大的进步总是来源于思想。但是思想并不是从天上掉下来的，他们是来自于人的头脑”。一个项目、一种策略、是否具有创意，是否具有新异，关键在于我们能否打破固有的思维模式，“出有入无”地走向广阔的创意思维领域，悟出万事万物都存在一种相似的“共性”——道。
什么是“道”呢？老子在《道德经.第二十五章》给我们描述介绍说：“有物混成，先天地生。寂兮寥兮，独立而不该，周行而不殆，可以为天地母。吾不知其名，字之曰道，强为之名曰大。”道是先天地而生的。“天下万物生于有，有生于无。”生天生地的“道”堪为天地之母、万物之祖。
在老子的思想智慧中，大道无形、大象无形。这里的“无”并非没有和不存在，而是无所不包、无所不容、无穷无尽、不可描述的“大有”与“万有”。虽然大道的本体是空虚而无形的，但《道德经.第十四章》却为我们揭示了“无中之有”的存在。“视之不见名曰夷，听之不闻名曰希，搏之不得名曰微。此三者不可致诘，故混而为一。其上不皎，其下不昧，绳绳不可名，复归于无物，是谓无状之状，无物之象，是谓惚恍。迎之不见其首，随之不见其后。”“道之为物，惟恍惟惚。惚兮恍兮，其中有象；恍兮惚兮，其中有物，窈兮冥兮，其中有精。其精甚真，其中有信。”（《道德经.第二十一章》）……
然而，无形的大道却具有无穷无尽之功用。《道德经》告诉我们：“道冲而用之或不盈，渊兮，似万物之宗。”；“天地之间，其犹橐龠乎，虚而不屈，动而愈出，多言数穷，不如守中。”在老子道学思想体系中非常强调“虚无”的妙用，并认为只有“虚无”才能够化生和孕育最大的“实有”。
如果我们从老子《道德经》的“虚无生妙有”智慧中，领悟“创意经济”的本质，在一个想象力无边界的无形时代，遵循老子“天下有始，以为天下母。既得其母，以知其子；既知其子，复守其母，没身不殆”的“守母存子”教诲，必定可以摆脱西方企业“体力劳动者”的卑贱身份，从“中国制造”到“中国创造”，以心智王天下，以创意王天下，构建以道兴商的“商业帝国”。
三、阴阳相济：创意经济的推进手段应“尊道贵德”
儒家善于守成，道家善于达变。司马迁《史记》称，道家“以虚无为本，以因循为用。无成势，无常形，故能究万物之情。不为物先，不为物后，故能为万物主”。我们倘一旦有幸进入“上善若水”的大道众妙之门，创意智慧必将源源不断，绵绵不竭，无时无处无物不存。
《道德经.第四十二章》曰：“道生一，一生二，二生三，三生万物。万物负阴而抱阳，冲气以为和”。宇宙万物皆太极，一阴一阳之谓道。创意思维的生发，创意经济的推动，无不在“负阴抱阳”的冲和交演中，遵循着“道生之，德蓄之，物形之，势成之”的规律进行演变推进。
在鼓励创新的社会氛围中，富余想象和激情的创意“道商”们，将运用老子道学“无中生有”、“借虚入实”、“以小搏大”、“以柔胜刚”的智慧，以较少的物质资源消耗为基础，迅速地将独特创意转化为具有知识产权的成果、设计和产品，在某一领域形成市场竞争力。
无中生有：《道德经》说：“天下万物生于有，有生于无。”道家认为世间万物都是从“无”开始的。从“无极图”生出“有极图”，又从“有极图”孕育发展出万物。
无中生有，无中之有是大有！伟大的商业公司总是尽可能的创造需求，而不仅仅是满足需求。商业的真正利润是往往出自“无中生有”的商业模式中，当我们以一种“上德无德”般的新的视角重新理解生活方式时，就会发现新的商业模式，达到“不争而善胜”的商业蓝海。凡是善于“创造需求”的成功企业家和企业，几乎都是“无中生有”的高手。
创造一种“渴望中的生活方式”，既考验着一个企业出色的创意思维想象力，又考验着企业把理想变成现实的创新实践能力。虽然能够运用“无中生有式”去主动创造需求的道商，总是显得那么凤毛麟角、寂寥星辰。可他们一旦诞生出来，就意味着开创出了一片崭新的天地，并且往往带领企业成为新产业或新行业的标志性领袖人物。
借虚入实：老子说，“三十辐，共一毂，当其无有，车之用。埏埴以为器，当其无用，器之用。凿户牖以为室，当其无有，室之用。故有之以为利，无之以为用。”在老子看来，一切有形的有用是有限的，而一切无形的无用却是无限的。任何事情都要阴阳共济，虚实结合，才能够产生无穷的妙用。
孙福良教授认为，“进入知识经济的时代，人们的需求发生了很大的变化，从满足物质需求到今天的文化精神需求。”所谓创意策划，就是如何利用智慧，将“虚拟”转化为“现实”的思维过程。
企业经营和商业发展也是如此，一般的管理者只知道向管理出效益，问生产要效益，却不知道高明的经营者却能极目思远，向虚空求实有，在无中创生机。罗夫.钱森告诉我们：“当我们在购物时，事实上我们在商品内寻找故事、友情、关怀、生活方式和品性。我们是在购买感情。”……真正的道商，往往善于从“虚构”出发，然后创造“事实”。
在《道德经》中，关于推动创意经济发展的创意思维培育智慧，可谓俯首可视。如：
“见小曰明，守柔曰强，用其光，复归其明，无遗身殃，是为袭常。”创意要善于从小处入手，以小博大。有媒体这样告诉公众：“什么叫做创意呢？你可以生产鞋子，但是，你生产一万只鞋子的利润，不如我设计一双鞋子的利润。”这和比尔·盖茨的说法有着异曲同工之妙：“创意具有裂变效应，一盎司创意能够带来无以数计的商业利益、商业奇迹”。
《道德经.第三十六章》：“将欲翕之，必故张之；将欲弱之，必故强之；将欲废之，必故兴之；将欲夺之，必故与之。是谓微明。柔胜刚，弱胜强。鱼不可脱于渊，国之利器不可以示人。”创意在于打破常规思维定式，而进行出奇制胜的逆反思维。而如何培育逆反思维，则须具备“上德不德，是以有德；下德不失德，是以无德”的开放式心境（《道德经.第三十八章》）。
《道德经》还强调创意思维不可缺少的平衡之美，如：“知其雄，守其雌，为天下溪；知其白，守其黑，为天下式；知其荣，守其辱，为天下谷。”；“天之道，其犹张弓乎？高者抑之，下者举之；有余者损之，不足者补之。天之道，损有余而补不足。”
在新的商业经济游戏规则下，最终的胜出者必定是那些具备人文气质和偏执狂精神“象做艺术品一样来做产品”的公司。苹果电脑原首席执行官史蒂夫.乔布斯告诉我们：“光有科技是不够的。科技要和人文、艺术结婚，才能产生让我们的心为之歌唱的结果”。美、情感、艺术、个性正在成为创意经济的引领者。
四、以道经商：创意经济的智本家时代已经来临
《道德经》告诉我们：“道者，万物之奥，善人之宝……故立天子，置三公，虽有拱璧以先驷马，不如坐进此道。”；“道：常，无名，朴，虽小，天下不敢臣。侯王若能守之，万物将自宾。”；“道常无为而无不为，侯王若能守之，万物将自化。”
2010年1月，胡锦涛主席在视察上海“8号桥”创意园区时说：“创意产业蕴藏着巨大发展潜力。”当前，发达国家和地区政府相继提出发展创意产业的政策，将其视为对未来经济增长和创造就业机会具有重要贡献的经济增长领域，并以创意产业的规模和程度作为衡量一国综合竞争力的重要标志。创意经济时代的新理念、新技术、新商业模式、新文化形势和新产业形态，正在成为人类经济发展的强大动力。
资本的时代已经过去，一个强调虚空智慧，推崇创新美感、注重文化艺术对经济支持的“创意经济”时代已经来临。约翰.霍金斯在《创意经济》一书中明确指出，“我确信，在21世纪，一个国家只有设法将个体作为具有思想和创造力的人融入其经济体系，才能获得成功。”“在这种经济中，大部分人在大部分时间依靠创意而非地产或资本赚取大部分收入”。
在创意经济时代，以心智王天下的道商（智本家）们，将凭借和依托《道德经》及中国古代哲学智慧，“执古之道，以御今之有”。他们承载着“以道启心，以心启智，以智启财，以财启众，众皆归道”的历史使命，奉行“天之道，利而不害，圣人之道，为而不争”之原则，以道经商，照亮亿万人民的创新梦想，谱写中华民族新的辉煌!并为人类社会的文明与进步做出更大贡献!
作者简介：李海波，知名道学学者，职业谋士，中国道商知识体系创建人，国际道商文化研究院院长。主要著作有：《势—人生谋势之道》；《道商》等。
近年来，以创意为主导，文化产业发展为特征的创意经济作为一种新的经济形态，正以不可阻挡的力量影响着世界各国的社会发展。“创意资本”作为继物质资本、土地资本、人力资本和社会资本之后的第五种资本要素，正逐步成为推动经济发展的核心要素。
老子道学文化及《道德经》智慧是塑造中华民族精神的源头活水。在创意经济风靡全球的大变革时代，我们该如何从老子《道德经》中汲取“创意”智慧源泉，通过培养大量具有自主创新意识和善于在变革中发展的现代“道商”，推动科学发展，这是时代发展提出的迫切要求。
一、虚实相交：创意经济是时代发展的必然趋势
“创意经济”的概念诞生于20世纪90年代中后期，最早是由英国人提出的。它主要是指从个人的创造力、技能和天分中获取发展动力的企业，以及通过对知识产权的开发可创造潜在财富和就业机会的活动。
《道德经.第二章》讲：“故有无之相生”。当前，人类经济社会正在经历四个时代——农业经济时代、工业经济时代、信息经济时代、创意经济时代。这四大时代的发展转化完美体现了道的阴阳交演规律，即：从小到大、由动入静、由粗转精、从低就高、化坤为乾、从体力到智能，从物质到思想、从重有形到重无形……
在农业经济时代，以地主阶级为代表，谁拥有土地谁就拥有财富，“普天之下，莫非王土，率土之滨，莫非王臣。”随着瓦特蒸汽机的发明，人类社会进入工业经济时代，以“资本主义”工业化最为典型，谁拥有自然资源和机器成为拥有财富的象征，这期间诞生了拥有石油资源的洛克菲勒家族与拥有汽车制造生产线的福特家族。自英特网诞生后，人类开始进入信息经济时代，进入了重视知识的“知本主义”时代。在信息经济时代，知识就是财富，资讯就是财富，财富拥有者的必须有与众不同的思考方式，以及精深的专业知识与广博的相关行业知识。雅虎的崛起、微软的称霸、戴尔的网上直销、软银的大肆扩张……都一再证明信息化时代财富拥有者的特征。
事物发展的规律就是极则反、极则变。“大曰逝，逝曰远，远曰反。”；“反者道之动。”当纯物质的文明发展到极限，世人就要通过市场经济，通过文化与精神的消费来满足其深层次需求。所以，丹麦著名未来学家罗夫.钱森告诉我们：“继信息社会之后，人类正在迈入梦想社会。我们将从重视信息过渡到重视想象。”
罗夫.钱森提到的“梦想社会”，也就是创意经济时代。
二、有无相生：创意经济的核心动力是创意思维
追溯创意经济产生的渊源，著名德国经济史及经济思想家熊.彼得在1912年就指出，“现在经济发展的根本动力不是资本和劳动力，而是创新”。
创新的本质是创意，而创意并不是凭空而来的。斯坦福大学经济学家保罗.罗默早就认为，“伟大的进步总是来源于思想。但是思想并不是从天上掉下来的，他们是来自于人的头脑”。一个项目、一种策略、是否具有创意，是否具有新异，关键在于我们能否打破固有的思维模式，“出有入无”地走向广阔的创意思维领域，悟出万事万物都存在一种相似的“共性”——道。
什么是“道”呢？老子在《道德经.第二十五章》给我们描述介绍说：“有物混成，先天地生。寂兮寥兮，独立而不该，周行而不殆，可以为天地母。吾不知其名，字之曰道，强为之名曰大。”道是先天地而生的。“天下万物生于有，有生于无。”生天生地的“道”堪为天地之母、万物之祖。
在老子的思想智慧中，大道无形、大象无形。这里的“无”并非没有和不存在，而是无所不包、无所不容、无穷无尽、不可描述的“大有”与“万有”。虽然大道的本体是空虚而无形的，但《道德经.第十四章》却为我们揭示了“无中之有”的存在。“视之不见名曰夷，听之不闻名曰希，搏之不得名曰微。此三者不可致诘，故混而为一。其上不皎，其下不昧，绳绳不可名，复归于无物，是谓无状之状，无物之象，是谓惚恍。迎之不见其首，随之不见其后。”“道之为物，惟恍惟惚。惚兮恍兮，其中有象；恍兮惚兮，其中有物，窈兮冥兮，其中有精。其精甚真，其中有信。”（《道德经.第二十一章》）……
然而，无形的大道却具有无穷无尽之功用。《道德经》告诉我们：“道冲而用之或不盈，渊兮，似万物之宗。”；“天地之间，其犹橐龠乎，虚而不屈，动而愈出，多言数穷，不如守中。”在老子道学思想体系中非常强调“虚无”的妙用，并认为只有“虚无”才能够化生和孕育最大的“实有”。
如果我们从老子《道德经》的“虚无生妙有”智慧中，领悟“创意经济”的本质，在一个想象力无边界的无形时代，遵循老子“天下有始，以为天下母。既得其母，以知其子；既知其子，复守其母，没身不殆”的“守母存子”教诲，必定可以摆脱西方企业“体力劳动者”的卑贱身份，从“中国制造”到“中国创造”，以心智王天下，以创意王天下，构建以道兴商的“商业帝国”。
三、阴阳相济：创意经济的推进手段应“尊道贵德”
儒家善于守成，道家善于达变。司马迁《史记》称，道家“以虚无为本，以因循为用。无成势，无常形，故能究万物之情。不为物先，不为物后，故能为万物主”。我们倘一旦有幸进入“上善若水”的大道众妙之门，创意智慧必将源源不断，绵绵不竭，无时无处无物不存。
《道德经.第四十二章》曰：“道生一，一生二，二生三，三生万物。万物负阴而抱阳，冲气以为和”。宇宙万物皆太极，一阴一阳之谓道。创意思维的生发，创意经济的推动，无不在“负阴抱阳”的冲和交演中，遵循着“道生之，德蓄之，物形之，势成之”的规律进行演变推进。
在鼓励创新的社会氛围中，富余想象和激情的创意“道商”们，将运用老子道学“无中生有”、“借虚入实”、“以小搏大”、“以柔胜刚”的智慧，以较少的物质资源消耗为基础，迅速地将独特创意转化为具有知识产权的成果、设计和产品，在某一领域形成市场竞争力。
无中生有：《道德经》说：“天下万物生于有，有生于无。”道家认为世间万物都是从“无”开始的。从“无极图”生出“有极图”，又从“有极图”孕育发展出万物。
无中生有，无中之有是大有！伟大的商业公司总是尽可能的创造需求，而不仅仅是满足需求。商业的真正利润是往往出自“无中生有”的商业模式中，当我们以一种“上德无德”般的新的视角重新理解生活方式时，就会发现新的商业模式，达到“不争而善胜”的商业蓝海。凡是善于“创造需求”的成功企业家和企业，几乎都是“无中生有”的高手。
创造一种“渴望中的生活方式”，既考验着一个企业出色的创意思维想象力，又考验着企业把理想变成现实的创新实践能力。虽然能够运用“无中生有式”去主动创造需求的道商，总是显得那么凤毛麟角、寂寥星辰。可他们一旦诞生出来，就意味着开创出了一片崭新的天地，并且往往带领企业成为新产业或新行业的标志性领袖人物。
借虚入实：老子说，“三十辐，共一毂，当其无有，车之用。埏埴以为器，当其无用，器之用。凿户牖以为室，当其无有，室之用。故有之以为利，无之以为用。”在老子看来，一切有形的有用是有限的，而一切无形的无用却是无限的。任何事情都要阴阳共济，虚实结合，才能够产生无穷的妙用。
孙福良教授认为，“进入知识经济的时代，人们的需求发生了很大的变化，从满足物质需求到今天的文化精神需求。”所谓创意策划，就是如何利用智慧，将“虚拟”转化为“现实”的思维过程。
企业经营和商业发展也是如此，一般的管理者只知道向管理出效益，问生产要效益，却不知道高明的经营者却能极目思远，向虚空求实有，在无中创生机。罗夫.钱森告诉我们：“当我们在购物时，事实上我们在商品内寻找故事、友情、关怀、生活方式和品性。我们是在购买感情。”……真正的道商，往往善于从“虚构”出发，然后创造“事实”。
在《道德经》中，关于推动创意经济发展的创意思维培育智慧，可谓俯首可视。如：
“见小曰明，守柔曰强，用其光，复归其明，无遗身殃，是为袭常。”创意要善于从小处入手，以小博大。有媒体这样告诉公众：“什么叫做创意呢？你可以生产鞋子，但是，你生产一万只鞋子的利润，不如我设计一双鞋子的利润。”这和比尔·盖茨的说法有着异曲同工之妙：“创意具有裂变效应，一盎司创意能够带来无以数计的商业利益、商业奇迹”。
《道德经.第三十六章》：“将欲翕之，必故张之；将欲弱之，必故强之；将欲废之，必故兴之；将欲夺之，必故与之。是谓微明。柔胜刚，弱胜强。鱼不可脱于渊，国之利器不可以示人。”创意在于打破常规思维定式，而进行出奇制胜的逆反思维。而如何培育逆反思维，则须具备“上德不德，是以有德；下德不失德，是以无德”的开放式心境（《道德经.第三十八章》）。
《道德经》还强调创意思维不可缺少的平衡之美，如：“知其雄，守其雌，为天下溪；知其白，守其黑，为天下式；知其荣，守其辱，为天下谷。”；“天之道，其犹张弓乎？高者抑之，下者举之；有余者损之，不足者补之。天之道，损有余而补不足。”
在新的商业经济游戏规则下，最终的胜出者必定是那些具备人文气质和偏执狂精神“象做艺术品一样来做产品”的公司。苹果电脑原首席执行官史蒂夫.乔布斯告诉我们：“光有科技是不够的。科技要和人文、艺术结婚，才能产生让我们的心为之歌唱的结果”。美、情感、艺术、个性正在成为创意经济的引领者。
四、以道经商：创意经济的智本家时代已经来临
《道德经》告诉我们：“道者，万物之奥，善人之宝……故立天子，置三公，虽有拱璧以先驷马，不如坐进此道。”；“道：常，无名，朴，虽小，天下不敢臣。侯王若能守之，万物将自宾。”；“道常无为而无不为，侯王若能守之，万物将自化。”
2010年1月，胡锦涛主席在视察上海“8号桥”创意园区时说：“创意产业蕴藏着巨大发展潜力。”当前，发达国家和地区政府相继提出发展创意产业的政策，将其视为对未来经济增长和创造就业机会具有重要贡献的经济增长领域，并以创意产业的规模和程度作为衡量一国综合竞争力的重要标志。创意经济时代的新理念、新技术、新商业模式、新文化形势和新产业形态，正在成为人类经济发展的强大动力。
资本的时代已经过去，一个强调虚空智慧，推崇创新美感、注重文化艺术对经济支持的“创意经济”时代已经来临。约翰.霍金斯在《创意经济》一书中明确指出，“我确信，在21世纪，一个国家只有设法将个体作为具有思想和创造力的人融入其经济体系，才能获得成功。”“在这种经济中，大部分人在大部分时间依靠创意而非地产或资本赚取大部分收入”。
在创意经济时代，以心智王天下的道商（智本家）们，将凭借和依托《道德经》及中国古代哲学智慧，“执古之道，以御今之有”。他们承载着“以道启心，以心启智，以智启财，以财启众，众皆归道”的历史使命，奉行“天之道，利而不害，圣人之道，为而不争”之原则，以道经商，照亮亿万人民的创新梦想，谱写中华民族新的辉煌!并为人类社会的文明与进步做出更大贡献!
作者简介：李海波，知名道学学者，职业谋士，中国道商知识体系创建人，国际道商文化研究院院长。主要著作有：《势—人生谋势之道》；《道商》等。
道德经 - 策划 与 谋略
现代商务策划脱胎于中国古代的谋略智慧，有人说：中国是讲究“道德”的，其实不尽然，中国人是外“道德”而内“谋略”的，这个结论，完全符合我们中国的太极观。中国的历代智慧典籍中，讲得最多的就是谋略；国人的善谋、多谋，早已成为世界上公认的事实。所以，我们可以说：中国，是谋略的国度，策划的国度！
我们现代研究与推行商务策划，不但要吸收西方的战略、营销、企划等诸多优秀外来文化和技术，我个人提议，更要深入到我们中华传统的谋略思想法乳中，继承祖先留给我们的优秀文化遗产，创建有中国特色的，能够走向世界的中国商务策划知识体系。
记得史教授在谈到中国策划在世界上的地位时，有句名言：“中国的老子不仅是外国人的老子，连中国的孙子都被外国人当作老子”。这句话道出了中国策划的渊源和广博的影响力。不管是今天的WBSA，还是CBSA，都非常推崇兵圣孙武子“以正合，以奇胜”的谋略思维模式。但是，我今天要告诉大家的是，我们更应该深入到孙武子以前的谋略文化中，去寻找中华谋略文化的源头。因为，早在孙武子之前，生活在周朝的中国道家文化的开创者——老子，就已经在他的《道德经》中提出了“以正治国，以奇用兵”的观点。
商务策划要有道，这个道，就是规律。策，就是发现规律；划，就是导引潮流。在座的各位商务策划师们，都熟知这个观点。而老子的《道德经》哲学，也早已阐发出这样的观点：这就是，万事万物，首先要从道入手，先抓住纲，先把握住规律，做到心中有数；再手中有术，按照自然规律、客观规律去作为、去导引潮流。同时，在老子当时，也率先提出了“生态策划”的重要性，那就是在去作为的同时，还要做到“为而不争”，不要把自己的主观愿望强加于客观规律，不要用自己的私心去策划并妄图改变大自然的规律，从而导致生态平衡的破坏，阴阳平衡的扭曲变形而变得不“和谐”，否则，必将“为者败之，执者失之”，而酿成全局的失败。
根据我个人的研究心得，老子的《道德经》中的谋略思维观点，比比皆是，俯手可拾，在这里，我谨将《道德经》观点与我们现代商务策划体系中五大领域“战略——生态——融资——管理——营销”作一个简单的对比阐述。
老子的战略策划观点：
老子真是一位伟大的战略策划专家，在他看来，“治大国，若烹小鲜”，治理一个大的国家，就好象煎炸一条小鱼一样简单，为什么呢？因为他有道，有“战略”策划思维，“以道莅天下，其鬼不神”！“道：常，无名，朴，虽小，天下不敢臣”。这个战略看起来虽然无关紧要，甚至虚无飘渺的，但是，在策划中，祭出战略这个武器，天下却没有不臣服的。“执大象，天下往”！有了大的战略，就能够号令天下。所以，战略策划，是老子极为推崇的。
老子的生态策划观点：
“中和”、“和谐”、“执中守一”的观点，也是老子最先提出来的，《道德经》讲：“万物负阴而抱阳，中气以为和”！要策划出水平，不但要负阴抱阳正合奇胜，更要把握住中和的原则。中国文化的大义，也全在“中和”、“中庸”的火候把握上，“努力构建和谐社会”是我们现阶段提出的治国之大策略，“和气生财”是我们商务策划中的重要原则，那么，这个和是什么呢？非阴非阳，非奇非正，乃是阴谋与阳略的结合体，局部策划与整体策划的结合，企业策划与社会策划的结合，是个人价值与社会价值的结合……
要想实现真正的大策划，只有把握住中和的生态发展观，适时有度、天地人合一做全局筹划。否则，违背这个规律，就必将导致“物及必反”。如以前我们在政府策划中，过分的追求城市亮化形象工程，而对城市构成了新的光污染；过分追求GDP的增长而忽视城市自有生态，而大量耗费未来的城市发展资源；对企业经营的过度的负重性策划，导致策划与管理脱节，最终脱垮企业……所以，在《道德经》中，老子认为“多藏必厚亡”、“企者不立，跨者不行”：掂起脚后跟站着的人，是站不久的，迈开大步跨行的人，是走不远的，因为这都违背了自然的规律。过分的追求成功，反而会导致更大的失败！中国前些年的民营企业在企业壮大后的转型之死，就是一个对生态策划很好的注解。
老子的融资策划观：
策划学是“务虚”的学问，道家历来推崇“无”、“弱”、“虚”的思想，并认为“无中可以生出妙有，柔弱可以战胜刚强，虚能入实，小可博大，四两可以取千斤”，这些思想为历代策划谋略家所称道。如《道德经》中讲“反者道之动，弱者道之用，天下万物生于有，有生于无”。商务策划人要懂得识得和“动”、“用”事物发展的深层次规律，才能真正的虚无生妙有，化腐朽为神奇。真正的大手笔策划，都是从无中融资，发现资源、整合资源、利用资源，进而创造更大的资源优势的。“以道佐人主者，不以兵强天下。”完成一个大手笔的策划，并不是靠雄厚的资金砸出来的，如果不懂得策划融资而单凭一己之经济力量，必将“大军之后，必有凶年”。
老子的管理策划观：
在管理中，我们大家都推行“扁平化”管理，扁平化管理模式的老祖宗是谁呢？同样是老子，《道德经》说“为学日益，为道日损，损之又损，以至于无为，无为而无不为。”做学问是要越学越充实，而搞管理、搞策划，就是要学会把复杂的问题、复杂的事物、复杂的程序简单化，要损之又损，当简单到不能简单时，一切都将明了而容易了。但是，就这么简单的管理大道，许多人却并不去实行。“大道甚夷，而民好径”。（《道德经?第53章》）在管理制度上，我们一旦制订并推行某种制度，就不要去轻易更改和推翻它，因为“治大国，若烹小鲜”（《道德经?第60章》），管理的大智慧就好象在锅里煎炸小鱼一样，不要轻易的翻动它，搅扰它。作为管理的最高决策层，最好能够有效的授权你的下属去有为，而不要把自己搀杂到具体的事务中去，免得影响您的员工的自由发挥能力，一定要知道“太上，不知有之，其次，亲而誉之；其次，畏之……”（《道德经?第17章》）所以，在管理学界，有这样的话：高层的管理者，一定要学道家，以无为而治理；中层的管理者，一定要学儒家，以仁义来管理；基层的管理者，一定要学法家，以制度来管理。
老子的营销策划观：
按照我个人的理解，老子是一位伟大的营销策划家，《史记》中记载的老子虽然“自隐无名”，但是孔子对老子的三次问礼，西出函谷尹喜的强留著书及目前《道德经》在全世界图书的发行量之巨大，都折射出老子成功的营销智慧。关于营销的观点，在《道德经》中，可谓比比皆是。如“将欲弛之，必固张之；将欲弱之，必固强之；将欲废之，必固兴之；将欲夺之，必固与之”、这就是我们商务策划体系中的“拉销营销法”、“逆反法”的理论根基。并且认为这些营销谋略是不能轻易让别人知道的，“鱼不可脱于渊，国之利器不可以示人”。（《道德经?第36章》）“圣人无常心，以百姓心为心”（《道德经?第49章》），你的服务、产品要想营销成功，获得市场，首先要以“百姓心”为心，以市场心为心，以消费者心为心，如此，才可以根深蒂固。
同时，老子非常注重于品牌的建设，在他看来，品牌的重要性就好象是“含德之厚的赤子”一样，任何危害都很难伤及它，在建设品牌时，一定要有长期的战略打算并不能脱离实际的冒进，“善建者不拔，善抱者不脱”（《道德经?第54章》），在营销策划中，还应该进行伏笔策划，危机策划，以“为之于未有，治之于未乱”、“慎终如始，则无败事”。（《道德经?第64章》）
老子的《道德经》思想，也是现代“竞合”理论的最早提出者，认为“以道佐人主者，不以兵强天下”。反对竞争而崇尚竞合，推崇双赢和多赢。因为“天之道，利而不害；圣人之道，为而不争”，从道的角度讲，商业竞争中，没有永恒的朋友，也没有永恒的敌人，有的，更多是合作、共赢！
谢谢大家，希望我们能有更多的机会相聚一堂，交流更多的《道德经》的智慧思想。
一滴水，只有融入到大海中，才能获得永恒！
本文作者：李海波，战略管理学者、高级商务策划师、国家人事部人才流动中心“商务策划师”资质评价办公室评审专家、《亚洲新闻人物》杂志社福建办事处主任、上海道商文化传播有限公司总策划，中国道商谋略学知识体系倡导者。20余家经营管理门户网站专栏作者。
我们现代研究与推行商务策划，不但要吸收西方的战略、营销、企划等诸多优秀外来文化和技术，我个人提议，更要深入到我们中华传统的谋略思想法乳中，继承祖先留给我们的优秀文化遗产，创建有中国特色的，能够走向世界的中国商务策划知识体系。
记得史教授在谈到中国策划在世界上的地位时，有句名言：“中国的老子不仅是外国人的老子，连中国的孙子都被外国人当作老子”。这句话道出了中国策划的渊源和广博的影响力。不管是今天的WBSA，还是CBSA，都非常推崇兵圣孙武子“以正合，以奇胜”的谋略思维模式。但是，我今天要告诉大家的是，我们更应该深入到孙武子以前的谋略文化中，去寻找中华谋略文化的源头。因为，早在孙武子之前，生活在周朝的中国道家文化的开创者——老子，就已经在他的《道德经》中提出了“以正治国，以奇用兵”的观点。
商务策划要有道，这个道，就是规律。策，就是发现规律；划，就是导引潮流。在座的各位商务策划师们，都熟知这个观点。而老子的《道德经》哲学，也早已阐发出这样的观点：这就是，万事万物，首先要从道入手，先抓住纲，先把握住规律，做到心中有数；再手中有术，按照自然规律、客观规律去作为、去导引潮流。同时，在老子当时，也率先提出了“生态策划”的重要性，那就是在去作为的同时，还要做到“为而不争”，不要把自己的主观愿望强加于客观规律，不要用自己的私心去策划并妄图改变大自然的规律，从而导致生态平衡的破坏，阴阳平衡的扭曲变形而变得不“和谐”，否则，必将“为者败之，执者失之”，而酿成全局的失败。
根据我个人的研究心得，老子的《道德经》中的谋略思维观点，比比皆是，俯手可拾，在这里，我谨将《道德经》观点与我们现代商务策划体系中五大领域“战略——生态——融资——管理——营销”作一个简单的对比阐述。
老子的战略策划观点：
老子真是一位伟大的战略策划专家，在他看来，“治大国，若烹小鲜”，治理一个大的国家，就好象煎炸一条小鱼一样简单，为什么呢？因为他有道，有“战略”策划思维，“以道莅天下，其鬼不神”！“道：常，无名，朴，虽小，天下不敢臣”。这个战略看起来虽然无关紧要，甚至虚无飘渺的，但是，在策划中，祭出战略这个武器，天下却没有不臣服的。“执大象，天下往”！有了大的战略，就能够号令天下。所以，战略策划，是老子极为推崇的。
老子的生态策划观点：
“中和”、“和谐”、“执中守一”的观点，也是老子最先提出来的，《道德经》讲：“万物负阴而抱阳，中气以为和”！要策划出水平，不但要负阴抱阳正合奇胜，更要把握住中和的原则。中国文化的大义，也全在“中和”、“中庸”的火候把握上，“努力构建和谐社会”是我们现阶段提出的治国之大策略，“和气生财”是我们商务策划中的重要原则，那么，这个和是什么呢？非阴非阳，非奇非正，乃是阴谋与阳略的结合体，局部策划与整体策划的结合，企业策划与社会策划的结合，是个人价值与社会价值的结合……
要想实现真正的大策划，只有把握住中和的生态发展观，适时有度、天地人合一做全局筹划。否则，违背这个规律，就必将导致“物及必反”。如以前我们在政府策划中，过分的追求城市亮化形象工程，而对城市构成了新的光污染；过分追求GDP的增长而忽视城市自有生态，而大量耗费未来的城市发展资源；对企业经营的过度的负重性策划，导致策划与管理脱节，最终脱垮企业……所以，在《道德经》中，老子认为“多藏必厚亡”、“企者不立，跨者不行”：掂起脚后跟站着的人，是站不久的，迈开大步跨行的人，是走不远的，因为这都违背了自然的规律。过分的追求成功，反而会导致更大的失败！中国前些年的民营企业在企业壮大后的转型之死，就是一个对生态策划很好的注解。
老子的融资策划观：
策划学是“务虚”的学问，道家历来推崇“无”、“弱”、“虚”的思想，并认为“无中可以生出妙有，柔弱可以战胜刚强，虚能入实，小可博大，四两可以取千斤”，这些思想为历代策划谋略家所称道。如《道德经》中讲“反者道之动，弱者道之用，天下万物生于有，有生于无”。商务策划人要懂得识得和“动”、“用”事物发展的深层次规律，才能真正的虚无生妙有，化腐朽为神奇。真正的大手笔策划，都是从无中融资，发现资源、整合资源、利用资源，进而创造更大的资源优势的。“以道佐人主者，不以兵强天下。”完成一个大手笔的策划，并不是靠雄厚的资金砸出来的，如果不懂得策划融资而单凭一己之经济力量，必将“大军之后，必有凶年”。
老子的管理策划观：
在管理中，我们大家都推行“扁平化”管理，扁平化管理模式的老祖宗是谁呢？同样是老子，《道德经》说“为学日益，为道日损，损之又损，以至于无为，无为而无不为。”做学问是要越学越充实，而搞管理、搞策划，就是要学会把复杂的问题、复杂的事物、复杂的程序简单化，要损之又损，当简单到不能简单时，一切都将明了而容易了。但是，就这么简单的管理大道，许多人却并不去实行。“大道甚夷，而民好径”。（《道德经?第53章》）在管理制度上，我们一旦制订并推行某种制度，就不要去轻易更改和推翻它，因为“治大国，若烹小鲜”（《道德经?第60章》），管理的大智慧就好象在锅里煎炸小鱼一样，不要轻易的翻动它，搅扰它。作为管理的最高决策层，最好能够有效的授权你的下属去有为，而不要把自己搀杂到具体的事务中去，免得影响您的员工的自由发挥能力，一定要知道“太上，不知有之，其次，亲而誉之；其次，畏之……”（《道德经?第17章》）所以，在管理学界，有这样的话：高层的管理者，一定要学道家，以无为而治理；中层的管理者，一定要学儒家，以仁义来管理；基层的管理者，一定要学法家，以制度来管理。
老子的营销策划观：
按照我个人的理解，老子是一位伟大的营销策划家，《史记》中记载的老子虽然“自隐无名”，但是孔子对老子的三次问礼，西出函谷尹喜的强留著书及目前《道德经》在全世界图书的发行量之巨大，都折射出老子成功的营销智慧。关于营销的观点，在《道德经》中，可谓比比皆是。如“将欲弛之，必固张之；将欲弱之，必固强之；将欲废之，必固兴之；将欲夺之，必固与之”、这就是我们商务策划体系中的“拉销营销法”、“逆反法”的理论根基。并且认为这些营销谋略是不能轻易让别人知道的，“鱼不可脱于渊，国之利器不可以示人”。（《道德经?第36章》）“圣人无常心，以百姓心为心”（《道德经?第49章》），你的服务、产品要想营销成功，获得市场，首先要以“百姓心”为心，以市场心为心，以消费者心为心，如此，才可以根深蒂固。
同时，老子非常注重于品牌的建设，在他看来，品牌的重要性就好象是“含德之厚的赤子”一样，任何危害都很难伤及它，在建设品牌时，一定要有长期的战略打算并不能脱离实际的冒进，“善建者不拔，善抱者不脱”（《道德经?第54章》），在营销策划中，还应该进行伏笔策划，危机策划，以“为之于未有，治之于未乱”、“慎终如始，则无败事”。（《道德经?第64章》）
老子的《道德经》思想，也是现代“竞合”理论的最早提出者，认为“以道佐人主者，不以兵强天下”。反对竞争而崇尚竞合，推崇双赢和多赢。因为“天之道，利而不害；圣人之道，为而不争”，从道的角度讲，商业竞争中，没有永恒的朋友，也没有永恒的敌人，有的，更多是合作、共赢！
谢谢大家，希望我们能有更多的机会相聚一堂，交流更多的《道德经》的智慧思想。
一滴水，只有融入到大海中，才能获得永恒！
本文作者：李海波，战略管理学者、高级商务策划师、国家人事部人才流动中心“商务策划师”资质评价办公室评审专家、《亚洲新闻人物》杂志社福建办事处主任、上海道商文化传播有限公司总策划，中国道商谋略学知识体系倡导者。20余家经营管理门户网站专栏作者。
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Education Policy in Malaysia - an implementation enigma
Introduction
Policy in Malaysia is designed generally upon the requirement of the political and social structure and the future demand of the nations as a whole. Since Malaysian community is a multi-ethnic society; therefore, any public policy formulation has to be carefully studied by taking into consideration many factors such as political, social and economic factors to give an acceptable norm of satisfaction among its citizen. Therefore, this term paper will briefly explain the influence of all these factors that eventually set up the current education policy in Malaysia.
Malaysian Political System
In order to understand the public policy in Malaysia; therefore, it is essential to get a clear scenario on the country’s political system and its social structures. Malaysian political system is based on Parliamentary Democracy and is ruled as a Constitutional Monarchy with his Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (the King) as the Supreme Head of the country. Malaysia upholds federal constitution that divides authority into legislative, judicial and executive authorities. The doctrine of separation of power, check and balance are clearly stated in the Federal Constitution. Concept of federalism also becomes a basis for Government Administration between the state and the federal government. Such system is so effective to coordinate the public policy formulation and implementation processes with the assistance of the government machinery. Since independence (31 August 1957), National Front Party (Barisan Nasional), which composed of United Malay National Organization, Malaysian Chinese Association, Malaysian Indian Congress and other affiliation parties, has become the only ruling party in the country and three major races represent it: the Malay, the Chinese and the Indian. Malaysia’s total population is estimated at 20.56 million (1996). Three major races in Malaysia are the Bumiputras (sons of the soils) including Malay (59% or 12.13 million), the Chinese (26% or 5.34 million) and the Indian (8% or 1.52 million). The structure of the society has definitely influenced the development of the current Malaysian Education System through various series of events in reforming the education policy just to suit the current and the future demands of the nation.
Important Features of Policy Process
In Malaysia, the social and political systems are very closely related in formulating public policy. The establishment of public policy is complex due to involvement various interested parties during the process to derive to a decision. Public Policy in Malaysia can be created through one or combination of three processes. First is through political channel that means the policy is initiated through Cabinet orders or through the recommendation of several political reigning parties. Second is through administrative processes at the ministerial level. Since a policy has implication on the administrative machinery, the drafted policy is discussed at several high-level of government meetings. Third is through the combination of both processes via integrated interaction. Special Committees may be set up to study in-depth the policy before presenting it to the Cabinet. Hence, we can see in this paper that public policy in Malaysia such as Education Policy will always be revised from time to time adjusting itself to the contemporary requirement by applying these three processes.
In general, policy making process in Malaysia has to go through several stages such as identifying the arising problems, recommending suitable alternatives, implementing the suitable action policy, coordinating various events to suit the established policy and finally evaluating the effectiveness of such policy. Upon all processes, policy revision is vital nowadays due to the development of complex society in the modern era. Besides the policy process making, the roles played by certain groups are essential to provide a better input in the content of the policy. Generally three categories are identified: the politicians and government public administrators; the publics; and the related interest group. The first group is the major players to be responsible in ensuring the success of the policy implementation. This group can be refined as the Cabinet ministers, members of parliament, and high-level of government officials. The policy is implemented under the jurisdiction of the Constitution and government regulations. Under the Constitution, the federal, state and local governments are given constitutional rights to implement public policy. As for the publics, they can act individually or form interest groups to put forth their ideas and needs for government consideration. However, these individuals and interest groups do not automatically have the exact power to formulate a public policy or playing as a major actor. Still, their movement can sometimes get a kind of strong public support through their campaign and activities and they also can make the policymaker to understand a ground problem in a clear vision to resolve the arising problems. Now let us relate Malaysian education policy in a clear sense of its policy processes and implementations before and after independence.
Evolution of Malaysian Education Policy
During the British Colonialism, the government at that time identified a need to establish a systematic school system that would create a quality education for all races in the country. However it was made in the sense of satisfying the British interest not to the nation as a whole. In 1950, Barnes Committee headed by L.J.Barnes (Oxford University) was established to make a study upon meeting such requirement. Barnes Report was available in 1951 that highlighted the following recommendation. All Malay and English school would be preserved and should be given priority. Vernacular school would be closed and replaced by the National School. English would be the medium of instruction at the secondary level. Free education was guaranteed at the National School. The Chinese and the Indian felt dissatisfaction about such recommendation and voiced out that their system of education should also be emphasized. Fenn-Wuu Committee was then established to revise the education problem for the Chinese community. The committee recommended that the Malay, Chinese and Indian languages should simultaneously be a medium of instruction in the school system and therefore all schoolbooks should apply those languages. However, the government objected such proposal. In this case, the British administration had shown strong enforcement to implement its own education policy according to their interest not according to the nation’s interest.
At the end of British colonialism era, the society, especially from several group of educated Malay made a movement to revamp the colonial education system. The essence of having a new national education policy was to make it more representative to the nation. Such movement had made the education issue to be prioritized in the aspect of nation building. Hence, the government agreed to set up a special committee led by Tun Abdul Razak (first Minister of Education and the second Prime Minister of Malaysia) to make several recommendations. This committee composed of high level of government officials and education experts from various groups (local and foreign). This comprehensive recommendation was known as Razak’s Report 1956. The objective of this committee was to establish a national education system that would promote the cultural, social, economic and political development accepted by the nation as a whole, having regard that the Malay language would be the national language. Hence, Malay language should be the main medium of instruction in the education system. The content of the Razak’s Report was later became the basis feature to establish the Education Ordinance 1957. Furthermore, the Malaysian Government at that time started to make several evolutionary changes especially upon educational curriculum to suit the aspiration of the Malaysian outlook. Education Policy should reflect to the satisfaction of all society in Malaysia and this had become a part of the political agenda for the ruling party.
To speed up the process of national integration and unity, the Rahman Talib’s Report was made by new special committee to review the education policy in 1960 and became a basis to establish the Education Act 1961. The act provided the legal basis for enabling national language to be a compulsory subject in primary and secondary school and in all training institutions. The act required pupils to have a satisfied grade in national language subject to be awarded a certificate for public education examination especially at the end of the lower and upper secondary levels. All School using English as the medium of instruction were gradually adopting National language. Since national language is Malay and had already accepted by the Chinese, Indian and other races; therefore, such enforcement will enable the society as a whole to shape up the language proficiency in the Malay language.
In 1979, a report from the Special Cabinet Committee chaired by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad (Mahathir’s Report), who was the Minister of Education at that time (later become a Prime Minister since 1981), was finalized after a six-year study. The objectives were to achieve national unity in a multiethnic society besides increase the sense of patriotism, to produce skilled manpower for national development and to further extend the policy of democratization of education in order to strike a balance in all aspects of education between rural and urban areas. This report has become a guideline for reforming the education system in the recent years. In 1995 and 1996, the Education Act was amended to give sufficient need to meet the challenges in the 21st century beside making Malaysia as a center of excellence to the world. The national education philosophy indicates that it is essential to develop potential individuals who are responsible and capable of achieving high level of personal well-being as well as being able to contribute to the harmony and betterment of the family, the society and the nation at large. Pre-school education has become one of the important components of the formal education system after the Education Act in 1996 enacted. It guarantees access of pre-school education to children between the age of five and six in urban and rural area. This will guarantee that the rural society will get the same opportunity to develop their social status by having quality education. The New Primary and Secondary Education Curriculums have been introduced to focus on developing skilled and knowledge manpower for the nation.
From the brief explanation above, we can analyze that the education policy in Malaysia is always being changed from time to time in order to meet the current and the future demands. We also can observe that such policy will be effectively implemented through collaboration among races and also through enforcing it by legal binding.
Examplification of Policy Process Related to Education Reform
In brief, Public Policy in Malaysia can be created through legal action, planning, program and project. The implementation of education policy combines most of the factors mentioned above. Education Policy was initiated structurally through a set up of special committee that proposed several recommendations. Minister and Public Administrators in the Ministry of Education were held responsible to overview such recommendations. Several inputs were given by a group of experts (interest group) especially from the National Union of the Teacher Profession (NUTP) to strengthen the policy content. Finally, the proposed policy that portrayed a set of guidelines was put forth for the Cabinet approval and the Cabinet composed of Ministers that represent the affiliation political parties in the National Front Party. Therefore once decision is derived, it would be considered as representative to the nation at large. To enforce it, a set of regulations was introduced. Education Policy was then strengthened by the enforcement of Education Act.
To simplify, the Education Act 1996 was prepared in conjunction to the guideline set in the Education Policy. Public Administrators in the Ministry of Education were responsible to gather related materials to compose the drafted bill in two versions: Malay and English with the assistance from the expertise of the Attorney’s General Office before presenting it to the Cabinet. After having such draft, a memorandum (recommendation paper) was prepared to justify the concerned education bill and was sent to the related ministries and central agency such as Ministry of Finance, Economic Planning Unit, Implementation and Coordination Units, Attorney’s General Office; etc to get an advisory comment. The feedback is important to guide the Cabinet before making a decision. This Bill was prepared before the Parliament session begins, usually in one month before the session started. The Bill indicated certain parts of the existing law to be amended, if it involved amendments. After information was gathered, the Minister of Education gave approval to forward the memorandum and the drafted bill at the Cabinet weekly meeting (Wednesday) after getting the clearance from the Cabinet Secretariat. This secretariat is under the Cabinet, Constitution and Inter Government Relation Division, Prime Minister Department headed by the Chief Secretary to the Government who is also the Head of the Government Civil Service. When Cabinet approved the bill, the decision was conveyed to the Ministry and the Ministries concerned. The Ministry of Education proceeded to obtain a notice of Presentation on the Bill to the House of Representative and the Senate Office for debate and approval in both houses during the Parliament Session. The bill was passed by both houses (more 2/3 vote) and was submitted to His Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong for the Royal Assent. The bill became law after gazetted. Finally, the decision was conveyed administratively to related parties and through several high-level of government meetings such as Meeting of the State Chief Minister; Meeting of Secretary-Generals of Ministries and Heads Of Services; Meeting of Heads of Federal Departments; Meeting of Chief Executives of Federal Statutory Bodies; and Meeting of Liaison Committee Between Federal and State Government.
Conclusion
Education reformation between countries may be different due to the characteristics of the nation, political and socio-economic establishment within one state. Hence, any kind of proposals on reforming education system in Malaysia has to be justifiable within the scope of the main vision of the country; in another word, the national policy. One way to collaborate is to proceed along the line with the vision of the country that has already been accepted by the whole nation and through structurally effective government machinery that has main players (the actors) to formulate and implement the policy effectively and efficiently.
Azman Mohd. Yusof
Policy Science
Graduate School of Policy Science, Saitama University
25 February 1998
Policy in Malaysia is designed generally upon the requirement of the political and social structure and the future demand of the nations as a whole. Since Malaysian community is a multi-ethnic society; therefore, any public policy formulation has to be carefully studied by taking into consideration many factors such as political, social and economic factors to give an acceptable norm of satisfaction among its citizen. Therefore, this term paper will briefly explain the influence of all these factors that eventually set up the current education policy in Malaysia.
Malaysian Political System
In order to understand the public policy in Malaysia; therefore, it is essential to get a clear scenario on the country’s political system and its social structures. Malaysian political system is based on Parliamentary Democracy and is ruled as a Constitutional Monarchy with his Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (the King) as the Supreme Head of the country. Malaysia upholds federal constitution that divides authority into legislative, judicial and executive authorities. The doctrine of separation of power, check and balance are clearly stated in the Federal Constitution. Concept of federalism also becomes a basis for Government Administration between the state and the federal government. Such system is so effective to coordinate the public policy formulation and implementation processes with the assistance of the government machinery. Since independence (31 August 1957), National Front Party (Barisan Nasional), which composed of United Malay National Organization, Malaysian Chinese Association, Malaysian Indian Congress and other affiliation parties, has become the only ruling party in the country and three major races represent it: the Malay, the Chinese and the Indian. Malaysia’s total population is estimated at 20.56 million (1996). Three major races in Malaysia are the Bumiputras (sons of the soils) including Malay (59% or 12.13 million), the Chinese (26% or 5.34 million) and the Indian (8% or 1.52 million). The structure of the society has definitely influenced the development of the current Malaysian Education System through various series of events in reforming the education policy just to suit the current and the future demands of the nation.
Important Features of Policy Process
In Malaysia, the social and political systems are very closely related in formulating public policy. The establishment of public policy is complex due to involvement various interested parties during the process to derive to a decision. Public Policy in Malaysia can be created through one or combination of three processes. First is through political channel that means the policy is initiated through Cabinet orders or through the recommendation of several political reigning parties. Second is through administrative processes at the ministerial level. Since a policy has implication on the administrative machinery, the drafted policy is discussed at several high-level of government meetings. Third is through the combination of both processes via integrated interaction. Special Committees may be set up to study in-depth the policy before presenting it to the Cabinet. Hence, we can see in this paper that public policy in Malaysia such as Education Policy will always be revised from time to time adjusting itself to the contemporary requirement by applying these three processes.
In general, policy making process in Malaysia has to go through several stages such as identifying the arising problems, recommending suitable alternatives, implementing the suitable action policy, coordinating various events to suit the established policy and finally evaluating the effectiveness of such policy. Upon all processes, policy revision is vital nowadays due to the development of complex society in the modern era. Besides the policy process making, the roles played by certain groups are essential to provide a better input in the content of the policy. Generally three categories are identified: the politicians and government public administrators; the publics; and the related interest group. The first group is the major players to be responsible in ensuring the success of the policy implementation. This group can be refined as the Cabinet ministers, members of parliament, and high-level of government officials. The policy is implemented under the jurisdiction of the Constitution and government regulations. Under the Constitution, the federal, state and local governments are given constitutional rights to implement public policy. As for the publics, they can act individually or form interest groups to put forth their ideas and needs for government consideration. However, these individuals and interest groups do not automatically have the exact power to formulate a public policy or playing as a major actor. Still, their movement can sometimes get a kind of strong public support through their campaign and activities and they also can make the policymaker to understand a ground problem in a clear vision to resolve the arising problems. Now let us relate Malaysian education policy in a clear sense of its policy processes and implementations before and after independence.
Evolution of Malaysian Education Policy
During the British Colonialism, the government at that time identified a need to establish a systematic school system that would create a quality education for all races in the country. However it was made in the sense of satisfying the British interest not to the nation as a whole. In 1950, Barnes Committee headed by L.J.Barnes (Oxford University) was established to make a study upon meeting such requirement. Barnes Report was available in 1951 that highlighted the following recommendation. All Malay and English school would be preserved and should be given priority. Vernacular school would be closed and replaced by the National School. English would be the medium of instruction at the secondary level. Free education was guaranteed at the National School. The Chinese and the Indian felt dissatisfaction about such recommendation and voiced out that their system of education should also be emphasized. Fenn-Wuu Committee was then established to revise the education problem for the Chinese community. The committee recommended that the Malay, Chinese and Indian languages should simultaneously be a medium of instruction in the school system and therefore all schoolbooks should apply those languages. However, the government objected such proposal. In this case, the British administration had shown strong enforcement to implement its own education policy according to their interest not according to the nation’s interest.
At the end of British colonialism era, the society, especially from several group of educated Malay made a movement to revamp the colonial education system. The essence of having a new national education policy was to make it more representative to the nation. Such movement had made the education issue to be prioritized in the aspect of nation building. Hence, the government agreed to set up a special committee led by Tun Abdul Razak (first Minister of Education and the second Prime Minister of Malaysia) to make several recommendations. This committee composed of high level of government officials and education experts from various groups (local and foreign). This comprehensive recommendation was known as Razak’s Report 1956. The objective of this committee was to establish a national education system that would promote the cultural, social, economic and political development accepted by the nation as a whole, having regard that the Malay language would be the national language. Hence, Malay language should be the main medium of instruction in the education system. The content of the Razak’s Report was later became the basis feature to establish the Education Ordinance 1957. Furthermore, the Malaysian Government at that time started to make several evolutionary changes especially upon educational curriculum to suit the aspiration of the Malaysian outlook. Education Policy should reflect to the satisfaction of all society in Malaysia and this had become a part of the political agenda for the ruling party.
To speed up the process of national integration and unity, the Rahman Talib’s Report was made by new special committee to review the education policy in 1960 and became a basis to establish the Education Act 1961. The act provided the legal basis for enabling national language to be a compulsory subject in primary and secondary school and in all training institutions. The act required pupils to have a satisfied grade in national language subject to be awarded a certificate for public education examination especially at the end of the lower and upper secondary levels. All School using English as the medium of instruction were gradually adopting National language. Since national language is Malay and had already accepted by the Chinese, Indian and other races; therefore, such enforcement will enable the society as a whole to shape up the language proficiency in the Malay language.
In 1979, a report from the Special Cabinet Committee chaired by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad (Mahathir’s Report), who was the Minister of Education at that time (later become a Prime Minister since 1981), was finalized after a six-year study. The objectives were to achieve national unity in a multiethnic society besides increase the sense of patriotism, to produce skilled manpower for national development and to further extend the policy of democratization of education in order to strike a balance in all aspects of education between rural and urban areas. This report has become a guideline for reforming the education system in the recent years. In 1995 and 1996, the Education Act was amended to give sufficient need to meet the challenges in the 21st century beside making Malaysia as a center of excellence to the world. The national education philosophy indicates that it is essential to develop potential individuals who are responsible and capable of achieving high level of personal well-being as well as being able to contribute to the harmony and betterment of the family, the society and the nation at large. Pre-school education has become one of the important components of the formal education system after the Education Act in 1996 enacted. It guarantees access of pre-school education to children between the age of five and six in urban and rural area. This will guarantee that the rural society will get the same opportunity to develop their social status by having quality education. The New Primary and Secondary Education Curriculums have been introduced to focus on developing skilled and knowledge manpower for the nation.
From the brief explanation above, we can analyze that the education policy in Malaysia is always being changed from time to time in order to meet the current and the future demands. We also can observe that such policy will be effectively implemented through collaboration among races and also through enforcing it by legal binding.
Examplification of Policy Process Related to Education Reform
In brief, Public Policy in Malaysia can be created through legal action, planning, program and project. The implementation of education policy combines most of the factors mentioned above. Education Policy was initiated structurally through a set up of special committee that proposed several recommendations. Minister and Public Administrators in the Ministry of Education were held responsible to overview such recommendations. Several inputs were given by a group of experts (interest group) especially from the National Union of the Teacher Profession (NUTP) to strengthen the policy content. Finally, the proposed policy that portrayed a set of guidelines was put forth for the Cabinet approval and the Cabinet composed of Ministers that represent the affiliation political parties in the National Front Party. Therefore once decision is derived, it would be considered as representative to the nation at large. To enforce it, a set of regulations was introduced. Education Policy was then strengthened by the enforcement of Education Act.
To simplify, the Education Act 1996 was prepared in conjunction to the guideline set in the Education Policy. Public Administrators in the Ministry of Education were responsible to gather related materials to compose the drafted bill in two versions: Malay and English with the assistance from the expertise of the Attorney’s General Office before presenting it to the Cabinet. After having such draft, a memorandum (recommendation paper) was prepared to justify the concerned education bill and was sent to the related ministries and central agency such as Ministry of Finance, Economic Planning Unit, Implementation and Coordination Units, Attorney’s General Office; etc to get an advisory comment. The feedback is important to guide the Cabinet before making a decision. This Bill was prepared before the Parliament session begins, usually in one month before the session started. The Bill indicated certain parts of the existing law to be amended, if it involved amendments. After information was gathered, the Minister of Education gave approval to forward the memorandum and the drafted bill at the Cabinet weekly meeting (Wednesday) after getting the clearance from the Cabinet Secretariat. This secretariat is under the Cabinet, Constitution and Inter Government Relation Division, Prime Minister Department headed by the Chief Secretary to the Government who is also the Head of the Government Civil Service. When Cabinet approved the bill, the decision was conveyed to the Ministry and the Ministries concerned. The Ministry of Education proceeded to obtain a notice of Presentation on the Bill to the House of Representative and the Senate Office for debate and approval in both houses during the Parliament Session. The bill was passed by both houses (more 2/3 vote) and was submitted to His Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong for the Royal Assent. The bill became law after gazetted. Finally, the decision was conveyed administratively to related parties and through several high-level of government meetings such as Meeting of the State Chief Minister; Meeting of Secretary-Generals of Ministries and Heads Of Services; Meeting of Heads of Federal Departments; Meeting of Chief Executives of Federal Statutory Bodies; and Meeting of Liaison Committee Between Federal and State Government.
Conclusion
Education reformation between countries may be different due to the characteristics of the nation, political and socio-economic establishment within one state. Hence, any kind of proposals on reforming education system in Malaysia has to be justifiable within the scope of the main vision of the country; in another word, the national policy. One way to collaborate is to proceed along the line with the vision of the country that has already been accepted by the whole nation and through structurally effective government machinery that has main players (the actors) to formulate and implement the policy effectively and efficiently.
Azman Mohd. Yusof
Policy Science
Graduate School of Policy Science, Saitama University
25 February 1998
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
道德经 Dao De Jing (Tao Te Ching)
Tao Te Ching
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
道德经 Dàodéjīng
The Tao Te Ching, Dao De Jing, or Daodejing (道德經), also simply referred to as Laozi,[1] whose authorship has been attributed to Laozi,[2] is a Chinese classic text. Its name comes from the opening words of its two sections: 道 dào "way," Chapter 1, and 德 dé "virtue/power," Chapter 38, plus 經 jīng "classic." According to tradition, it was written around the 6th century BC by the sage Laozi (or Lao Tzu, "Old Master"), a record-keeper at the Zhou Dynasty court, by whose name the text is known in China. The text's true authorship and date of composition or compilation are still debated,[3] although the oldest excavated text dates back to the late 4th century BC.[1]
The text is fundamental to the Philosophical Taoism (Daojia (Pinyin: Dàojiā) 道家) and strongly influenced other schools, such as Legalism and Neo-Confucianism. This ancient book is also central in Chinese religion, not only for Religious Daoism (Daojiao (Pinyin: Dàojiào) 道教) but Chinese Buddhism, which when first introduced into China was largely interpreted through the use of Daoist words and concepts. Many Chinese artists, including poets, painters, calligraphers, and even gardeners have used the Daodejing as a source of inspiration. Its influence has also spread widely outside East Asia, and is amongst the most translated works in world literature.[1]
The Wade–Giles romanization "Tao Te Ching" dates back to early English transliterations in the late 19th century, and many people continue using it, especially for words and phrases that have become well-established in English. The pinyin romanization "Daodejing" originated in the late 20th century, and this romanization is becoming increasingly popular, having been adopted as the official system by the Chinese government.
Contents
[hide] 1 The text 1.1 Title
1.2 Internal structure
1.3 Historical authenticity of the author
1.4 Principal versions
1.5 Mawangdui and Guodian texts
1.6 Written style
2 Interpretation and themes 2.1 Ineffability or Genesis
2.2 The Mysterious Female
2.3 Returning (Union with the Primordial)
2.4 Emptiness
2.5 Knowledge and humility
2.6 Interpretations in relation to religious traditions
3 Translations 3.1 Translational difficulties
4 See also
5 Notes
6 References
7 External links 7.1 Online English translations
[edit] The text
The Daodejing has a long and complex textual history. On one hand, there are transmitted versions and commentaries that date back two millennia; on the other, there are ancient bamboo, silk, and paper manuscripts that archeologists discovered in the last century.
[edit] Title
Taoism
This article is part of a series on Taoism
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fundamentals
Dao (Tao) ·De (Te) ·Wuji ·Taiji ·Yin-Yang ·Wu Xing ·Qi ·Neidan ·Wu wei
Texts
Laozi (Tao Te Ching) ·Zhuangzi ·Liezi ·Daozang
Deities
Three Pure Ones ·Guan Shengdi ·Eight Immortals ·Yellow Emperor ·Xiwangmu ·Jade Emperor ·Chang'e ·Other deities
People
Laozi ·Zhuangzi ·Zhang Daoling ·Zhang Jue ·Ge Hong ·Chen Tuan
Schools
Tianshi Dao ·Shangqing ·Lingbao ·Quanzhen Dao ·Zhengyi Dao ·Wuliupai
Sacred sites
Grotto-heavens ·Mount Penglai
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Taoism Portal
v · d · e
"Tao Te Ching", Calligraphy by Gia-Fu Feng
There are many possible translations of the book's title:
Dào/Tao 道 literally means "way", or one of its synonyms, but was extended to mean "the Way." This term, which was variously used by other Chinese philosophers (including Confucius, Mencius, Mozi, and Hanfeizi), has special meaning within the context of Daoism, where it implies the essential, unnamable process of the universe.
Dé/Te 德 basically means "virtue" in the sense of "personal character," "inner strength" (virtuosity), or "integrity." The semantics of this Chinese word resemble English virtue, which developed from a (now archaic) sense of "inner potency" or "divine power" (as in "healing virtue of a drug") to the modern meaning of "moral excellence" or "goodness." Compare the compound word dàodé (道德 "ethics," "ethical principles," "morals," or "morality").
Jīng/Ching 經 as it is used here means "canon," "great book," or "classic."
Thus, Daodejing can be translated as "The Classic/Canon of the Way/Path and the Power/Virtue," etc.
The title Daodejing is an honorific given by posterity, other titles include the amalgam Lǎozǐ Dàodéjīng (老子道德經), the honorific Daode Zhen Jing (道德真經 "True Classic of the Way and the Power"), and the Wuqian wen (五千文 "Five thousand character [classic]").
[edit] Internal structure
The received Tao Te Ching is a short text of around 5,000 Chinese characters in 81 brief chapters or sections (章). There is some evidence that the chapter divisions were later additions - for commentary, or as aids to rote memorization - and that the original text was more fluidly organized. It has two parts, the Tao Ching (道經; chaps. 1–37) and the Te Ching (德經; chaps. 38–81), which may have been edited together into the received text, possibly reversed from an original "Te Tao Ching". The written style is laconic, has few grammatical particles, and encourages varied, even contradictory interpretations. The ideas are singular; the style poetic.
The Chinese characters in the original versions were probably written in zhuànshū (篆書 seal script), while later versions were written in lìshū (隷書 clerical script) and kǎishū (楷書 regular script) styles. Daoist Chinese Characters contains a good summary of these different calligraphies.
[edit] Historical authenticity of the author
The Tao Te Ching is ascribed to Laozi, whose historical existence has been a matter of scholastic debate. His name, which means "Old Master", has only fueled controversy on this issue. (Kaltenmark 1969:10).
Laozi
The first reliable reference to Laozi is his "biography" in Shiji (63, tr. Chan 1963:35-37), by Chinese historian Sima Qian (ca. 145–86 BC), which combines three stories. First, Laozi was a contemporary of Confucius (551-479 BC). His surname was Li (李 "plum"), and his personal name was Er (耳 "ear") or Dan (聃 "long ear"). He was an official in the imperial archives, and wrote a book in two parts before departing to the West. Second, Laozi was Lao Laizi (老來子 "Old Come Master"), also a contemporary of Confucius, who wrote a book in 15 parts. Third, Laozi was the Grand Historian and astrologer Lao Dan (老聃 "Old Long-ears"), who lived during the reign (384-362 BC) of Duke Xian (獻公) of Qin).
Generations of scholars have debated the historicity of Laozi and the dating of the Tao Te Ching. Linguistic studies of the text's vocabulary and rhyme scheme point to a date of composition after the Shi Jing yet before the Zhuangzi. Legends claim variously that Laozi was "born old"; that he lived for 996 years, with twelve previous incarnations starting around the time of the Three Sovereigns before the thirteenth as Laozi. Some Western scholars have expressed doubts over Laozi's historical existence, claiming that the Tao Te Ching is actually a collection of the work of various authors.
Many Taoists venerate Laozi as Daotsu the founder of the school of Dao, the Daode Tianjun in the Three Pure Ones, one of the eight elders transformed from Taiji in the Chinese creation myth.
[edit] Principal versions
Among the many transmitted editions of the Tao Te Ching text, the three primary ones are named after early commentaries. The "Yan Zun Version," which is only extant for the Te Ching, derives from a commentary attributed to Han Dynasty scholar Yan Zun (巖尊, fl. 80 BC-10 AD). The "Heshang Gong Version" is named after the legendary Heshang Gong (河上公 "Riverside Sage") who supposedly lived during the reign (202-157 BC) of Emperor Wen of Han. This commentary (tr. Erkes 1950) has a preface written by Ge Xuan (葛玄, 164-244 AD), granduncle of Ge Hong, and scholarship dates this version to around the 3rd century AD. The "Wang Bi Version" has more verifiable origins than either of the above. Wang Bi (王弼, 226 – 249 AD) was a famous Three Kingdoms period philosopher and commentator on the Tao Te Ching (tr. Lin 1977, Rump and Chan 1979) and the I Ching.
Tao Te Ching scholarship has lately advanced from archeological discoveries of manuscripts, some of which are older than any of the received texts. Beginning in the 1920s and 1930s, Marc Aurel Stein and others found thousands of scrolls in the Mogao Caves near Dunhuang. They included more than 50 partial and complete "Tao Te Ching" manuscripts. One written by the scribe So/Su Dan (素統) is dated 270 AD and corresponds closely with the Heshang Gong version. Another partial manuscript has the Xiang'er (想爾) commentary, which had previously been lost.
[edit] Mawangdui and Guodian texts
In 1973, archeologists discovered copies of early Chinese books, known as the Mawangdui Silk Texts, in a tomb dating from 168 BC.[1] They included two nearly complete copies of the text, referred to as Text A (甲) and Text B (乙), both of which reverse the traditional ordering and put the Te Ching section before the Tao Ching, which is why the Henricks translation of them is named "Te-Tao Ching". Based on calligraphic styles and imperial naming taboo avoidances, scholars believe that A can be dated to about the first decade and B to about the third decade of the 2nd century BC.[4]
In 1993, the oldest known version of the text, written on bamboo tablets, was found in a tomb near the town of Guodian (郭店) in Jingmen, Hubei, and dated prior to 300 BC.[1] The Guodian Chu Slips comprise about 800 slips of bamboo with a total of over 13,000 characters, about 2,000 of which correspond with the Tao Te Ching, including 14 previously unknown verses.
Both the Mawangdui and Guodian versions are generally consistent with the received texts, excepting differences in chapter sequence and graphic variants. Several recent Tao Te Ching translations (e.g., Lau 1989, Henricks 1989, Mair 1990, Henricks 2000, Allan and Williams 2000, and Roberts 2004) utilize these two versions, sometimes with the verses reordered to synthesize the new finds.
[edit] Written style
The Tao Te Ching was originally written in zhuànshū calligraphy style. It is difficult to obtain modern replicas of these styles except through specialty stores. Most modern versions use the newspaper print style kǎishū.
[edit] Interpretation and themes
The passages are ambiguous, and topics range from political advice for rulers to practical wisdom for people. Because the variety of interpretation is virtually limitless, not only for different people but for the same person over time, readers do well to avoid making claims of objectivity or superiority. Also, since the book is 81 short poems, there is little need for an abridgement.
[edit] Ineffability or Genesis
The Way that can be told of is not an unvarying way; The names that can be named are not unvarying names. It was from the Nameless that Heaven and Earth sprang; The named is but the mother that rears the ten thousand creatures, each after its kind. (chap. 1, tr. Waley)
These famous first lines of the Tao Te Ching state that the Tao is ineffable, i.e., the Tao is nameless, goes beyond distinctions, and transcends language. However this first verse does not occur in the earliest known version from the Guodian Chu Slips and there is speculation that it may have been added by later commentators.[5] In Laozi's Qingjing Jing (verse 1-8) he clarified the term Tao was nominated as he was trying to describe a state of existence before it happened and before time or space. Way or path happened to be the side meaning of Tao, ineffability would be just poetic. This is the Chinese creation myth from the primordial Tao.
[edit] The Mysterious Female
The Valley Spirit never dies It is named the Mysterious Female. And the doorway of the Mysterious Female Is the base from which Heaven and Earth sprang. It is there within us all the while; Draw upon it as you will, it never runs dry. (chap. 6, tr. Waley)
Like the above description of the ineffable Tao as "the mother that rears the ten thousand creatures", the Tao Te Ching advocates "female" (or Yin) values, emphasizing the passive, solid, and quiescent qualities of nature (which is opposed to the active and energetic), and "having without possessing". Waley's translation can also be understood as the Esoteric Feminine in that it can be known intuitively, that must be complemented by the masculine, "male" (or Yang), again amplified in Qingjing Jing (verse 9-13). Yin and Yang should be balanced, "Know masculinity, Maintain femininity, and be a ravine for all under heaven." (chap. 28, tr. Mair)
[edit] Returning (Union with the Primordial)
In Tao the only motion is returning; The only useful quality, weakness. For though all creatures under heaven are the products of Being, Being itself is the product of Not-being. " (chap. 40, tr. Waley)
Another theme is the eternal return, or what Mair (1990:139) calls "the continual return of the myriad creatures to the cosmic principle from which they arose."
There is a contrast between the rigidity of death and the weakness of life: "When he is born, man is soft and weak; in death he becomes stiff and hard. The ten thousand creatures and all plants and trees while they are alive are supple and soft, but when dead they become brittle and dry." (chap. 76, tr. Waley). This is returning to the beginning of things, or to one's own childhood.
The Tao Te Ching focuses upon the beginnings of society, and describes a golden age in the past, comparable with the ideas of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Human problems arose from the "invention" of culture and civilization. In this idealized past, “the people should have no use for any form of writing save knotted ropes, should be contented with their food, pleased with their clothing, satisfied with their homes, should take pleasure in their rustic tasks." (chap. 80, tr. Waley)
[edit] Emptiness
We put thirty spokes together and call it a wheel; But it is on the space where there is nothing that the usefulness of the wheel depends. We turn clay to make a vessel; But it is on the space where there is nothing that the usefulness of the vessel depends. We pierce doors and windows to make a house; And it is on these spaces where there is nothing that the usefulness of the house depends. Therefore just as we take advantage of what is, we should recognize the usefulness of what is not. (chap. 11, tr. Waley)
Philosophical vacuity is a common theme among Asian wisdom traditions including Taoism (especially Wu wei "effortless action"), Buddhism, and some aspects of Confucianism. One could interpret the Tao Te Ching as a suite of variations on the "Powers of Nothingness". This resonates with the Buddhist Shunyata philosophy of "form is emptiness, emptiness is form."
Looking at a traditional Chinese Landscape, one can understand how emptiness (the unpainted) has the power of animating the trees, mountains, and rivers it surrounds. Emptiness can mean having no fixed preconceptions, preferences, intentions, or agenda. Since "The Sage has no heart of his own; He uses the heart of the people as his heart." (chap. 49, tr. Waley). From a ruler's point of view, it is a laissez-faire approach:
So a wise leader may say: "I practice inaction, and the people look after themselves." But from the Sage it is so hard at any price to get a single word That when his task is accomplished, his work done, Throughout the country every one says: “It happened of its own accord”. (chap. 17, tr. Waley)
[edit] Knowledge and humility
Knowing others is wisdom; Knowing the self is enlightenment. Mastering others requires force; Mastering the self requires strength; He who knows he has enough is rich. Perseverance is a sign of will power. He who stays where he is endures. To die but not to perish is to be eternally present. (chap. 33, tr. Feng and English)
The Tao Te Ching praises self-gained knowledge with emphasis on that knowledge being gained with humility. When what one person has experienced is put into words and transmitted to others, so doing risks giving unwarranted status to what inevitably must have had a subjective tinge. Moreover, it will be subjected to another layer of interpretation and subjectivity when read and learned by others. This kind of knowledge (or "book learning"), like desire, should be diminished. "It was when intelligence and knowledge appeared that the Great Artifice began." (chap. 18, tr. Waley) And so, "The pursuit of learning is to increase day after day. The pursuit of Tao is to decrease day after day." (chap. 48, tr. W.T. Chan)
[edit] Interpretations in relation to religious traditions
The relation between Taoism and Buddhism and Chan Buddhism is complex and fertile. Similarly, the relationship between Taoism and Confucianism is richly interwoven, historically.
In 1823 the French sinologist Jean-Pierre-Abel Rémusat suggested a relationship between Abrahamic faiths and Taoism; he held that Yahweh was signified by three words in Chapter 14; yi (夷 "calm; level; barbarian"), xi (希 "rare; indiscernible; hope"), and wei (微 "tiny, small; obscure"). James Legge (1891:57-58[6]) dismissed this hypothetical yi-xi-wei and Yahweh connection as "a mere fancy or dream". According to Holmes Welch:
It is not hard to understand the readiness of early scholars to assert that the doctrine of the Trinity was revealed in the Tao Te Ching and that its fourteenth chapter contains the syllables of "Yahveh." Even today, though these errors have been recognized for more than a century, the general notion that Lao Tzu was Christ's forerunner has lost none of its romantic appeal. (1965:7)
[edit] Translations
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Tao Te Ching
The Tao Te Ching has been translated into Western languages over 250 times, mostly to English, German, and French.[7] According to Holmes Welch, "It is a famous puzzle which everyone would like to feel he had solved."[8]
Many translations are written by people with a foundation in Chinese language and philosophy who are trying to render the original meaning of the text as faithfully as possible into English. Some of the more popular translations are written from a less scholarly perspective, giving an individual author's interpretation. Critics of these versions, such as Taoism scholar Eugene Eoyang, claim that translators like Stephen Mitchell produce readings of the Tao Te Ching that deviate from the text and are incompatible with the history of Chinese thought.[9] Russell Kirkland goes further to argue that these versions are based on Western Orientalist fantasies, and represent the colonial appropriation of Chinese culture.[10][11] In contrast, Huston Smith, scholar of world religions, said of the Mitchell version, "This translation comes as close to being definitive for our time as any I can imagine. It embodies the virtues its translator credits to the Chinese original: a gemlike lucidity that is radiant with humor, grace, largeheartedness, and deep wisdom." —Other Taoism scholars, such as Michael LaFargue[12] and Johnathan Herman,[13] argue that while they are poor scholarship they meet a real spiritual need in the West. The most recent translation is by Bill Porter (Red Pine) (Copper Canyon Press, 2009) and distinguishes itself in its extensive commentary by scores of poets, monks, and Chinese scholars.[14] There are a handful of sites on the web that compare chapters translated by various authors such as TaoTeChingMe.com[15] and Waylist.org. [16]
[edit] Translational difficulties
The Tao Te Ching is written in classical Chinese, which can be difficult to understand completely, even for well-educated native speakers of modern Chinese. In fact, in learning classical Chinese, native speakers can be at a disadvantage relative to non-native speakers, as native speakers often have difficulty with Chinese characters whose older meaning differs from the modern language. Classical Chinese relies heavily on allusion to a corpus of standard literary works to convey semantic meaning, nuance, and subtext. This corpus was memorized by highly-educated people in Laozi's time, and the allusions were reinforced through common use in writing, but few people today have this type of deep acquaintance with ancient Chinese literature. Thus, many levels of subtext are potentially lost on modern translators. Furthermore, many of the words that the Tao Te Ching uses are deliberately vague and ambiguous.
Since there are no punctuation marks in classical Chinese, it can be difficult to conclusively determine where one sentence ends and the next begins. Moving a full-stop a few words forward or back or inserting a comma can profoundly alter the meaning of many passages, and such divisions and meanings must be determined by the translator. Some editors and translators argue that the received text is so corrupted (from originally being written on one-line bamboo strips linked with silk threads) that it is impossible to understand some chapters without moving sequences of characters from one place to another.
[edit] See also
Taoism portal
Daoism-Taoism romanization issue
Eastern philosophy
Zhuangzi (book)
Huainanzi
Liezi
Qingjing Jing
Huahujing
Xishengjing
[edit] Notes
1.^ a b c d e "Laozi". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy by Stanford University.
2.^ "The Tao Teh King, or the Tao and its Characteristics by Laozi - Project Gutenberg". Gutenberg.org. 2007-12-01. Retrieved 2010-08-13.
3.^ Eliade (1984), p.26
4.^ Boltz (1993): 284
5.^ Henricks (2000) Lao Tzu's Tao Teh Ching - A translation of the startling new documents found at Guodian, page 3
6.^ "Texts of Taoism (SBE 39): The Tao Teh King, Part I: Chapter 14". Sacred-texts.com. Retrieved 2011-03-16.
7.^ LaFargue, Michael and Pas, Julian. On Translating the Tao-te-ching in Kohn and LaFargue (1998), p. 277
8.^ Welch (1965), p. 7
9.^ The Journal of Religion
10.^ [1][dead link]
11.^ "Taoism: the enduring tradition - Google Books". Books.google.com. Retrieved 2010-08-13.
12.^ [2][dead link]
13.^ Journal of the American Academy of Religion
14.^ Lao-Tzu's Taoteching
15.^ Tao Te Ching | Multiple Translations by various authors
16.^ Tao Teh Ching - Line-by-Line Comparisons.
[edit] References
Ariel, Yoav, and Gil Raz. “Anaphors or Cataphors? A Discussion of the Two qi 其 Graphs in the First Chapter of the Daodejing.” PEW 60.3 (2010): 391-421
Boltz, William G. Lao tzu Tao te ching. In Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide, edited by Michael Loewe. Berkeley: University of California, Institute of East Asian Studies. 1993. pp. 269–92.
Cole, Alan, "Simplicity for the Sophisticated: ReReading the Daode Jing for the Polemics of Ease and Innocence," in History of Religions, August 2006, pp. 1-49
Damascene, Hieromonk, Lou Shibai, and You-Shan Tang. Christ the Eternal Tao. Platina, CA: Saint Herman Press, 1999.
Eliade, Mircea. A History of Religious Ideas, Volume 2. Translated by Willard R. Trask. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984.
Kaltenmark, Max. Lao Tzu and Taoism. Translated by Roger Greaves. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 1969.
Kohn, Livia and Michael LaFargue, eds. Lao-Tzu and the Tao-Te-Ching, Albany: State University of New York Press. 1998.
Komjathy, Louis. Handbooks for Daoist Practice. 10 vols. Hong Kong: Yuen Yuen Institute, 2008.
Welch, Holmes. Taoism: The Parting of the Way (1957). Boston: Beacon Press. 1965.
Klaus, Hilmar Das Tao der Weisheit. Laozi-Daodejing. English + German introduction, 140 p. bibliogr., 3 German transl. Aachen: Mainz 2008, 548 p.
Klaus, Hilmar The Tao of Wisdom. Laozi-Daodejing. Chinese-English-German. 2 verbatim + 2 analogous transl., 140 p. bibl., Aachen: Mainz 2009 600p.
[edit] External links
Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Tao Te Ching
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Tao Te Ching
Chinese Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Dàodéjīng
Daode jing entry from the Center for Daoist Studies
Daodejing Wang Bi edition with English translation, Guodian text, and Mawangdui text - Chinese Text Project
Lǎozǐ Dàodéjīng Chinese + English + German, verbatim + analogous
Tao Te Ching | Multiple Translations by various authors
The Authorship of the Tao Te Ching, John J. Emerson
Tao Te Ching at the Open Directory Project
Daode jing (Isabelle Robinet), entry in The Encyclopedia of Taoism
The Call of Silence - Reflections on the Tao-Teh-King by Abdullah Dougan, a recent interpretation.
[edit] Online English translations
Tao Te Ching | Multiple Translations by various authors
Tao Te Ching | Multiple English Translations
Tao Te Ching, James Legge
The Tao Te Ching, Frederic H. Balfour
The Tao Teh King, Aleister Crowley
Daode Jing, Charles Muller
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
道德经 Dàodéjīng
The Tao Te Ching, Dao De Jing, or Daodejing (道德經), also simply referred to as Laozi,[1] whose authorship has been attributed to Laozi,[2] is a Chinese classic text. Its name comes from the opening words of its two sections: 道 dào "way," Chapter 1, and 德 dé "virtue/power," Chapter 38, plus 經 jīng "classic." According to tradition, it was written around the 6th century BC by the sage Laozi (or Lao Tzu, "Old Master"), a record-keeper at the Zhou Dynasty court, by whose name the text is known in China. The text's true authorship and date of composition or compilation are still debated,[3] although the oldest excavated text dates back to the late 4th century BC.[1]
The text is fundamental to the Philosophical Taoism (Daojia (Pinyin: Dàojiā) 道家) and strongly influenced other schools, such as Legalism and Neo-Confucianism. This ancient book is also central in Chinese religion, not only for Religious Daoism (Daojiao (Pinyin: Dàojiào) 道教) but Chinese Buddhism, which when first introduced into China was largely interpreted through the use of Daoist words and concepts. Many Chinese artists, including poets, painters, calligraphers, and even gardeners have used the Daodejing as a source of inspiration. Its influence has also spread widely outside East Asia, and is amongst the most translated works in world literature.[1]
The Wade–Giles romanization "Tao Te Ching" dates back to early English transliterations in the late 19th century, and many people continue using it, especially for words and phrases that have become well-established in English. The pinyin romanization "Daodejing" originated in the late 20th century, and this romanization is becoming increasingly popular, having been adopted as the official system by the Chinese government.
Contents
[hide] 1 The text 1.1 Title
1.2 Internal structure
1.3 Historical authenticity of the author
1.4 Principal versions
1.5 Mawangdui and Guodian texts
1.6 Written style
2 Interpretation and themes 2.1 Ineffability or Genesis
2.2 The Mysterious Female
2.3 Returning (Union with the Primordial)
2.4 Emptiness
2.5 Knowledge and humility
2.6 Interpretations in relation to religious traditions
3 Translations 3.1 Translational difficulties
4 See also
5 Notes
6 References
7 External links 7.1 Online English translations
[edit] The text
The Daodejing has a long and complex textual history. On one hand, there are transmitted versions and commentaries that date back two millennia; on the other, there are ancient bamboo, silk, and paper manuscripts that archeologists discovered in the last century.
[edit] Title
Taoism
This article is part of a series on Taoism
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fundamentals
Dao (Tao) ·De (Te) ·Wuji ·Taiji ·Yin-Yang ·Wu Xing ·Qi ·Neidan ·Wu wei
Texts
Laozi (Tao Te Ching) ·Zhuangzi ·Liezi ·Daozang
Deities
Three Pure Ones ·Guan Shengdi ·Eight Immortals ·Yellow Emperor ·Xiwangmu ·Jade Emperor ·Chang'e ·Other deities
People
Laozi ·Zhuangzi ·Zhang Daoling ·Zhang Jue ·Ge Hong ·Chen Tuan
Schools
Tianshi Dao ·Shangqing ·Lingbao ·Quanzhen Dao ·Zhengyi Dao ·Wuliupai
Sacred sites
Grotto-heavens ·Mount Penglai
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Taoism Portal
v · d · e
"Tao Te Ching", Calligraphy by Gia-Fu Feng
There are many possible translations of the book's title:
Dào/Tao 道 literally means "way", or one of its synonyms, but was extended to mean "the Way." This term, which was variously used by other Chinese philosophers (including Confucius, Mencius, Mozi, and Hanfeizi), has special meaning within the context of Daoism, where it implies the essential, unnamable process of the universe.
Dé/Te 德 basically means "virtue" in the sense of "personal character," "inner strength" (virtuosity), or "integrity." The semantics of this Chinese word resemble English virtue, which developed from a (now archaic) sense of "inner potency" or "divine power" (as in "healing virtue of a drug") to the modern meaning of "moral excellence" or "goodness." Compare the compound word dàodé (道德 "ethics," "ethical principles," "morals," or "morality").
Jīng/Ching 經 as it is used here means "canon," "great book," or "classic."
Thus, Daodejing can be translated as "The Classic/Canon of the Way/Path and the Power/Virtue," etc.
The title Daodejing is an honorific given by posterity, other titles include the amalgam Lǎozǐ Dàodéjīng (老子道德經), the honorific Daode Zhen Jing (道德真經 "True Classic of the Way and the Power"), and the Wuqian wen (五千文 "Five thousand character [classic]").
[edit] Internal structure
The received Tao Te Ching is a short text of around 5,000 Chinese characters in 81 brief chapters or sections (章). There is some evidence that the chapter divisions were later additions - for commentary, or as aids to rote memorization - and that the original text was more fluidly organized. It has two parts, the Tao Ching (道經; chaps. 1–37) and the Te Ching (德經; chaps. 38–81), which may have been edited together into the received text, possibly reversed from an original "Te Tao Ching". The written style is laconic, has few grammatical particles, and encourages varied, even contradictory interpretations. The ideas are singular; the style poetic.
The Chinese characters in the original versions were probably written in zhuànshū (篆書 seal script), while later versions were written in lìshū (隷書 clerical script) and kǎishū (楷書 regular script) styles. Daoist Chinese Characters contains a good summary of these different calligraphies.
[edit] Historical authenticity of the author
The Tao Te Ching is ascribed to Laozi, whose historical existence has been a matter of scholastic debate. His name, which means "Old Master", has only fueled controversy on this issue. (Kaltenmark 1969:10).
Laozi
The first reliable reference to Laozi is his "biography" in Shiji (63, tr. Chan 1963:35-37), by Chinese historian Sima Qian (ca. 145–86 BC), which combines three stories. First, Laozi was a contemporary of Confucius (551-479 BC). His surname was Li (李 "plum"), and his personal name was Er (耳 "ear") or Dan (聃 "long ear"). He was an official in the imperial archives, and wrote a book in two parts before departing to the West. Second, Laozi was Lao Laizi (老來子 "Old Come Master"), also a contemporary of Confucius, who wrote a book in 15 parts. Third, Laozi was the Grand Historian and astrologer Lao Dan (老聃 "Old Long-ears"), who lived during the reign (384-362 BC) of Duke Xian (獻公) of Qin).
Generations of scholars have debated the historicity of Laozi and the dating of the Tao Te Ching. Linguistic studies of the text's vocabulary and rhyme scheme point to a date of composition after the Shi Jing yet before the Zhuangzi. Legends claim variously that Laozi was "born old"; that he lived for 996 years, with twelve previous incarnations starting around the time of the Three Sovereigns before the thirteenth as Laozi. Some Western scholars have expressed doubts over Laozi's historical existence, claiming that the Tao Te Ching is actually a collection of the work of various authors.
Many Taoists venerate Laozi as Daotsu the founder of the school of Dao, the Daode Tianjun in the Three Pure Ones, one of the eight elders transformed from Taiji in the Chinese creation myth.
[edit] Principal versions
Among the many transmitted editions of the Tao Te Ching text, the three primary ones are named after early commentaries. The "Yan Zun Version," which is only extant for the Te Ching, derives from a commentary attributed to Han Dynasty scholar Yan Zun (巖尊, fl. 80 BC-10 AD). The "Heshang Gong Version" is named after the legendary Heshang Gong (河上公 "Riverside Sage") who supposedly lived during the reign (202-157 BC) of Emperor Wen of Han. This commentary (tr. Erkes 1950) has a preface written by Ge Xuan (葛玄, 164-244 AD), granduncle of Ge Hong, and scholarship dates this version to around the 3rd century AD. The "Wang Bi Version" has more verifiable origins than either of the above. Wang Bi (王弼, 226 – 249 AD) was a famous Three Kingdoms period philosopher and commentator on the Tao Te Ching (tr. Lin 1977, Rump and Chan 1979) and the I Ching.
Tao Te Ching scholarship has lately advanced from archeological discoveries of manuscripts, some of which are older than any of the received texts. Beginning in the 1920s and 1930s, Marc Aurel Stein and others found thousands of scrolls in the Mogao Caves near Dunhuang. They included more than 50 partial and complete "Tao Te Ching" manuscripts. One written by the scribe So/Su Dan (素統) is dated 270 AD and corresponds closely with the Heshang Gong version. Another partial manuscript has the Xiang'er (想爾) commentary, which had previously been lost.
[edit] Mawangdui and Guodian texts
In 1973, archeologists discovered copies of early Chinese books, known as the Mawangdui Silk Texts, in a tomb dating from 168 BC.[1] They included two nearly complete copies of the text, referred to as Text A (甲) and Text B (乙), both of which reverse the traditional ordering and put the Te Ching section before the Tao Ching, which is why the Henricks translation of them is named "Te-Tao Ching". Based on calligraphic styles and imperial naming taboo avoidances, scholars believe that A can be dated to about the first decade and B to about the third decade of the 2nd century BC.[4]
In 1993, the oldest known version of the text, written on bamboo tablets, was found in a tomb near the town of Guodian (郭店) in Jingmen, Hubei, and dated prior to 300 BC.[1] The Guodian Chu Slips comprise about 800 slips of bamboo with a total of over 13,000 characters, about 2,000 of which correspond with the Tao Te Ching, including 14 previously unknown verses.
Both the Mawangdui and Guodian versions are generally consistent with the received texts, excepting differences in chapter sequence and graphic variants. Several recent Tao Te Ching translations (e.g., Lau 1989, Henricks 1989, Mair 1990, Henricks 2000, Allan and Williams 2000, and Roberts 2004) utilize these two versions, sometimes with the verses reordered to synthesize the new finds.
[edit] Written style
The Tao Te Ching was originally written in zhuànshū calligraphy style. It is difficult to obtain modern replicas of these styles except through specialty stores. Most modern versions use the newspaper print style kǎishū.
[edit] Interpretation and themes
The passages are ambiguous, and topics range from political advice for rulers to practical wisdom for people. Because the variety of interpretation is virtually limitless, not only for different people but for the same person over time, readers do well to avoid making claims of objectivity or superiority. Also, since the book is 81 short poems, there is little need for an abridgement.
[edit] Ineffability or Genesis
The Way that can be told of is not an unvarying way; The names that can be named are not unvarying names. It was from the Nameless that Heaven and Earth sprang; The named is but the mother that rears the ten thousand creatures, each after its kind. (chap. 1, tr. Waley)
These famous first lines of the Tao Te Ching state that the Tao is ineffable, i.e., the Tao is nameless, goes beyond distinctions, and transcends language. However this first verse does not occur in the earliest known version from the Guodian Chu Slips and there is speculation that it may have been added by later commentators.[5] In Laozi's Qingjing Jing (verse 1-8) he clarified the term Tao was nominated as he was trying to describe a state of existence before it happened and before time or space. Way or path happened to be the side meaning of Tao, ineffability would be just poetic. This is the Chinese creation myth from the primordial Tao.
[edit] The Mysterious Female
The Valley Spirit never dies It is named the Mysterious Female. And the doorway of the Mysterious Female Is the base from which Heaven and Earth sprang. It is there within us all the while; Draw upon it as you will, it never runs dry. (chap. 6, tr. Waley)
Like the above description of the ineffable Tao as "the mother that rears the ten thousand creatures", the Tao Te Ching advocates "female" (or Yin) values, emphasizing the passive, solid, and quiescent qualities of nature (which is opposed to the active and energetic), and "having without possessing". Waley's translation can also be understood as the Esoteric Feminine in that it can be known intuitively, that must be complemented by the masculine, "male" (or Yang), again amplified in Qingjing Jing (verse 9-13). Yin and Yang should be balanced, "Know masculinity, Maintain femininity, and be a ravine for all under heaven." (chap. 28, tr. Mair)
[edit] Returning (Union with the Primordial)
In Tao the only motion is returning; The only useful quality, weakness. For though all creatures under heaven are the products of Being, Being itself is the product of Not-being. " (chap. 40, tr. Waley)
Another theme is the eternal return, or what Mair (1990:139) calls "the continual return of the myriad creatures to the cosmic principle from which they arose."
There is a contrast between the rigidity of death and the weakness of life: "When he is born, man is soft and weak; in death he becomes stiff and hard. The ten thousand creatures and all plants and trees while they are alive are supple and soft, but when dead they become brittle and dry." (chap. 76, tr. Waley). This is returning to the beginning of things, or to one's own childhood.
The Tao Te Ching focuses upon the beginnings of society, and describes a golden age in the past, comparable with the ideas of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Human problems arose from the "invention" of culture and civilization. In this idealized past, “the people should have no use for any form of writing save knotted ropes, should be contented with their food, pleased with their clothing, satisfied with their homes, should take pleasure in their rustic tasks." (chap. 80, tr. Waley)
[edit] Emptiness
We put thirty spokes together and call it a wheel; But it is on the space where there is nothing that the usefulness of the wheel depends. We turn clay to make a vessel; But it is on the space where there is nothing that the usefulness of the vessel depends. We pierce doors and windows to make a house; And it is on these spaces where there is nothing that the usefulness of the house depends. Therefore just as we take advantage of what is, we should recognize the usefulness of what is not. (chap. 11, tr. Waley)
Philosophical vacuity is a common theme among Asian wisdom traditions including Taoism (especially Wu wei "effortless action"), Buddhism, and some aspects of Confucianism. One could interpret the Tao Te Ching as a suite of variations on the "Powers of Nothingness". This resonates with the Buddhist Shunyata philosophy of "form is emptiness, emptiness is form."
Looking at a traditional Chinese Landscape, one can understand how emptiness (the unpainted) has the power of animating the trees, mountains, and rivers it surrounds. Emptiness can mean having no fixed preconceptions, preferences, intentions, or agenda. Since "The Sage has no heart of his own; He uses the heart of the people as his heart." (chap. 49, tr. Waley). From a ruler's point of view, it is a laissez-faire approach:
So a wise leader may say: "I practice inaction, and the people look after themselves." But from the Sage it is so hard at any price to get a single word That when his task is accomplished, his work done, Throughout the country every one says: “It happened of its own accord”. (chap. 17, tr. Waley)
[edit] Knowledge and humility
Knowing others is wisdom; Knowing the self is enlightenment. Mastering others requires force; Mastering the self requires strength; He who knows he has enough is rich. Perseverance is a sign of will power. He who stays where he is endures. To die but not to perish is to be eternally present. (chap. 33, tr. Feng and English)
The Tao Te Ching praises self-gained knowledge with emphasis on that knowledge being gained with humility. When what one person has experienced is put into words and transmitted to others, so doing risks giving unwarranted status to what inevitably must have had a subjective tinge. Moreover, it will be subjected to another layer of interpretation and subjectivity when read and learned by others. This kind of knowledge (or "book learning"), like desire, should be diminished. "It was when intelligence and knowledge appeared that the Great Artifice began." (chap. 18, tr. Waley) And so, "The pursuit of learning is to increase day after day. The pursuit of Tao is to decrease day after day." (chap. 48, tr. W.T. Chan)
[edit] Interpretations in relation to religious traditions
The relation between Taoism and Buddhism and Chan Buddhism is complex and fertile. Similarly, the relationship between Taoism and Confucianism is richly interwoven, historically.
In 1823 the French sinologist Jean-Pierre-Abel Rémusat suggested a relationship between Abrahamic faiths and Taoism; he held that Yahweh was signified by three words in Chapter 14; yi (夷 "calm; level; barbarian"), xi (希 "rare; indiscernible; hope"), and wei (微 "tiny, small; obscure"). James Legge (1891:57-58[6]) dismissed this hypothetical yi-xi-wei and Yahweh connection as "a mere fancy or dream". According to Holmes Welch:
It is not hard to understand the readiness of early scholars to assert that the doctrine of the Trinity was revealed in the Tao Te Ching and that its fourteenth chapter contains the syllables of "Yahveh." Even today, though these errors have been recognized for more than a century, the general notion that Lao Tzu was Christ's forerunner has lost none of its romantic appeal. (1965:7)
[edit] Translations
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Tao Te Ching
The Tao Te Ching has been translated into Western languages over 250 times, mostly to English, German, and French.[7] According to Holmes Welch, "It is a famous puzzle which everyone would like to feel he had solved."[8]
Many translations are written by people with a foundation in Chinese language and philosophy who are trying to render the original meaning of the text as faithfully as possible into English. Some of the more popular translations are written from a less scholarly perspective, giving an individual author's interpretation. Critics of these versions, such as Taoism scholar Eugene Eoyang, claim that translators like Stephen Mitchell produce readings of the Tao Te Ching that deviate from the text and are incompatible with the history of Chinese thought.[9] Russell Kirkland goes further to argue that these versions are based on Western Orientalist fantasies, and represent the colonial appropriation of Chinese culture.[10][11] In contrast, Huston Smith, scholar of world religions, said of the Mitchell version, "This translation comes as close to being definitive for our time as any I can imagine. It embodies the virtues its translator credits to the Chinese original: a gemlike lucidity that is radiant with humor, grace, largeheartedness, and deep wisdom." —Other Taoism scholars, such as Michael LaFargue[12] and Johnathan Herman,[13] argue that while they are poor scholarship they meet a real spiritual need in the West. The most recent translation is by Bill Porter (Red Pine) (Copper Canyon Press, 2009) and distinguishes itself in its extensive commentary by scores of poets, monks, and Chinese scholars.[14] There are a handful of sites on the web that compare chapters translated by various authors such as TaoTeChingMe.com[15] and Waylist.org. [16]
[edit] Translational difficulties
The Tao Te Ching is written in classical Chinese, which can be difficult to understand completely, even for well-educated native speakers of modern Chinese. In fact, in learning classical Chinese, native speakers can be at a disadvantage relative to non-native speakers, as native speakers often have difficulty with Chinese characters whose older meaning differs from the modern language. Classical Chinese relies heavily on allusion to a corpus of standard literary works to convey semantic meaning, nuance, and subtext. This corpus was memorized by highly-educated people in Laozi's time, and the allusions were reinforced through common use in writing, but few people today have this type of deep acquaintance with ancient Chinese literature. Thus, many levels of subtext are potentially lost on modern translators. Furthermore, many of the words that the Tao Te Ching uses are deliberately vague and ambiguous.
Since there are no punctuation marks in classical Chinese, it can be difficult to conclusively determine where one sentence ends and the next begins. Moving a full-stop a few words forward or back or inserting a comma can profoundly alter the meaning of many passages, and such divisions and meanings must be determined by the translator. Some editors and translators argue that the received text is so corrupted (from originally being written on one-line bamboo strips linked with silk threads) that it is impossible to understand some chapters without moving sequences of characters from one place to another.
[edit] See also
Taoism portal
Daoism-Taoism romanization issue
Eastern philosophy
Zhuangzi (book)
Huainanzi
Liezi
Qingjing Jing
Huahujing
Xishengjing
[edit] Notes
1.^ a b c d e "Laozi". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy by Stanford University.
2.^ "The Tao Teh King, or the Tao and its Characteristics by Laozi - Project Gutenberg". Gutenberg.org. 2007-12-01. Retrieved 2010-08-13.
3.^ Eliade (1984), p.26
4.^ Boltz (1993): 284
5.^ Henricks (2000) Lao Tzu's Tao Teh Ching - A translation of the startling new documents found at Guodian, page 3
6.^ "Texts of Taoism (SBE 39): The Tao Teh King, Part I: Chapter 14". Sacred-texts.com. Retrieved 2011-03-16.
7.^ LaFargue, Michael and Pas, Julian. On Translating the Tao-te-ching in Kohn and LaFargue (1998), p. 277
8.^ Welch (1965), p. 7
9.^ The Journal of Religion
10.^ [1][dead link]
11.^ "Taoism: the enduring tradition - Google Books". Books.google.com. Retrieved 2010-08-13.
12.^ [2][dead link]
13.^ Journal of the American Academy of Religion
14.^ Lao-Tzu's Taoteching
15.^ Tao Te Ching | Multiple Translations by various authors
16.^ Tao Teh Ching - Line-by-Line Comparisons.
[edit] References
Ariel, Yoav, and Gil Raz. “Anaphors or Cataphors? A Discussion of the Two qi 其 Graphs in the First Chapter of the Daodejing.” PEW 60.3 (2010): 391-421
Boltz, William G. Lao tzu Tao te ching. In Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide, edited by Michael Loewe. Berkeley: University of California, Institute of East Asian Studies. 1993. pp. 269–92.
Cole, Alan, "Simplicity for the Sophisticated: ReReading the Daode Jing for the Polemics of Ease and Innocence," in History of Religions, August 2006, pp. 1-49
Damascene, Hieromonk, Lou Shibai, and You-Shan Tang. Christ the Eternal Tao. Platina, CA: Saint Herman Press, 1999.
Eliade, Mircea. A History of Religious Ideas, Volume 2. Translated by Willard R. Trask. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984.
Kaltenmark, Max. Lao Tzu and Taoism. Translated by Roger Greaves. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 1969.
Kohn, Livia and Michael LaFargue, eds. Lao-Tzu and the Tao-Te-Ching, Albany: State University of New York Press. 1998.
Komjathy, Louis. Handbooks for Daoist Practice. 10 vols. Hong Kong: Yuen Yuen Institute, 2008.
Welch, Holmes. Taoism: The Parting of the Way (1957). Boston: Beacon Press. 1965.
Klaus, Hilmar Das Tao der Weisheit. Laozi-Daodejing. English + German introduction, 140 p. bibliogr., 3 German transl. Aachen: Mainz 2008, 548 p.
Klaus, Hilmar The Tao of Wisdom. Laozi-Daodejing. Chinese-English-German. 2 verbatim + 2 analogous transl., 140 p. bibl., Aachen: Mainz 2009 600p.
[edit] External links
Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Tao Te Ching
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Tao Te Ching
Chinese Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Dàodéjīng
Daode jing entry from the Center for Daoist Studies
Daodejing Wang Bi edition with English translation, Guodian text, and Mawangdui text - Chinese Text Project
Lǎozǐ Dàodéjīng Chinese + English + German, verbatim + analogous
Tao Te Ching | Multiple Translations by various authors
The Authorship of the Tao Te Ching, John J. Emerson
Tao Te Ching at the Open Directory Project
Daode jing (Isabelle Robinet), entry in The Encyclopedia of Taoism
The Call of Silence - Reflections on the Tao-Teh-King by Abdullah Dougan, a recent interpretation.
[edit] Online English translations
Tao Te Ching | Multiple Translations by various authors
Tao Te Ching | Multiple English Translations
Tao Te Ching, James Legge
The Tao Te Ching, Frederic H. Balfour
The Tao Teh King, Aleister Crowley
Daode Jing, Charles Muller
Monday, October 10, 2011
How Dangerous Is U.S. Government Debt?
The Risks of a Sudden Spike in U.S. Interest Rates
Francis E. Warnock
June 2010
INTRODUCTION
In 1961, the Belgian economist Robert Triffin described the dilemma faced by the country at the center of the international monetary system.1 To supply the world’s risk-free asset, the center country must run a current account deficit and in doing so become ever more indebted to foreigners, until the risk-free asset that it issues ceases to be risk free. Precisely because the world is happy to have a dependable asset to hold as a store of value, it will buy so much of that asset that its issuer will become unsustainably burdened. The endgame to Triffin’s
paradox is a global, wholesale dumping of the center country’s securities. No one knows in advance when the tipping point will be reached, but the damage brought about by higher interest rates and slower economic growth will be readily apparent afterward.For a long time now, the United States has seemed vulnerable to the fate that Triffin predicted.
Since 1982 it has run a current account deficit every year but one, steadily piling up obligations to foreigners. Because foreigners have been eager to hold dollar assets, they have willingly enabled this pattern, pouring capital into
the United States and financing the nation’s surplus of spending over savings. The dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency has become a facet of U.S. power, allowing the United States to borrow effortlessly and sustain large debt-financed military commitments.
Capital has tended to flood into the United States especially readily during moments of geopolitical stress, ensuring that the nation has had the financial wherewithal to conduct an assertive foreign policy precisely at moments when crises demanded it. But the capital inflows associated with the dollar’s reserve-currency status have created a vulnerability, too, opening the door to a foreign sell-off of U.S. securities that could drive up U.S. interest rates and render the nation’s formidable stock of debt far more expensive to service.
Late last year, this potential danger came close to becoming reality. Largely thanks to homegrown pressures, unrelated to Triffin’s dilemma, the world’s risk-free asset, the ten-year U.S. Treasury bond, was sagging.
With sizeable budget deficits, the prospects of an ever-increasing amount of government debt, the end of the Federal Reserve’s crisis-driven program of accumulating Treasury bonds, and an uptick in inflation expectations,
the ten-year Treasury yield increased by fifty basis points from 3.25 percent to 3.75 percent. And further increases were likely. Such increases would not only substantially raise the cost of future government borrowing, but would also threaten any recovery in housing and other interest-rate-sensitive sectors.
At the same time, moreover, foreigners seemed poised to drive U.S. borrowing costs higher. The dollar was falling sharply. Early in 2009 it fetched almost eighty euro cents in Frankfurt or Athens; by autumn it was worth sixty-seven euro cents.
Foreign investors, who held more than half of the U.S. Treasury market, were
getting nervous. Luo Ping, a director-general at the China Banking Regulatory Commission, summed up the angst:
Except for U.S. Treasuries, what can you hold? Gold? You don’t hold Japanese government bonds or UK bonds. U.S. Treasuries are the safe haven. For everyone, including China, it is the only option . . . . We know the dollar is going to depreciate, so we hate you guys, but there is nothing much we can do.
2 Was Triffin’s endgame—sudden reserve diversification, or the act of foreign governments abruptly shifting their funds from dollars to other currencies—about to become a reality? If so, the likeliest benefactor was the eurozone. Prominent economists opined that the euro would become the world’s reserve currency by as
early as 2015.
3 Through the first half of 2009 global investors seemed to agree: net inflows into eurozone debt instruments—that is, the rest of the world’s purchases of eurozone bonds less euro-area purchases of 2 foreign bonds—surged to record levels. The related plummeting of the dollar relative to the euro added to the
fear that global investors were abandoning the center country.
But then began the eurozone phase of the global financial crisis. This has provided the U.S. government with a timely respite from both domestic forces and Triffin’s endgame. U.S. policymakers need to understand that this is not a reset, not a new beginning; it is a lucky break. How the United States uses this reprieve will affect the nation’s ability to borrow for years to come, with broad implications for the sustainability of an active U.S. foreign policy.
In what follows we will walk through the domestic pressures on U.S. long-term interest rates, the role of global investors, the respite provided by the eurozone crisis, and policy implications. The story will be told primarily through pictures. For those interested in the methodology used to measure foreign official flows and a more detailed perspective on U.S. capital flows, a box and appendix are also provided.
DOMESTIC PRESSURES ON LONG-TERM RATES
In the autumn of 2009 at least three factors were weighing heavily on U.S. Treasury bond prices, driving interest rates (or “yields”) upward. Significantly, none of the three factors has diminished.
The first factor is the hangover from the financial crisis. On top of tax cuts and spending increases over the past decade, the stimulus spending and the decline in tax revenues resulting from the recession worsened the U.S. fiscal situation.
The budget deficit reached 10 percent of potential GDP in 2008, and even the baseline Congressional Budget Office forecast, which must include the implausible assumption that Congress will allow various “temporary” tax relief measures to expire, has U.S. public debt skyrocketing toward 100 percent of GDP (Figure 1, left panels).
4 Various economic theories provide a link from increases in either government debt (a stock figure) or budget deficits (a flow) and increases in interest rates, be it through the crowding out of private investment or through Keynesian increases in demand. Whatever theory one prefers,
Thomas Laubach showed that for each percentage point rise in the projected deficit-to-GDP ratio, longer term interest rates increase by about twenty-five basis points (or 0.25 percent); alternatively, each percentage point rise in the public debt-to-GDP ratio increases long rates by three to four basis points.5 Combining deficit (or debt) projections with the Laubach analysis, one might expect the fiscal situation to lead to a full percentage point (or even much greater) increase in long rates.
The second domestic factor exerting upward pressure on long rates is that demand from one source—the Federal Reserve—is likely to be scaled back. In 2009, the Fed purchased $300 billion in long-dated treasuries (Figure 1, right top panel). To the extent this put downward pressure on rates, the cessation of the Fed’s credit-
easing policy might be expected to lead to higher long rates.
A third factor on the radar screen is inflation expectations. An increase in inflation expectations can have a one-for-one impact on long-term nominal interest rates. Longer-term inflation expectations (Figure 1, right bottom panel) have been on a post-crisis upward march, putting yet more upward pressure on long rates.
In the autumn of 2009, the one domestic factor that was pulling rates lower was anything but comforting: concerns about a potential double-dip recession. As the U.S. recovery has strengthened, this factor has grown less significant. The result is that the balance of domestic forces in the United States now points to higher borrowing costs for the U.S. government. Adding together the pressure from large deficits, the cessation of the Fed’s crisis-response policies, and rising inflation expectations, one might expect the ten-year Treasury rate to
be at least one hundred basis points higher than it was a year ago. Oddly, and perhaps ominously, the actual ten-year Treasury rate at the start of June 2010 languishes at 3.4 percent, roughly unchanged from a year ago,
implying plenty of room for an upward spike.
THE ROLE OF GLOBAL INVESTORS
Not too long ago many were skeptical that foreign accumulation of U.S. debt securities materially affected U.S. rates. The view that such intervention did not matter was summed up concisely by the chief economist of an investment bank: “U.S. bond yields . . . have fluctuated over a wide range in response to many factors . . .but foreign buying . . . ha(s) simply not had much impact. Foreigners don’t have much influence . . .”6
At a July 2005 briefing, Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) asked Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan of foreign flows could affect long-term U.S. interest rates. In Greenspan’s response to the senator, he noted that while foreign accumulation probably lowered long-term U.S. interest rates, the effect was likely small, and so the unwinding of those positions, were it to occur, would only add a small amount to long rates. But at that time no one had a good sense of the dynamics of foreign demand for U.S. bonds. To calculate the effect of this demand on Treasury rates, economists seek to isolate the portion of foreign demand that comes from governments: Unlike private foreign purchases, which may fluctuate in response to Treasury rates, foreign government purchases are presumed to be insensitive to Treasury rates, so that changes in those rates can be presumed to be driven by government buying rather than the other way around. Greenspan’s
response to Senator Shelby was based on calculations that used data on bonds held at the New York Fed on behalf of foreign governments. But, while governments use the New York Fed’s custodial services for some purchases, they also hold U.S. bonds elsewhere, so the analysis was based on partial data. And while there have been many user-friendly improvements over the past few years, international capital flows data remain
hard to navigate. (For a discussion of various sources of data on foreign governments’ purchases and sales of U.S. securities, see Box 1).
However, a 2005 Federal Reserve discussion paper pointed to a better answer than the one that was generally accepted at the time of Shelby’s question.7 The paper began by showing how reported capital flows data could be adjusted for use in empirical analysis. Briefly, because of a bias in the Treasury International Capital data collected by the U.S. government, flows from foreign official institutions were often reported as being
from private investors. Infrequent but high-quality snapshots of stocks (as opposed to flows) do not suffer from this bias (although they are subject to a less severe bias, described in the box) and so can be used to correct flows data. Armed with such data, the authors found that foreign official purchases of treasuries had little if any impact on shorter-term U.S. rates (which are well anchored by the Fed Funds rate) but a substantial impact on U.S. long-term interest rates. The accumulation of U.S. treasuries (and near substitutes) by foreign official institutions, then running at about $400 billion per year, lowered long-term U.S. interest rates by anywhere from fifty to one hundred basis points; if foreign governments ceased adding treasuries to their portfolios, U.S. long-term rates could spike upward by the same amount. The increase would be much greater
if foreign governments actively sold existing Treasury positions. Equally, a cessation of purchases or a sell-off by foreign private investors could add even more to the upward pressure on U.S. interest rates, since foreign private investors remain large buyers.
The potential impact on the United States resulting from a sell-off has not diminished since the original discussion paper calculations, because foreigners have not reduced the size of their positions. Foreigners now hold over half of the Treasury bond market and almost a fifth of the corporate debt market.
6
T H E N E A R M I S S O F 2 0 0 9
The large foreign holdings of U.S. assets presented in Table 1 are only a threat to the United States if there is a risk that foreigners might abandon past patterns and decide to put their money elsewhere. In 2009, with domestic conditions pointing toward a surge in Treasury yields, major investors were thinking aloud about doing just that—witness the concern expressed by China’s Luo Ping that his country’s accumulation of riskfree
dollar assets was anything but risk-free. At the same time, other senior foreign officials were actively debating the future of the dollar as the global reserve currency. On a visit to Beijing in May 2009, Brazil’s president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, picked up on his hosts’ frustration with the U.S. currency. Calling for a “new economic order,” he suggested that it was time to stop denominating trade in dollars.
Sure enough, foreign flows into U.S. Treasury bonds declined steeply in the first months of 2009. Yet they remained positive, and recovered in the second half of the year (Figure 2). While not as pronounced as in 20032004, foreign appetite for the reserve asset remained at a high level.
Even though foreign appetite for U.S. treasuries remained healthy, this did not eliminate the risk to the United States. The reason was that U.S. debt issuance was increasing sharply, and foreigners were holding a 7 smaller share of outstanding U.S. bonds. This raised the specter of a future in which the United States would likely have to issue more and more bonds, but foreign demand might not keep pace.
In 2009 foreign official inflows either decreased or increased, and the amount of inflows was as high as $448 billion or as little as $36 billion. Nor is this extraordinary discrepancy confined to 2009. For 2010,such data as are currently available suggest that foreign official flows have either surged or plummeted.
Which is it?
Foreign Official Flows ($billions, annual averages)
20042007 2008 2009 2010
BEA’s Quarterly Balance of Payment (BOP) Data
Foreign official flows into the United States 406 487 448
U.S. Treasury securities 173 478 490
Short-term bills and certificates -7 272 63
Medium-to-long-term bonds and notes 181 205 427
U.S. agency securities 133 66 -39
Other foreign official inflows 100 -56 -4
13
Treasury’s Monthly TIC Data
through
March
Foreign official flows into the United States 213 158 36 -38
U.S. Treasury securities 82 336 238 2
Short-term bills and certificates -3 259 76 -28
Medium-to-long-term bonds and notes 86 77 161 30
U.S. agency securities 66 -32 -43 -4
Other foreign official inflows 64 -147 -159 -36
memo items: Selected Federal Reserve adjustments
Treasury bonds, foreign official flows 113 198
Treasury bonds, private flows -75 -104
New York Fed’s Weekly H.4.1 Custodial Data
through
May
Foreign official flows into the United States 253 383 418 319
Change in holdings of Treasury securities 116 203 543 304
Change in holdings of agency securities 137 180 -125 14
Annual averages, except for partial 2010 data.
The three data sources conflict because of different methodologies. The monthly TIC data “identifies” foreign
official flows as those that originate from a recognized foreign official institution. Any transaction run through a shell company or even a non-U.S. intermediary shows up in the TIC data, but not as a foreign official flow. That is, the TIC data on foreign official flows should be viewed as a lower bound. Hence, in Figures 2 and 6 both “identified” foreign official flows and total foreign flows are shown; true foreign official
flows are likely somewhere between the two lines.
One read on the extent of private flows that should be “shuffled” into foreign official flows is provided by Federal Reserve adjustments.
11 Those adjustments, shown in the “memo items” listed under the TIC data in
the above table, shift roughly $100 billion a year from private to foreign official inflows. These adjustments are, however, also partial, as they are based on a reconciliation of the monthly flows with annual snapshots of custodial holdings. That is, they replace a severe transaction center bias with a much less severe custodial
center bias.
12 While this is an improvement, even this adjustment cannot be viewed as complete as any foreign official institution that wants to mask its holdings can do so by using a foreign custodian.
13 The different reported amounts of foreign official inflows can be reconciled. The New York Fed’s H.4.1 data, the most timely, is custodial based and for only one custodian, the New York Fed. If foreign central banks choose not to utilize the New York Fed, or move bonds from their accounts at the New York Fed to other custodians, the H.4.1 data will not provide an accurate read of foreign official inflows. The TIC data by itself has a transaction center bias that in some cases will cause foreign official flows to be reported as private flows. Federal Reserve adjustments, by making monthly flows consistent with annual data on positions, transform this transaction center bias into a more benign custodial center bias (and also correct for some other problems with the flows data). The Bureau of Economic Analysis moves last and thus can incorporate all of these sources into what should be the most comprehensive view of foreign official flows into the United States. That view shows that foreign official inflows maintained a high level of over $400 billion per year during the financial crisis, although the composition changed dramatically.
In particular, foreign official institutions no longer accumulate agency and corporate bonds, instead focusing their purchases on Treasury securities.
To date in 2010, by focusing solely on TIC’s reported foreign official flows, one would conclude that foreign governments have greatly reduced their demand for U.S. Treasury securities. But, recognizing that many foreign official flows are not identified as such in the TIC data, and that (1) total foreign flows into
treasuries remain strong. Foreign governments’demand for U.S. Treasury securities remains as strong as ever.
This paper has zeroed in on a particular type of capital flow: foreigners’ purchases (and sales) of U.S. Treasury secAP urities. But it is also useful to keep the broader picture in mind. Thus, the appendix provides a broader (but
cursory) view of U.S. international capital flows, primarily through an annotated table of U.S. capital flows, which will be updated each quarter.
Net financial flows into the United States (line 7) slowed only slightly during the financial crisis, even as foreigners sharply curtailed their purchases of U.S. securities (included in line 15). Reason: At the same time, U.S. investors ceased their purchases of foreign securities (line 10). But in 2009, foreigners’ demand for U.S. securities remained tepid and U.S. investors’ purchases of foreign securities resumed to some extent, and thus net financial inflows into the U.S. slowed substantially. Things to consider over the rest of 2010: Will foreign
official institutions (line 16) maintain their large flows into the United States? Will FDI (line 24) and equity flows (line 25) into the United States maintain their recent levels and perhaps even increase? Will U.S. corporate bonds (line 30) become a desirable asset class once again? And will U.S. investors step up their diversification into foreign markets?
An oddity in recent BOP data is U.S. government assets abroad (line 14). Most years these flows are approximately zero, but in 2008 they were very large. Reason: Included in this category are the currency swaps initiated by the Fed. When they were put on (in 2008), they were recorded as large outflows; as they were undone n 2009, a large inflow was recorded. Over time these currency swaps are designed to sum to zero in BOP terms.
16
17
Endnotes
1. Robert Triffin, Gold and the Dollar Crisis: The Future of Convertibility (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961).
2. Henny Sender, “China to Stick with U.S. Bonds,” FT.com, February 11, 2009.
3. See http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/02/23/the-euro-could-surpass-the-dollar-within%2010-years/.
4. The baseline CBO forecast must assume policies remain as they currently are, which means that temporary spending provisions are assumed
to expire, even if in practice they are often extended. For a discussion of various deficit and debt forecasts, see Alan Auerbach and William Gale,
“Déjà Vu All Over Again: On the Dismal Prospects for the Federal Budget” (Brookings Institution mimeograph, 2010), which notes that the
main concern is not in deficits over the next year or two, but medium- and long-term deficits.
5. Laubach’s analysis is explicitly about five-year projections of deficits (and debt), so one should caution against using it to make statements
about the impact of cyclical deficits. It is more appropriate for longer-term fiscal trends. See Thomas Laubach, “New Evidence on the Interest
Rate Effects of Budget Deficits and Debt,” Journal of the European Economic Association, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 858–885.
6. David Malpass, chief economist of Bear Stearns, quoted in “Their Money, Our Strength,” Wall Street Journal, August 5, 2004.
7. See Francis E Warnock and Veronica Cacdac Warnock, “International Capital Flows and U.S. Interest Rates,” Journal of International Money
and Finance, vol. 28 (2009), pp. 90319.
8. For a more eloquent discussion of salient features of the U.S. Treasury market, see Brian Sack, “Dollar Asset Markets: Prospects after the Crisis,”
remarks at the ACI 2010 World Congress, Sydney, Australia, March 26, 2010.
9. See, for example, Jacques Delpla and Jakob von Weizsäcker, “The Blue Bond Proposal,” Bruegel Policy Brief 2010/03.
10. See Sack, “Dollar Asset Markets.”
11. These adjustments, developed by Charles Thomas, Francis E. Warnock, and Jon Wongswan in “The Performance of International Equity
Portfolios” (NBER Working Paper 12346, 2006) and refined by Carol Bertaut and Ralph Tryon in “Monthly Estimates of U.S. Cross-Border
Securities Positions” (FRB International Finance Discussion Paper No. 910, 2007), are updated each year on http://www.federalreserve.gov/
pubs/ifdp/2007/910/default.htm.
12. The transactions center bias in the TIC data on long-term securities flows derives from the fact that the respondents are asked to identify the
country through which the transaction was made, which can differ from the country of the ultimate buyer (in the case of inflows) or of the issuer
(in the case of outflows). Liabilities data collected on a custodial basis can also have a bias if the custodian and ultimate investor reside in different
countries. To see that the Federal Reserve adjustment is largely a removal of the transaction center bias, note that for Treasury bills, which are
collected by the TIC system on a custodial basis, the discrepancy between TIC and BOP data is quite modest.
13. Note that even with all available information, there is nothing pristine about transactions-based international capital flows data collected for
BOP purposes. A fundamental difficulty with such a data collection system is that it asks reporters to submit data that they would never collect on
their own. A financial intermediary would not naturally care about the residency of the parties on either side of a trade, but that is exactly what
BOP accounting rules ask them to do. More natural might be to obtain higher frequency reads on cross-border positions, something naturally
collected by custodians, and use them to calculate flows.
18
About the Author
Francis E. Warnock is Paul M. Hammaker associate professor of business administration at the Darden
Business School, University of Virginia, research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research,
senior fellow at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas’s Globalization and Monetary Policy Institute, and research
associate at Trinity College Dublin’s Institute for International Integration Studies.
Francis E. Warnock
June 2010
INTRODUCTION
In 1961, the Belgian economist Robert Triffin described the dilemma faced by the country at the center of the international monetary system.1 To supply the world’s risk-free asset, the center country must run a current account deficit and in doing so become ever more indebted to foreigners, until the risk-free asset that it issues ceases to be risk free. Precisely because the world is happy to have a dependable asset to hold as a store of value, it will buy so much of that asset that its issuer will become unsustainably burdened. The endgame to Triffin’s
paradox is a global, wholesale dumping of the center country’s securities. No one knows in advance when the tipping point will be reached, but the damage brought about by higher interest rates and slower economic growth will be readily apparent afterward.For a long time now, the United States has seemed vulnerable to the fate that Triffin predicted.
Since 1982 it has run a current account deficit every year but one, steadily piling up obligations to foreigners. Because foreigners have been eager to hold dollar assets, they have willingly enabled this pattern, pouring capital into
the United States and financing the nation’s surplus of spending over savings. The dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency has become a facet of U.S. power, allowing the United States to borrow effortlessly and sustain large debt-financed military commitments.
Capital has tended to flood into the United States especially readily during moments of geopolitical stress, ensuring that the nation has had the financial wherewithal to conduct an assertive foreign policy precisely at moments when crises demanded it. But the capital inflows associated with the dollar’s reserve-currency status have created a vulnerability, too, opening the door to a foreign sell-off of U.S. securities that could drive up U.S. interest rates and render the nation’s formidable stock of debt far more expensive to service.
Late last year, this potential danger came close to becoming reality. Largely thanks to homegrown pressures, unrelated to Triffin’s dilemma, the world’s risk-free asset, the ten-year U.S. Treasury bond, was sagging.
With sizeable budget deficits, the prospects of an ever-increasing amount of government debt, the end of the Federal Reserve’s crisis-driven program of accumulating Treasury bonds, and an uptick in inflation expectations,
the ten-year Treasury yield increased by fifty basis points from 3.25 percent to 3.75 percent. And further increases were likely. Such increases would not only substantially raise the cost of future government borrowing, but would also threaten any recovery in housing and other interest-rate-sensitive sectors.
At the same time, moreover, foreigners seemed poised to drive U.S. borrowing costs higher. The dollar was falling sharply. Early in 2009 it fetched almost eighty euro cents in Frankfurt or Athens; by autumn it was worth sixty-seven euro cents.
Foreign investors, who held more than half of the U.S. Treasury market, were
getting nervous. Luo Ping, a director-general at the China Banking Regulatory Commission, summed up the angst:
Except for U.S. Treasuries, what can you hold? Gold? You don’t hold Japanese government bonds or UK bonds. U.S. Treasuries are the safe haven. For everyone, including China, it is the only option . . . . We know the dollar is going to depreciate, so we hate you guys, but there is nothing much we can do.
2 Was Triffin’s endgame—sudden reserve diversification, or the act of foreign governments abruptly shifting their funds from dollars to other currencies—about to become a reality? If so, the likeliest benefactor was the eurozone. Prominent economists opined that the euro would become the world’s reserve currency by as
early as 2015.
3 Through the first half of 2009 global investors seemed to agree: net inflows into eurozone debt instruments—that is, the rest of the world’s purchases of eurozone bonds less euro-area purchases of 2 foreign bonds—surged to record levels. The related plummeting of the dollar relative to the euro added to the
fear that global investors were abandoning the center country.
But then began the eurozone phase of the global financial crisis. This has provided the U.S. government with a timely respite from both domestic forces and Triffin’s endgame. U.S. policymakers need to understand that this is not a reset, not a new beginning; it is a lucky break. How the United States uses this reprieve will affect the nation’s ability to borrow for years to come, with broad implications for the sustainability of an active U.S. foreign policy.
In what follows we will walk through the domestic pressures on U.S. long-term interest rates, the role of global investors, the respite provided by the eurozone crisis, and policy implications. The story will be told primarily through pictures. For those interested in the methodology used to measure foreign official flows and a more detailed perspective on U.S. capital flows, a box and appendix are also provided.
DOMESTIC PRESSURES ON LONG-TERM RATES
In the autumn of 2009 at least three factors were weighing heavily on U.S. Treasury bond prices, driving interest rates (or “yields”) upward. Significantly, none of the three factors has diminished.
The first factor is the hangover from the financial crisis. On top of tax cuts and spending increases over the past decade, the stimulus spending and the decline in tax revenues resulting from the recession worsened the U.S. fiscal situation.
The budget deficit reached 10 percent of potential GDP in 2008, and even the baseline Congressional Budget Office forecast, which must include the implausible assumption that Congress will allow various “temporary” tax relief measures to expire, has U.S. public debt skyrocketing toward 100 percent of GDP (Figure 1, left panels).
4 Various economic theories provide a link from increases in either government debt (a stock figure) or budget deficits (a flow) and increases in interest rates, be it through the crowding out of private investment or through Keynesian increases in demand. Whatever theory one prefers,
Thomas Laubach showed that for each percentage point rise in the projected deficit-to-GDP ratio, longer term interest rates increase by about twenty-five basis points (or 0.25 percent); alternatively, each percentage point rise in the public debt-to-GDP ratio increases long rates by three to four basis points.5 Combining deficit (or debt) projections with the Laubach analysis, one might expect the fiscal situation to lead to a full percentage point (or even much greater) increase in long rates.
The second domestic factor exerting upward pressure on long rates is that demand from one source—the Federal Reserve—is likely to be scaled back. In 2009, the Fed purchased $300 billion in long-dated treasuries (Figure 1, right top panel). To the extent this put downward pressure on rates, the cessation of the Fed’s credit-
easing policy might be expected to lead to higher long rates.
A third factor on the radar screen is inflation expectations. An increase in inflation expectations can have a one-for-one impact on long-term nominal interest rates. Longer-term inflation expectations (Figure 1, right bottom panel) have been on a post-crisis upward march, putting yet more upward pressure on long rates.
In the autumn of 2009, the one domestic factor that was pulling rates lower was anything but comforting: concerns about a potential double-dip recession. As the U.S. recovery has strengthened, this factor has grown less significant. The result is that the balance of domestic forces in the United States now points to higher borrowing costs for the U.S. government. Adding together the pressure from large deficits, the cessation of the Fed’s crisis-response policies, and rising inflation expectations, one might expect the ten-year Treasury rate to
be at least one hundred basis points higher than it was a year ago. Oddly, and perhaps ominously, the actual ten-year Treasury rate at the start of June 2010 languishes at 3.4 percent, roughly unchanged from a year ago,
implying plenty of room for an upward spike.
THE ROLE OF GLOBAL INVESTORS
Not too long ago many were skeptical that foreign accumulation of U.S. debt securities materially affected U.S. rates. The view that such intervention did not matter was summed up concisely by the chief economist of an investment bank: “U.S. bond yields . . . have fluctuated over a wide range in response to many factors . . .but foreign buying . . . ha(s) simply not had much impact. Foreigners don’t have much influence . . .”6
At a July 2005 briefing, Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) asked Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan of foreign flows could affect long-term U.S. interest rates. In Greenspan’s response to the senator, he noted that while foreign accumulation probably lowered long-term U.S. interest rates, the effect was likely small, and so the unwinding of those positions, were it to occur, would only add a small amount to long rates. But at that time no one had a good sense of the dynamics of foreign demand for U.S. bonds. To calculate the effect of this demand on Treasury rates, economists seek to isolate the portion of foreign demand that comes from governments: Unlike private foreign purchases, which may fluctuate in response to Treasury rates, foreign government purchases are presumed to be insensitive to Treasury rates, so that changes in those rates can be presumed to be driven by government buying rather than the other way around. Greenspan’s
response to Senator Shelby was based on calculations that used data on bonds held at the New York Fed on behalf of foreign governments. But, while governments use the New York Fed’s custodial services for some purchases, they also hold U.S. bonds elsewhere, so the analysis was based on partial data. And while there have been many user-friendly improvements over the past few years, international capital flows data remain
hard to navigate. (For a discussion of various sources of data on foreign governments’ purchases and sales of U.S. securities, see Box 1).
However, a 2005 Federal Reserve discussion paper pointed to a better answer than the one that was generally accepted at the time of Shelby’s question.7 The paper began by showing how reported capital flows data could be adjusted for use in empirical analysis. Briefly, because of a bias in the Treasury International Capital data collected by the U.S. government, flows from foreign official institutions were often reported as being
from private investors. Infrequent but high-quality snapshots of stocks (as opposed to flows) do not suffer from this bias (although they are subject to a less severe bias, described in the box) and so can be used to correct flows data. Armed with such data, the authors found that foreign official purchases of treasuries had little if any impact on shorter-term U.S. rates (which are well anchored by the Fed Funds rate) but a substantial impact on U.S. long-term interest rates. The accumulation of U.S. treasuries (and near substitutes) by foreign official institutions, then running at about $400 billion per year, lowered long-term U.S. interest rates by anywhere from fifty to one hundred basis points; if foreign governments ceased adding treasuries to their portfolios, U.S. long-term rates could spike upward by the same amount. The increase would be much greater
if foreign governments actively sold existing Treasury positions. Equally, a cessation of purchases or a sell-off by foreign private investors could add even more to the upward pressure on U.S. interest rates, since foreign private investors remain large buyers.
The potential impact on the United States resulting from a sell-off has not diminished since the original discussion paper calculations, because foreigners have not reduced the size of their positions. Foreigners now hold over half of the Treasury bond market and almost a fifth of the corporate debt market.
6
T H E N E A R M I S S O F 2 0 0 9
The large foreign holdings of U.S. assets presented in Table 1 are only a threat to the United States if there is a risk that foreigners might abandon past patterns and decide to put their money elsewhere. In 2009, with domestic conditions pointing toward a surge in Treasury yields, major investors were thinking aloud about doing just that—witness the concern expressed by China’s Luo Ping that his country’s accumulation of riskfree
dollar assets was anything but risk-free. At the same time, other senior foreign officials were actively debating the future of the dollar as the global reserve currency. On a visit to Beijing in May 2009, Brazil’s president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, picked up on his hosts’ frustration with the U.S. currency. Calling for a “new economic order,” he suggested that it was time to stop denominating trade in dollars.
Sure enough, foreign flows into U.S. Treasury bonds declined steeply in the first months of 2009. Yet they remained positive, and recovered in the second half of the year (Figure 2). While not as pronounced as in 20032004, foreign appetite for the reserve asset remained at a high level.
Even though foreign appetite for U.S. treasuries remained healthy, this did not eliminate the risk to the United States. The reason was that U.S. debt issuance was increasing sharply, and foreigners were holding a 7 smaller share of outstanding U.S. bonds. This raised the specter of a future in which the United States would likely have to issue more and more bonds, but foreign demand might not keep pace.
In 2009 foreign official inflows either decreased or increased, and the amount of inflows was as high as $448 billion or as little as $36 billion. Nor is this extraordinary discrepancy confined to 2009. For 2010,such data as are currently available suggest that foreign official flows have either surged or plummeted.
Which is it?
Foreign Official Flows ($billions, annual averages)
20042007 2008 2009 2010
BEA’s Quarterly Balance of Payment (BOP) Data
Foreign official flows into the United States 406 487 448
U.S. Treasury securities 173 478 490
Short-term bills and certificates -7 272 63
Medium-to-long-term bonds and notes 181 205 427
U.S. agency securities 133 66 -39
Other foreign official inflows 100 -56 -4
13
Treasury’s Monthly TIC Data
through
March
Foreign official flows into the United States 213 158 36 -38
U.S. Treasury securities 82 336 238 2
Short-term bills and certificates -3 259 76 -28
Medium-to-long-term bonds and notes 86 77 161 30
U.S. agency securities 66 -32 -43 -4
Other foreign official inflows 64 -147 -159 -36
memo items: Selected Federal Reserve adjustments
Treasury bonds, foreign official flows 113 198
Treasury bonds, private flows -75 -104
New York Fed’s Weekly H.4.1 Custodial Data
through
May
Foreign official flows into the United States 253 383 418 319
Change in holdings of Treasury securities 116 203 543 304
Change in holdings of agency securities 137 180 -125 14
Annual averages, except for partial 2010 data.
The three data sources conflict because of different methodologies. The monthly TIC data “identifies” foreign
official flows as those that originate from a recognized foreign official institution. Any transaction run through a shell company or even a non-U.S. intermediary shows up in the TIC data, but not as a foreign official flow. That is, the TIC data on foreign official flows should be viewed as a lower bound. Hence, in Figures 2 and 6 both “identified” foreign official flows and total foreign flows are shown; true foreign official
flows are likely somewhere between the two lines.
One read on the extent of private flows that should be “shuffled” into foreign official flows is provided by Federal Reserve adjustments.
11 Those adjustments, shown in the “memo items” listed under the TIC data in
the above table, shift roughly $100 billion a year from private to foreign official inflows. These adjustments are, however, also partial, as they are based on a reconciliation of the monthly flows with annual snapshots of custodial holdings. That is, they replace a severe transaction center bias with a much less severe custodial
center bias.
12 While this is an improvement, even this adjustment cannot be viewed as complete as any foreign official institution that wants to mask its holdings can do so by using a foreign custodian.
13 The different reported amounts of foreign official inflows can be reconciled. The New York Fed’s H.4.1 data, the most timely, is custodial based and for only one custodian, the New York Fed. If foreign central banks choose not to utilize the New York Fed, or move bonds from their accounts at the New York Fed to other custodians, the H.4.1 data will not provide an accurate read of foreign official inflows. The TIC data by itself has a transaction center bias that in some cases will cause foreign official flows to be reported as private flows. Federal Reserve adjustments, by making monthly flows consistent with annual data on positions, transform this transaction center bias into a more benign custodial center bias (and also correct for some other problems with the flows data). The Bureau of Economic Analysis moves last and thus can incorporate all of these sources into what should be the most comprehensive view of foreign official flows into the United States. That view shows that foreign official inflows maintained a high level of over $400 billion per year during the financial crisis, although the composition changed dramatically.
In particular, foreign official institutions no longer accumulate agency and corporate bonds, instead focusing their purchases on Treasury securities.
To date in 2010, by focusing solely on TIC’s reported foreign official flows, one would conclude that foreign governments have greatly reduced their demand for U.S. Treasury securities. But, recognizing that many foreign official flows are not identified as such in the TIC data, and that (1) total foreign flows into
treasuries remain strong. Foreign governments’demand for U.S. Treasury securities remains as strong as ever.
This paper has zeroed in on a particular type of capital flow: foreigners’ purchases (and sales) of U.S. Treasury secAP urities. But it is also useful to keep the broader picture in mind. Thus, the appendix provides a broader (but
cursory) view of U.S. international capital flows, primarily through an annotated table of U.S. capital flows, which will be updated each quarter.
Net financial flows into the United States (line 7) slowed only slightly during the financial crisis, even as foreigners sharply curtailed their purchases of U.S. securities (included in line 15). Reason: At the same time, U.S. investors ceased their purchases of foreign securities (line 10). But in 2009, foreigners’ demand for U.S. securities remained tepid and U.S. investors’ purchases of foreign securities resumed to some extent, and thus net financial inflows into the U.S. slowed substantially. Things to consider over the rest of 2010: Will foreign
official institutions (line 16) maintain their large flows into the United States? Will FDI (line 24) and equity flows (line 25) into the United States maintain their recent levels and perhaps even increase? Will U.S. corporate bonds (line 30) become a desirable asset class once again? And will U.S. investors step up their diversification into foreign markets?
An oddity in recent BOP data is U.S. government assets abroad (line 14). Most years these flows are approximately zero, but in 2008 they were very large. Reason: Included in this category are the currency swaps initiated by the Fed. When they were put on (in 2008), they were recorded as large outflows; as they were undone n 2009, a large inflow was recorded. Over time these currency swaps are designed to sum to zero in BOP terms.
16
17
Endnotes
1. Robert Triffin, Gold and the Dollar Crisis: The Future of Convertibility (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961).
2. Henny Sender, “China to Stick with U.S. Bonds,” FT.com, February 11, 2009.
3. See http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/02/23/the-euro-could-surpass-the-dollar-within%2010-years/.
4. The baseline CBO forecast must assume policies remain as they currently are, which means that temporary spending provisions are assumed
to expire, even if in practice they are often extended. For a discussion of various deficit and debt forecasts, see Alan Auerbach and William Gale,
“Déjà Vu All Over Again: On the Dismal Prospects for the Federal Budget” (Brookings Institution mimeograph, 2010), which notes that the
main concern is not in deficits over the next year or two, but medium- and long-term deficits.
5. Laubach’s analysis is explicitly about five-year projections of deficits (and debt), so one should caution against using it to make statements
about the impact of cyclical deficits. It is more appropriate for longer-term fiscal trends. See Thomas Laubach, “New Evidence on the Interest
Rate Effects of Budget Deficits and Debt,” Journal of the European Economic Association, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 858–885.
6. David Malpass, chief economist of Bear Stearns, quoted in “Their Money, Our Strength,” Wall Street Journal, August 5, 2004.
7. See Francis E Warnock and Veronica Cacdac Warnock, “International Capital Flows and U.S. Interest Rates,” Journal of International Money
and Finance, vol. 28 (2009), pp. 90319.
8. For a more eloquent discussion of salient features of the U.S. Treasury market, see Brian Sack, “Dollar Asset Markets: Prospects after the Crisis,”
remarks at the ACI 2010 World Congress, Sydney, Australia, March 26, 2010.
9. See, for example, Jacques Delpla and Jakob von Weizsäcker, “The Blue Bond Proposal,” Bruegel Policy Brief 2010/03.
10. See Sack, “Dollar Asset Markets.”
11. These adjustments, developed by Charles Thomas, Francis E. Warnock, and Jon Wongswan in “The Performance of International Equity
Portfolios” (NBER Working Paper 12346, 2006) and refined by Carol Bertaut and Ralph Tryon in “Monthly Estimates of U.S. Cross-Border
Securities Positions” (FRB International Finance Discussion Paper No. 910, 2007), are updated each year on http://www.federalreserve.gov/
pubs/ifdp/2007/910/default.htm.
12. The transactions center bias in the TIC data on long-term securities flows derives from the fact that the respondents are asked to identify the
country through which the transaction was made, which can differ from the country of the ultimate buyer (in the case of inflows) or of the issuer
(in the case of outflows). Liabilities data collected on a custodial basis can also have a bias if the custodian and ultimate investor reside in different
countries. To see that the Federal Reserve adjustment is largely a removal of the transaction center bias, note that for Treasury bills, which are
collected by the TIC system on a custodial basis, the discrepancy between TIC and BOP data is quite modest.
13. Note that even with all available information, there is nothing pristine about transactions-based international capital flows data collected for
BOP purposes. A fundamental difficulty with such a data collection system is that it asks reporters to submit data that they would never collect on
their own. A financial intermediary would not naturally care about the residency of the parties on either side of a trade, but that is exactly what
BOP accounting rules ask them to do. More natural might be to obtain higher frequency reads on cross-border positions, something naturally
collected by custodians, and use them to calculate flows.
18
About the Author
Francis E. Warnock is Paul M. Hammaker associate professor of business administration at the Darden
Business School, University of Virginia, research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research,
senior fellow at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas’s Globalization and Monetary Policy Institute, and research
associate at Trinity College Dublin’s Institute for International Integration Studies.
Sunday, October 2, 2011
2008 GE12 results
Banner King
2011年1月23日 星期日
2008年马来西亚第12届全国大选最新成绩(国席)
玻璃市：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P1 巴东勿剎 (PADANG BESAR) (国阵巫统) 阿兹米卡立 16,991 57.97 (回教党) 朱卡南 11,643 5,348 674 80.05 36,613
2 P2 加央 (KANGAR) (国阵巫统) 拉西 23,821 68.49 (公正党) 东姑阿都拉曼 10,150 13,671 808 80.17 43,591
3 P3 亚娄 (ARAU) (国阵巫统) 依斯迈拿卡欣 16,451 49.57 (回教党) 哈仑汀 16,151 300 586 83.23 39,877
吉打：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P4 浮罗交怡 (LANGKAWI) (国阵巫统) 阿布峇卡 13,762 59.26 (公正党) 旺沙列 8,792 4,970 670 78.55 29,567
2 P5 尤崙 (JERLUN) (国阵巫统) 慕克力马哈迪 19,424 52.16 (回教党) 依德利斯阿末 17,219 2,205 599 81.83 45,513
3 P6 古邦巴素 (KUBANG PASU) (国阵巫统) 佐哈里 24,179 57.26 (回教党) 依沙依斯迈 17,119 7,060 928 79.19 53,323
4 P7 巴东得腊 (PADANG TERAP) (回教党) 莫哈末纳希 15,003 49.34 (国阵巫统) 卡查里 14,634 369 770 86.00 35,403
5 P8 波各先那 (POKOK SENA) (回教党) 马夫兹 29,687 54.29 (国阵巫统) 阿都拉曼依布拉欣 23,956 5,731 1,039 79.44 69,631
6 P9 亚罗士打 (ALOR SETAR) (国阵马华) 曹智雄 20,741 48.17 (公正党) 魏晓隆 20,557 184 1,757 73.28 58,957
7 P10 吉打港口 (KUALA KEDAH) (公正党) 阿末卡欣 35,689 54.28 (国阵巫统) 哈欣耶也 28,671 7,018 1,385 79.08 83,132
8 P11 本同 (PENDANG) (回教党) 莫哈末哈耶迪 27,311 52.99 (国阵巫统) 罗再沙菲岸 23,238 4,073 991 84.19 61,346
9 P12 日莱 (JERAI) (回教党) 莫哈末费道斯 26,510 51.19 (国阵巫统) 峇达鲁丁 24,211 2,299 1,070 78.78 65,739
10 P13 锡 (SIK) (回教党) 仄乌达仄聂 16,864 49.96 (国阵巫统) 奥士曼帝沙 16,383 481 505 86.15 40,339
11 P14 傌莫 (MERBOK) (公正党) 拉昔丁 25,541 51.78 (国阵巫统) 达祖乌鲁斯 22,443 3,098 1,338 77.15 64,443
12 P15 双溪大年 (SUNGAI PETANI) (公正党) 佐哈里阿都 33,822 57.08 (国阵巫统) 再努丁麦丁 24,441 9,381 986 77.84 76,284
13 P16 华玲 (BALING) (回教党) 泰益阿占慕丁 36,074 54.92 (国阵巫统) 阿都阿兹拉欣 28,461 7,613 1,154 83.74 78,784
14 P17 巴东色海 (PADANG SERAI) (公正党) 哥巴拉克里斯南 28,774 61.13 (国阵马华) 梅振仁 17,036 11,738 1,259 79.58 59,218
15 P18 居林万拉峇鲁 (KULIM-BANDAR BAHARU) (公正党) 朱基菲里诺丁 22,255 55.71 (国阵巫统) 阿都阿兹 16,672 5,583 1,022 77.28 51,995
吉兰丹：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P19 道北 (TUMPAT) (回教党) 卡玛鲁丁查化 36,714 56.41 (国阵巫统) 阿斯拉夫华迪 27,337 9,377 1,032 81.49 80,072
2 P20 彭加兰吉巴 (PENGKALAN CHEPA) (回教党) 阿都哈林 26,763 62.56 (国阵巫统) 拉欣奥斯曼 15,452 11,311 564 82.23 52,350
3 P21 哥打峇鲁 (KOTA BHARU) (回教党) 旺阿都拉欣 32,129 59.97 (国阵巫统) 法米仄沙列 20,841 11,288 609 78.68 68,261
4 P22 巴西马 (PASIR MAS) (回教党) 依布拉欣阿里 28,673 58.26 (国阵巫统) 罗斯迪玛哈末 19,682 8,991 864 82.74 59,640
5 P23 兰斗班让 (RANTAU PANJANG) (回教党) 茜蒂再拉 19,344 54.69 (国阵巫统) 莫哈末阿芬迪 14,858 4,486 837 78.11 45,384
6 P24 古邦阁亮 (KUBANG KERIAN) (回教党) 沙拉胡丁阿约 27,179 61.28 (国阵巫统) 阿都甘尼玛末 16,537 10,642 638 83.14 53,496
7 P25 万捷 (BACHOK) (回教党) 纳沙鲁丁 28,835 51.88 (国阵巫统) 阿旺阿迪 25,934 2,901 811 85.98 64,808
8 P26 格底里 (KETEREH) (公正党) 阿都阿兹 21,738 49.33 (国阵巫统) 安努亚慕沙 21,338 400 993 84.95 52,240
9 P27 丹那美拉 (TANAH MERAH) (公正党) 安南甘尼 17,554 48.72 (国阵巫统) 沙哈里哈山 15,970 1,584 1,064 81.46 44,347
10 P28 巴西富地 (PASIR PUTEH) (回教党) 莫哈末胡欣 28,365 52.87 (国阵巫统) 安兰末诺 24,397 3,968 886 83.52 64,393
11 P29 马樟 (MACHANG) (公正党) 赛夫丁 21,041 50.86 (国阵巫统) 沙兹米 19,581 1,460 748 84.41 49,157
12 P30 日里 (JELI) (国阵巫统) 慕斯达法 17,168 56.52 (回教党) 莫哈末阿邦迪 12,732 4,436 474 84.18 36,298
13 P31 瓜拉吉赖 (KUALA KRAI) (回教党) 莫哈末哈达南利 23,562 54.93 (国阵巫统) 仄慕沙 18,578 4,984 756 82.32 52,250
14 P32 话望生 (GUA MUSANG) (国阵巫统) 东姑拉沙里 14,063 58.06 (回教党) 祖基菲莫哈末 9,669 4,394 489 83.77 28,986
登嘉楼：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P33 勿述 (BESUT) (国阵巫统) 阿都拉辛 29,376 60.16 (回教党) 胡辛阿旺 18,786 10,590 668 84.49 58,353
2 P34 士兆 (SETIU) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末基汀 26,610 56.83 (回教党) 莫哈末宝兹慕达 19,378 7,232 833 85.88 54,520
3 P35 瓜拉尼鲁斯 (KUALA NERUS) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末纳西依布拉欣 26,439 50.60 (回教党) 慕哈曼苏克里姆 25,098 1,341 713 85.83 61,214
4 P36 瓜拉登嘉楼 (KUALA TERENGGANU) (国阵巫统) 拉查理依斯迈 32,562 49.25 (回教党) 莫哈末沙布 31,934 628 931 82.45 80,325
5 P37 马江 (MARANG) (回教党) 哈迪阿旺 33,435 51.49 (国阵巫统) 阿末兰兹 30,688 2,747 806 86.89 74,813
6 P38 乌鲁登嘉楼 (HULU TERENGGANU) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末诺奥斯曼 27,784 60.64 (回教党) 卡玛鲁查曼阿都拉 17,324 10,460 709 87.54 52,515
7 P39 龙运 (DUNGUN) (国阵巫统) 马督里迪祖索 29,264 53.73 (公正党) 三苏依斯干达尤斯里 24,270 4,994 930 83.98 64,851
8 P40 甘马挽 (KEMAMAN) (国阵巫统) 阿末沙比里 37,199 59.24 (公正党) 法里兹慕沙 24,516 12,683 1,077 83.82 75,006
檳城：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P41 甲拋峇底 (KEPALA BATAS) (国阵巫统) 阿都拉 23,445 64.63 (回教党) 索比利莫哈末亚尔沙 12,199 11,246 634 84.45 43,018
2 P42 打西汝莪 (TASEK GELUGOR) (国阵巫统) 诺莫哈末 20,448 55.34 (回教党) 依斯迈沙烈 15,901 4,547 600 87.98 44,466
3 P43 峇眼 (BAGAN) (行动党) 林冠英 33,748 73.06 (国阵马华) 宋彩苓 11,678 22,070 766 77.84 59,385
4 P44 峇东埔 (PERMATANG PAUH) (公正党) 旺阿兹莎 30,338 64.01 (国阵巫统) 菲道斯 16,950 13,388 110 81.10 58,449
5 P45 大山脚 (BUKIT MERTAJAM) (行动党) 章瑛 37,882 72.51 (国阵马华) 王嵣荃 13,431 24,451 931 79.31 64,080
6 P46 峇都交湾 (BATU KAWAN) (行动党) 拉玛沙米 23,067 61.86 (国阵民政党) 许子根 13,582 9,485 640 78.70 47,378
7 P47 高渊 (NIBONG TEBAL) (公正党) 陈智铭 20,210 53.02 (国阵巫统) 再纳阿比丁 17,123 3,087 784 80.20 47,540
8 P48 升旗山 (BUKIT BENDERA) (行动党) 刘镇东 31,243 66.45 (国阵民政党) 谢宽泰 15,131 16,112 642 72.98 64,545
9 P49 丹绒 (TANJONG) (行动党) 曹观友 28,248 73.11 (国阵民政党) 许文思 9,759 18,489 631 72.80 53,188
10 P50 日落洞 (JELUTONG) (行动党) 黄泉安 30,493 65.77 (国阵民政党) 涂仲仪 14,247 16,246 743 74.56 61,181
11 P51 武吉牛汝莪 (BUKIT GELUGOR) (行动党) 卡巴星 35,140 70.32 (国阵马华) 郭家驊 14,125 21,015 707 76.16 65,614
12 P52 峇央峇鲁 (BAYAN BARU) (公正党) 再林 27,618 61.56 (国阵马华) 黄秀金 16,589 11,029 655 73.90 60,713
13 P53 浮罗山背 (BALIK PULAU) (公正党) 尤斯马尼 15,749 50.17 (国阵巫统) 诺莱莎 15,041 708 601 77.40 39,765
霹靂：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P54 宜力 (GERIK) (国阵民政党) 陈莲花 12,526 62.23 (回教党) 莫哈末诺 6,953 5,573 649 78.13 26,229
2 P55 玲瓏 (LENGGONG) (国阵巫统) 三苏安华 10,992 63.26 (回教党) 莫哈末祖基菲 6,073 4,919 311 75.08 23,223
3 P56 拉律 (LARUT) (国阵巫统) 韩沙查鲁汀 15,878 52.00 (回教党) 莫哈末达里 13,967 1,911 687 77.06 39,697
4 P57 巴里文打 (PARIT BUNTAR) (回教党) 慕加希 21,221 59.76 (国阵巫统) 阿都拉曼苏丽曼 13,670 7,551 618 78.71 45,219
5 P58 峇眼色海 (BAGAN SERAI) (公正党) 慕辛法兹利 18,943 53.12 (国阵巫统) 再纳阿比丁辛 15,530 3,413 1,186 76.92 47,111
6 P59 武吉干当 (BUKIT GANTANG) (回教党) 罗斯兰 20,015 49.80 (国阵巫统) 阿欣查比迪 18,449 1,566 851 72.65 55,471
7 P60 太平 (TAIPING) (行动党) 倪可敏 28,098 60.41 (国阵进步党) 卡维斯 16,800 11,298 1,612 71.52 65,889
8 P61 硝山 (PADANG RENGAS) (国阵巫统) 纳兹里 9,830 53.80 (公正党) 阿里亚斯再润 8,081 1,749 362 75.21 24,397
9 P62 和丰 (SUNGAI SIPUT) (公正党) 再也古玛 16,458 49.93 (国阵国大党) 三美威鲁 14,637 1,821 1,001 69.91 47,424
10 P63 打捫 (TAMBUN) (国阵巫统) 阿末胡斯尼 27,942 54.34 (公正党) 莫哈末阿斯里 22,556 5,386 927 75.17 68,966
11 P64 怡保东区 (IPOH TIMOR) (行动党) 林吉祥 37,364 69.85 (国阵马华) 刘文汉 15,422 21,942 707 70.45 76,647
12 P65 怡保西区 (IPOH BARAT) (行动党) 古拉 32,576 64.57 (国阵马华) 易沛鸿 17,042 15,534 829 72.58 69,773
13 P66 华都牙也 (BATU GAJAH) (行动党) 冯宝君 39,922 71.13 (国阵马华) 谢玉权 15,295 24,627 911 72.78 77,313
14 P67 江沙 (KUALA KANGSAR) (国阵巫统) 拉菲达 10,735 52.66 (回教党) 凯鲁丁 9,277 1,458 373 73.34 28,325
15 P68 木威 (BERUAS) (行动党) 倪可汉 15,831 51.53 (国阵民政党) 郑可扬 14,003 1,828 889 71.22 43,273
16 P69 巴力 (PARIT) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末尼沙 12,399 54.98 (回教党) 娜芝哈 9,526 2,873 628 78.30 28,859
17 P70 金宝 (KAMPAR) (国阵马华) 李志亮 20,126 52.14 (行动党) 龚明勋 17,429 2,697 1,048 65.16 59,784
18 P71 务边 (GOPENG) (公正党) 李文材 29,696 55.71 (国阵马华) 林熙隆 22,328 7,368 1,279 71.70 74,344
19 P72 打巴 (TAPAH) (国阵国大党) 沙拉瓦南 14,084 52.53 (公正党) 陈升德 11,064 3,020 1,662 70.12 38,236
20 P73 巴西沙叻 (PASIR SALAK) (国阵巫统) 达祖丁 16,928 52.71 (公正党) 慕斯达化卡米尔 14,240 2,688 950 75.20 42,712
21 P74 红土坎 (LUMUT) (国阵马华) 江作汉 25,698 48.50 (公正党) 苏华迪沙夫万 25,400 298 1,884 72.81 72,766
22 P75 峇眼拿督 (BAGAN DATOK) (国阵巫统) 阿末扎希 13,115 53.86 (公正党) 马兹哈山 10,423 2,692 814 70.42 34,670
23 P76 安顺 (TELUK INTAN) (行动党) 马诺佳能 18,486 50.43 (国阵民政党) 马袖强 17,016 1,470 1,153 70.17 52,354
24 P77 丹绒马林 (TANJONG MALIM) (国阵马华) 黄家泉 21,016 55.37 (公正党) 莫哈末阿兹曼 15,594 5,422 1,344 71.25 53,481
彭亨：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P78 金马崙高原 (CAMERON HIGHLANDS) (国阵国大党) 迪温玛尼 9,164 55.89 (行动党) 亚巴拉三美 6,047 3,117 1,186 70.14 23,461
2 P79 立卑 (LIPIS) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末沙仑 12,611 58.26 (回教党) 莫哈末聂南 8,474 4,137 561 76.55 28,425
3 P80 劳勿 (RAUB) (国阵马华) 黄燕燕 18,078 52.68 (行动党) 阿布巴卡 15,326 2,752 915 74.18 46,454
4 P81 而连突 (JERANTUT) (国阵巫统) 东姑阿兹兰沙 19,543 51.47 (回教党) 韩沙惹化 17,597 1,946 829 78.01 48,812
5 P82 英迪拉马哥打 (INDERA MAHKOTA) (公正党) 阿占依斯迈 19,823 50.43 (国阵巫统) 沙拉蒙阿里 18,796 1,027 688 77.44 51,235
6 P83 关丹 (KUANTAN) (公正党) 傅芝雅 18,398 51.69 (国阵马华) 胡亚桥 16,572 1,826 623 74.92 47,745
7 P84 巴耶勿沙 (PAYA BESAR) (国阵巫统) 拿督阿都马南 19,355 62.75 (公正党) 莫哈末杰菲里 10,852 8,503 637 77.45 39,882
8 P85 北根 (PEKAN) (国阵巫统) 纳吉 36,262 76.63 (公正党) 凯鲁安华 9,798 26,464 1,261 82.23 58,217
9 P86 马兰 (MARAN) (国阵巫统) 依斯迈慕达利 15,868 62.01 (回教党) 纳斯鲁丁 9,227 6,641 495 78.95 32,517
10 P87 瓜拉吉挠 (KUALA KRAU) (国阵巫统) 依斯迈莫哈末赛 16,165 58.69 (回教党) 卡马沙利 10,900 5,265 479 80.83 34,139
11 P88 淡马鲁 (TEMERLOH) (国阵巫统) 赛夫丁 21,381 51.84 (公正党) 阿末尼占 18,940 2,441 924 76.37 54,010
12 P89 文冬 (BENTONG) (国阵马华) 廖中莱 25,134 64.44 (公正党) 波罗沙美 12,585 12,549 1,285 73.01 53,651
13 P90 百乐 (BERA) (国阵巫统) 依斯迈沙比利 18,051 54.59 (回教党) 马兹兰阿利曼 14,230 3,821 783 76.91 42,993
14 P91 云冰 (ROMPIN) (国阵巫统) 贾马鲁丁 21,308 65.04 (回教党) 马兹兰耶欣 10,629 10,679 824 79.04 41,701
雪兰莪：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P92 沙白安南 (SABAK BERNAM) (国阵巫统) 阿都拉曼 12,055 51.33 (公正党) 峇鲁阿敏 10,720 1,335 711 75.00 31,381
2 P93 大港 (SUNGAI BESAR) (国阵巫统) 诺丽雅 16,069 57.83 (回教党) 奥斯曼沙布朗 11,060 5,009 656 81.69 34,073
3 P94 乌鲁雪兰莪 (ULU SELANGOR) (公正党) 再纳阿比丁 23,177 48.67 (国阵国大党) G.巴拉尼威 22,979 198 1,466 74.89 63,593
4 P95 丹绒加弄 (TANJONG KARANG) (国阵巫统) 诺奥玛 16,073 55.42 (回教党) 莫哈末哈尼巴 12,253 3,820 674 79.83 36,391
5 P96 瓜拉雪兰莪 (KUALA SELANGOR) (回教党) 祖基菲里阿末 18,796 49.96 (国阵巫统) 阿兹再也 17,934 862 894 79.81 47,203
6 P97 士拉央 (SELAYANG) (公正党) 梁自坚 30,701 50.60 (国阵马华) 李丽友 27,134 3,567 1,506 76.57 79,557
7 P98 鹅嘜 (GOMBAK) (公正党) 阿兹敏阿里 40,334 54.05 (国阵巫统) 赛安华 33,467 6,867 820 76.26 99,153
8 P99 安邦 (AMPANG) (公正党) 祖莱达 26,995 52.98 (国阵巫统) 阿兹曼 23,319 3,676 636 73.70 69,132
9 P100 班登 (PANDAN) (国阵马华) 翁诗杰 25,236 52.24 (公正党) 赛沙希尔 22,275 2,961 798 74.90 64,497
10 P101 乌鲁冷岳 (HULU LANGAT) (回教党) 茦罗斯利 36,124 50.24 (国阵巫统) 马基曼 34,379 1,745 1,401 80.02 90,319
11 P102 沙登 (SERDANG) (行动党) 张念群 47,444 62.48 (国阵马华) 何啟利 26,419 21,025 2,072 80.35 94,877
12 P103 蒲种 (PUCHONG) (行动党) 哥宾星 35,079 60.77 (国阵民政党) 卢永平 22,486 12,593 158 78.44 75,625
13 P104 格拉那再也 (KELANA JAYA) (公正党) 罗国本 30,298 51.77 (国阵马华) 李华民 25,267 5,031 1,065 73.61 79,649
14 P105 八打灵再也南区 (PJ SELATAN) (公正党) 许来贤 28,598 54.44 (国阵马华) 林祥才 22,892 5,706 1,044 71.91 73,192
15 P106 八打灵再也北区 (PJ UTARA) (行动党) 潘俭伟 37,851 67.28 (国阵马华) 周美芬 17,879 19,972 527 73.47 76,618
16 P107 梳邦 (SUBANG) (公正党) 西华拉沙 35,024 53.54 (国阵国大党) 慕鲁根山 28,315 6,709 2,079 78.02 84,414
17 P108 沙亚南 (SHAH ALAM) (回教党) 卡利阿都沙末 33,356 57.36 (国阵巫统) 阿都阿兹三苏汀 24,042 9,314 749 77.47 75,334
18 P109 加埔 (KAPAR) (公正党) 马尼卡瓦沙甘 48,196 55.30 (国阵国大党) 柯玛拉 35,899 12,297 3,064 78.10 112,224
19 P110 巴生 (KLANG) (行动党) 查尔斯圣地亚哥 37,990 64.05 (国阵马华) 庄祷融 20,289 17,701 1,036 76.23 77,816
20 P111 哥打拉惹 (KOTA RAJA) (回教党) 希蒂玛丽亚 38,630 67.39 (国阵国大党) 威尼斯瓦兰 17,879 20,751 814 79.74 71,887
21 P112 瓜拉冷岳 (KUALA LANGAT) (公正党) 阿都拉沙尼 26,687 50.55 (国阵巫统) 哈芝苏莱曼 25,698 989 407 79.37 66,515
22 P113 雪邦 (SEPANG) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末欣 26,381 53.83 (回教党) 莫哈末玛奇 21,532 4,849 1,099 79.20 62,044
吉隆坡联邦直辖区：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P114 甲洞 (KEPONG) (行动党) 陈胜尧 35,552 74.90 (国阵民政党) 刘开强 11,704 23,848 212 78.10 60,775
2 P115 峇都 (BATU) (公正党) 蔡添强 29,785 58.71 (国阵民政党) 林时彬 20,330 9,455 614 72.72 70,544
3 P116 旺沙马朱 (WANGSA MAJU) (公正党) 黄朱强 19,637 49.74 (国阵马华) 姚长禄 19,487 150 357 73.01 54,509
4 P117 泗岩沫 (SEGAMBUT) (行动党) 林立迎 25,046 58.38 (国阵民政党) 马伟祺 17,314 7,732 541 72.93 59,690
5 P118 斯迪亚旺沙 (SETIAWANGSA) (国阵巫统) 朱哈斯南 25,489 58.24 (公正党) 依布拉欣 17,355 8,134 918 76.56 57,161
6 P119 帝帝皇沙 (TITIWANGSA) (回教党) 洛洛莫哈末卡扎里 17,857 52.62 (国阵巫统) 阿兹加马鲁丁 15,885 1,972 191 68.01 49,892
7 P120 武吉免登 (BUKIT BINTANG) (行动党) 方贵伦 26,811 67.35 (国阵马华) 李崇孟 12,534 14,277 466 66.37 59,986
8 P121 班底谷 (LEMBAH PANTAI) (公正党) 努鲁依莎 21,728 52.62 (国阵巫统) 莎丽扎 18,833 2,895 239 72.88 56,650
9 P122 士布爹 (SEPUTEH) (行动党) 郭素沁 47,230 81.23 (国阵马华) 周紫琳 10,738 36,492 174 75.70 76,891
10 P123 蕉赖 (CHERAS) (行动党) 陈国伟 39,253 77.81 (国阵马华) 吴心一 10,953 28,300 244 73.58 68,725
11 P124 敦拉萨镇 (BANDAR TUN RAZAK) (公正党) 卡立依布拉欣 28,123 51.66 (国阵马华) 陈财和 25,608 2,515 707 75.72 72,628
布城联邦直辖区：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P125 布城 (PUTRAJAYA) (国阵巫统) 东姑安南 4,038 75.06 (回教党) 莫哈末诺 1,304 2,734 38 81.96 6,608
森美兰：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P126 日叻务 (JELEBU) (国阵巫统) 莱士雅丁 19,737 68.93 (回教党) 诺曼依彬 8,127 11,610 769 75.05 38,682
2 P127 仁保 (JEMPOL) (国阵巫统) 利拉耶辛 25,294 64.33 (回教党) 茜蒂玛丽亚 12,974 12,320 1,054 73.53 53,478
3 P128 芙蓉 (SEREMBAN) (行动党) 约翰费南迪 32,970 51.32 (国阵马华) 尤绰韜 29,022 3,948 2,248 76.10 84,675
4 P129 瓜拉庇劳 (KUALA PILAH) (国阵巫统) 哈山马力 20,417 64.34 (公正党) 安华莫哈末沙烈 10,409 10,008 908 74.79 42,328
5 P130 亚沙 (RASAH) (行动党) 陆兆福 34,271 60.49 (国阵马华) 姚再添 21,120 13,151 1,261 78.56 72,115
6 P131 林茂 (REMBAU) (国阵巫统) 凯里 26,525 54.82 (公正党) 巴都鲁希山 20,779 5,746 1,086 77.75 62,896
7 P132 直落甘望 (TELOK KEMANG) (公正党) 卡玛鲁巴哈林 23,348 50.99 (国阵国大党) 索迪纳登 20,544 2,804 1,299 77.45 60,186
8 P133 淡边 (TAMPIN) (国阵巫统) 沙兹曼 24,022 66.58 (回教党) 拉查吉 10,943 13,079 1,115 76.24 47,655
马六甲：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P134 马日丹那 (MASJID TANAH) (国阵巫统) 阿布瑟曼尤索夫 21,582 68.31 (回教党) 阿都甘尼 9,297 12,285 717 78.10 40,606
2 P135 亚罗牙也 (ALOR GAJAH) (国阵马华) 冯镇安 26,354 63.08 (行动党) 陈丽香 13,470 12,884 1,953 77.37 54,097
3 P136 冬牙峇株 (TANGGA BATU) (国阵巫统) 伊德利斯哈仑 30,460 61.32 (公正党) 再农嘉化 15,960 14,500 3,255 82.53 60,188
4 P137 武吉卡迪 (BUKIT KATIL) (国阵巫统) 末西蜡阿布 30,975 50.48 (公正党) 卡立耶化 29,217 1,758 1,173 81.92 75,777
5 P138 马六甲市区 (KOTA MELAKA) (行动党) 沉同钦 38,640 57.38 (国阵马华) 王乃志 27,250 11,390 1,448 79.57 84,805
6 P139 野新 (JASIN) (国阵巫统) 阿末韩查 27,838 63.02 (公正党) 祖吉菲礼 15,348 12,490 990 78.72 56,121
柔佛：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P140 昔加末 (SEGAMAT) (国阵国大党) 苏巴马廉 15,921 53.61 (行动党) 彭学良 12,930 2,991 847 72.96 40,708
2 P141 士基央 (SEKIJANG) (国阵巫统) 巴哈仑 17,979 67.30 (公正党) 祖基菲沙烈 8,112 9,867 622 76.03 35,138
3 P142 拉美士 (LABIS) (国阵马华) 蔡智勇 13,658 56.82 (行动党) 张颖群 9,564 4,094 816 71.95 33,468
4 P143 巴莪 (PAGOH) (国阵巫统) 慕尤丁 21,028 69.49 (回教党) 莫哈末罗查礼 8,447 12,581 787 75.70 40,042
5 P144 礼让 (LEDANG) (国阵巫统) 哈敏 25,319 56.96 (公正党) 刘德海 17,702 7,617 1,433 75.99 58,501
6 P145 峇吉里 (BAKRI) (行动党) 余德华 21,051 49.02 (国阵马华) 郑贝川 20,329 722 1,561 76.55 56,372
7 P146 麻坡 (MUAR) (国阵巫统) 拉查里 16,986 56.22 (公正党) 娜布汀 12,325 4,661 902 73.81 41,019
8 P147 巴力士隆 (PARIT SULONG) (国阵巫统) 诺莱妮 26,066 65.88 (回教党) 费沙阿里 12,467 13,599 1,033 78.91 50,234
9 P148 亚依淡 (AYER HITAM) (国阵马华) 魏家祥 20,230 73.68 (回教党) 胡申苏嘉 6,321 13,909 907 78.98 34,805
10 P149 四加亭 (SRI GADING) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末阿兹士 19,641 67.39 (公正党) 阿里玛贡 8,767 10,874 738 79.43 36,845
11 P150 峇株巴辖 (BATU PAHAT) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末卜艾 32,461 60.13 (公正党) 莫哈末阿都拉 19,757 12,704 1,768 77.21 70,069
12 P151 新邦令金 (SIMPANG RENGGAM) (国阵民政党) 梁德明 16,450 63.34 (回教党) 阿丹贡邦 8,597 7,853 924 74.58 34,859
13 P152 居鑾 (KLUANG) (国阵马华) 何国忠 27,970 51.76 (行动党) 黄南华 24,189 3,781 1,884 76.60 71,233
14 P153 森波浪 (SEMBRONG) (国阵巫统) 希山慕丁 17,988 71.54 (公正党) 李尚 6,418 11,570 739 75.98 33,181
15 P154 丰盛港 (MERSING) (国阵巫统) 阿都拉迪夫 20,116 73.54 (回教党) 沙哈尔阿都拉 6,380 13,736 857 75.59 36,445
16 P155 东南镇 (TENGGARA) (国阵巫统) 哈丽玛 19,031 75.08 (回教党) 沙烈法敏 4,982 14,049 1,336 78.49 32,297
17 P156 哥打丁宜 (KOTA TINGGI) (国阵巫统) 赛哈密 22,682 83.83 (回教党) 翁嘉化 3,721 18,961 653 79.29 34,190
18 P157 边佳兰 (PENGERANG) (国阵巫统) 阿莎丽娜 不战而胜 33,002
19 P158 地不佬 (TEBRAU) (国阵马华) 邓文村 30,860 63.51 (回教党) 罗斯来尼 16,202 14,658 1,525 77.73 62,505
20 P159 巴西古当 (PASIR GUDANG) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末卡立 35,849 64.44 (公正党) 末尼占莫哈末沙曼 18,568 17,281 1,211 76.71 72,862
21 P160 新山 (JOHOR BAHRU) (国阵巫统) 沙里尔 43,143 69.22 (人民党) 哈山卡林 17,794 25,349 1,391 69.59 89,725
22 P161 埔来 (PULAI) (国阵巫统) 诺加兹兰 38,036 67.08 (回教党) 阿都拉 17,587 20,449 1,079 71.42 79,622
23 P162 振林山 (GELANG PATAH) (国阵马华) 曾亚英 33,630 55.45 (公正党) 查丽哈 24,779 8,851 2,244 77.19 78,676
24 P163 古来 (KULAI) (国阵马华) 黄家定 32,017 59.71 (行动党) 吴柏松 20,273 11,744 1,327 79.69 67,358
25 P164 笨珍 (PONTIAN) (国阵巫统) 阿末玛士兰 23,121 70.48 (公正党) 莫哈末安努亚 8,677 14,444 1,008 75.83 43,264
26 P165 丹绒比艾 (TANJONG PIAI) (国阵马华) 黄日升 23,302 65.92 (行动党) 阿末顿 10,931 12,371 1,117 77.35 45,701
纳闽联邦直辖区：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P166 纳闽 (LABUAN) (国阵巫统) 尤索夫玛哈 10,471 75.32 (独立人士) 刘成吉 2,014 8,457 311 68.08 20,783
沙巴：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P167 古达 (KUDAT) (国阵巫统) 阿都拉欣巴克里 17,634 66.72 (公正党) 耶也奥曼 7,739 9,895 1,058 66.98 39,643
2 P168 马鲁都 (KOTA MARUDU) (国阵团结党) 麦西慕 12,028 54.25 (公正党) 安东尼曼帝奥 7,830 4,198 748 69.51 31,938
3 P169 哥打毛律 (KOTA BELUD) (国阵巫统) 阿都拉曼达兰 17,842 52.93 (公正党) 沙依帝西莫依 14,822 3,020 1,046 78.27 43,071
4 P170 斗亚兰 (TUARAN) (国阵民统) 威弗烈邦布琳 17,645 57.80 (公正党) 安沙里阿都拉 11,023 6,622 979 74.89 40,761
5 P171 昔邦加 (SEPANGGAR) (国阵沙进步党) 依力马贞文 16,884 62.99 (公正党) 莫哈末依巴拉欣 5,423 11,461 790 68.76 39,251
6 P172 亚庇 (KOTA KINABALU) (行动党) 邱庆洲 9,464 33.89 (公正党) 刘静芝 9,358 106 340 64.09 43,714
7 P173 布达丹 (PUTATAN) (国阵民统) 马京马古斯莫吉高 13,737 60.90 (公正党) 少吉那尤索夫 7,292 6,445 608 66.68 34,935
8 P174 兵南邦 (PENAMPANG) (国阵民统) 柏纳东博 13,400 52.80 (公正党) 爱尔文波西 10,337 3,063 540 70.84 35,821
9 P175 吧巴 (PAPAR) (国阵巫统) 罗丝娜拉西 15,352 62.72 (公正党) 瓦合依德利斯 5,778 9,574 651 75.84 32,276
10 P176 金马利 (KIMANIS) (国阵巫统) 阿尼法阿曼 10,242 59.03 (独立人士) 查阿法依斯迈 4,789 5,453 500 78.09 22,239
11 P177 保佛 (BEAUFORT) (国阵巫统) 拉京奥津 14,780 76.47 (公正党) 拉津尤索夫 3,866 10,914 681 72.22 26,788
12 P178 实必丹 (SIPITANG) (国阵巫统) 沙巴威阿末 11,905 65.43 (公正党) 卡林达欣 5,759 6,146 531 75.00 24,145
13 P179 兰瑙 (RANAU) (国阵民统) 系林安古巴 14,074 63.49 (公正党) 佐纳丹耶辛 6,823 7,251 653 72.06 30,810
14 P180 根地咬 (KENINGAU) (国阵团结党) 拜林吉丁岸 14,958 56.84 (公正党) 杰菲里吉丁岸 10,334 4,624 464 73.97 35,578
15 P181 丹南 (TENOM) (国阵巫统) 莱米翁吉 9,535 60.76 (公正党) 安德利斯达利宾 2,652 6,883 523 75.20 20,874
16 P182 冰厢岸 (PENSIANGAN) (国阵人民团结) 佐瑟古律 不战而胜 19,712
17 P183 柏鲁兰 (BELURAN) (国阵巫统) 罗纳建迪 7,090 57.58 (独立人士) 兰沙达欣 2,738 4,352 468 64.00 19,181
18 P184 里巴兰 (LIBARAN) (国阵巫统) 朱斯里阿基罗 13,668 66.93 (公正党) 阿末丹林再尼 6,139 7,529 613 65.33 31,435
19 P185 巴都沙比 (BATU SAPI) (国阵团结党) 蒋国华 9,479 59.32 (独立人士) 钟广维 5,771 3,708 730 63.06 26,004
20 P186 山打根 (SANDAKAN) (国阵自民党) 刘伟强 8,297 41.50 (行动党) 章翠玲 8,121 176 644 61.00 32,847
21 P187 京那巴丹岸 (KINABATANGAN) (国阵巫统) 邦莫达拉丁 8,507 66.50 (公正党) 阿末阿都 2,181 6,326 589 66.00 19,554
22 P188 诗南 (SILAM) (国阵巫统) 沙礼卡比 18,111 66.05 (公正党) 哈斯布拉奥亨 8,319 9,792 989 63.37 43,488
23 P189 仙本那 (SEMPORNA) (国阵巫统) 沙菲益阿达 19,419 87.44 (公正党) 阿基斯阿都哈密 1,957 17,462 832 63.07 35,216
24 P190 斗湖 (TAWAU) (国阵沙进步党) 蔡顺梅 13,943 51.58 (行动党) 陈泓縑 9,076 4,867 735 63.52 42,560
25 P191 加拉巴干 (KALABAKAN) (国阵巫统) 阿都嘉夫 不战而胜 36,018
砂拉越：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P192 玛士加汀 (MAS GADING) (国阵民进党) 迪奇拉菲 8,551 57.89 (国民党) 巴岛鲁必士 4,250 4,301 188 67.37 21,968
2 P193 山都望 (SANTUBONG) (国阵土保党) 旺朱乃迪 15,800 79.39 (公正党) 拉末艾迪尔 3,855 11,945 248 64.73 30,836
3 P194 柏特拉再也 (PETRA JAYA) (国阵土保党) 法迪拉 19,515 78.39 (公正党) 莫哈末佐希 5,118 14,397 263 61.74 40,533
4 P195 古晋 (BANDAR KUCHING) (行动党) 张健仁 22,901 63.45 (国阵人联党) 沉耀荣 12,949 9,952 242 68.13 53,216
5 P196 实旦宾 (STAMPIN) (国阵人联党) 杨昆贤 21,966 50.51 (行动党) 温利山 18,896 3,070 428 65.31 67,257
6 P197 哥打三马拉汉 (KOTA SAMARAHAN) (国阵土保党) 苏莱曼泰益 15,559 72.61 (公正党) 胡先阿波 4,148 11,411 823 75.14 28,517
7 P198 曼旺 (MAMBONG) (国阵土保党) 詹姆士达弗 14,182 63.94 (公正党) 玛仁邦约 7,525 6,657 473 61.71 36,147
8 P199 西连 (SERIAN) (国阵人联党) 里察烈 15,793 85.41 (国民党) 柏拉勇阿纳查央 2,366 13,427 332 66.36 27,901
9 P200 峇丹砂隆 (BATANG SADONG) (国阵土保党) 南茜苏克利 8,183 73.65 (公正党) 毕依琳 2,758 5,425 170 66.21 16,794
10 P201 峇丹鲁巴 (BATANG LUPAR) (国阵土保党) 罗哈妮 11,015 76.59 (回教党) 阿邦依迪 2,923 8,092 193 64.21 22,417
11 P202 斯里阿曼 (SRI AMAN) (国阵砂人民党) 玛瑟古札 9,700 63.16 (独立人士) 古波阿纳鲁西 5,448 4,252 211 59.70 25,724
12 P203 鲁勃安都 (LUBOK ANTU) (国阵砂人民党) 威廉雅劳 6,769 56.28 (独立人士) 尼克拉斯巴威尔 5,159 1,610 99 69.97 17,190
13 P204 木中 (BETONG) (国阵土保党) 道格拉斯 13,708 85.93 (国民党) 史登里朱戈 1,999 11,709 246 72.22 22,088
14 P205 砂拉卓 (SARATOK) (国阵民进党) 惹拉因末萨 12,470 75.80 (公正党) 莫哈末耶也 3,764 8,706 218 68.66 23,982
15 P206 丹绒玛尼斯 (TANJONGＭANIS) (国阵土保党) 诺拉阿都拉曼 不战而胜 17,052
16 P207 伊干 (IGAN) (国阵土保党) 瓦合杜拉 不战而胜 15,735
17 P208 泗里街 (SARIKEI) (国阵人联党) 陈冠勋 10,588 47.98 (行动党) 黄华西 10,537 51 176 69.68 31,675
18 P209 如楼 (JULAU) (国阵砂人民党) 佐瑟沙朗 10,351 77.83 (公正党) 安布鲁斯拉邦 2,767 7,584 182 65.50 20,306
19 P210 加拿逸 (KANOWIT) (国阵砂人民党) 艾伦达干 不战而胜 17,613
20 P211 南兰 (LANANG) (国阵人联党) 张泰卿 19,476 56.71 (行动党) 黄培根 14,612 4,864 253 69.54 49,530
21 P212 诗巫 (SIBU) (国阵人联党) 刘会洲 19,138 52.61 (行动党) 黄和联 15,903 3,235 526 67.77 53,679
22 P213 沐胶 (MUKAH) (国阵土保党) 廖迈克 10,090 70.05 (独立人士) 海宾玛拉威因 3,792 6,298 521 63.17 22,851
23 P214 实兰沟 (SELANGAU) (国阵砂人民党) 佐瑟恩都鲁 不战而胜 20,057
24 P215 加帛 (KAPIT) (国阵土保党) 阿歷山大南达林奇 不战而胜 22,723
25 P216 乌鲁拉让 (HULU RAJANG) (国阵砂人民党) 比利阿必佐 6,590 59.08 (独立人士) 乔治拉贡 4,426 2,164 139 63.09 17,696
26 P217 民都鲁 (BINTULU) (国阵民进党) 张庆信 23,628 72.53 (行动党) 林素均 8,663 14,965 288 64.98 50,404
27 P218 实务地 (SIBUTI) (国阵土保党) 阿末莱 8,238 63.27 (公正党) 张有庆 4,590 3,648 192 58.84 22,143
28 P219 美里 (MIRI) (国阵人联党) 陈华贵 19,354 57.32 (行动党) 房保德 14,138 5,216 273 60.70 55,963
29 P220 峇南 (BARAM) (国阵民进党) 耶谷沙岸 7,996 66.00 (独立人士) 哥宾旺 3,952 4,044 167 49.65 24,425
30 P221 林梦 (LIMBANG) (国阵土保党) 哈斯比哈比波拉 6,427 52.29 (公正党) 刘烈贵 5,751 676 113 60.94 20,315
31 P222 老越 (LAWAS) (国阵土保党) 亨利宋艾贡 8,526 91.27 (公正党) 查巴苏友 734 7,792 82 59.44 15,717
发贴者 malaysia888 时间： 下午9:23
通过电子邮件发送
BlogThis!
共享给 Twitter
共享给 Facebook
0 评论:
发表评论
较新的帖子 较早的帖子 主页
订阅： 帖子评论 (Atom)
Malaysia777.com 大马最佳在线娱乐
以假筹码玩百家乐,2大马男子新国被控
还记得易胜博网站吗?
马六甲首长效应，地方政府严打非法马机
大马网球公开赛·锦织圭闯16强 达夫仁戈苦战晋级
疑遭内鬼爆料，扫荡15跑马机中心仅捣破1间
关注者
博客归档
▼ 2011 (14)
► 九月 (3)
► 八月 (1)
► 七月 (1)
► 六月 (4)
► 五月 (1)
► 四月 (2)
▼ 一月 (2)
2008年马来西亚第12届全国大选最新成绩(州席)
2008年马来西亚第12届全国大选最新成绩(国席)
► 2010 (1)
我的简介
malaysia888
查看我的完整个人资料
由 Blogger 强力驱动.
Malaysia888.com: 马来西亚人的赌博资讯网 - Malaysian Online Betting Guide
M88明陞:请您看张学友演唱会
2012年F1赛历:马来西亚第2站,新加坡第14站
水上德士直通金沙赌场!
Bodog博狗即将推出全新体育平台
一代千王"肥吕"走了
2011年1月23日 星期日
2008年马来西亚第12届全国大选最新成绩(国席)
玻璃市：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P1 巴东勿剎 (PADANG BESAR) (国阵巫统) 阿兹米卡立 16,991 57.97 (回教党) 朱卡南 11,643 5,348 674 80.05 36,613
2 P2 加央 (KANGAR) (国阵巫统) 拉西 23,821 68.49 (公正党) 东姑阿都拉曼 10,150 13,671 808 80.17 43,591
3 P3 亚娄 (ARAU) (国阵巫统) 依斯迈拿卡欣 16,451 49.57 (回教党) 哈仑汀 16,151 300 586 83.23 39,877
吉打：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P4 浮罗交怡 (LANGKAWI) (国阵巫统) 阿布峇卡 13,762 59.26 (公正党) 旺沙列 8,792 4,970 670 78.55 29,567
2 P5 尤崙 (JERLUN) (国阵巫统) 慕克力马哈迪 19,424 52.16 (回教党) 依德利斯阿末 17,219 2,205 599 81.83 45,513
3 P6 古邦巴素 (KUBANG PASU) (国阵巫统) 佐哈里 24,179 57.26 (回教党) 依沙依斯迈 17,119 7,060 928 79.19 53,323
4 P7 巴东得腊 (PADANG TERAP) (回教党) 莫哈末纳希 15,003 49.34 (国阵巫统) 卡查里 14,634 369 770 86.00 35,403
5 P8 波各先那 (POKOK SENA) (回教党) 马夫兹 29,687 54.29 (国阵巫统) 阿都拉曼依布拉欣 23,956 5,731 1,039 79.44 69,631
6 P9 亚罗士打 (ALOR SETAR) (国阵马华) 曹智雄 20,741 48.17 (公正党) 魏晓隆 20,557 184 1,757 73.28 58,957
7 P10 吉打港口 (KUALA KEDAH) (公正党) 阿末卡欣 35,689 54.28 (国阵巫统) 哈欣耶也 28,671 7,018 1,385 79.08 83,132
8 P11 本同 (PENDANG) (回教党) 莫哈末哈耶迪 27,311 52.99 (国阵巫统) 罗再沙菲岸 23,238 4,073 991 84.19 61,346
9 P12 日莱 (JERAI) (回教党) 莫哈末费道斯 26,510 51.19 (国阵巫统) 峇达鲁丁 24,211 2,299 1,070 78.78 65,739
10 P13 锡 (SIK) (回教党) 仄乌达仄聂 16,864 49.96 (国阵巫统) 奥士曼帝沙 16,383 481 505 86.15 40,339
11 P14 傌莫 (MERBOK) (公正党) 拉昔丁 25,541 51.78 (国阵巫统) 达祖乌鲁斯 22,443 3,098 1,338 77.15 64,443
12 P15 双溪大年 (SUNGAI PETANI) (公正党) 佐哈里阿都 33,822 57.08 (国阵巫统) 再努丁麦丁 24,441 9,381 986 77.84 76,284
13 P16 华玲 (BALING) (回教党) 泰益阿占慕丁 36,074 54.92 (国阵巫统) 阿都阿兹拉欣 28,461 7,613 1,154 83.74 78,784
14 P17 巴东色海 (PADANG SERAI) (公正党) 哥巴拉克里斯南 28,774 61.13 (国阵马华) 梅振仁 17,036 11,738 1,259 79.58 59,218
15 P18 居林万拉峇鲁 (KULIM-BANDAR BAHARU) (公正党) 朱基菲里诺丁 22,255 55.71 (国阵巫统) 阿都阿兹 16,672 5,583 1,022 77.28 51,995
吉兰丹：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P19 道北 (TUMPAT) (回教党) 卡玛鲁丁查化 36,714 56.41 (国阵巫统) 阿斯拉夫华迪 27,337 9,377 1,032 81.49 80,072
2 P20 彭加兰吉巴 (PENGKALAN CHEPA) (回教党) 阿都哈林 26,763 62.56 (国阵巫统) 拉欣奥斯曼 15,452 11,311 564 82.23 52,350
3 P21 哥打峇鲁 (KOTA BHARU) (回教党) 旺阿都拉欣 32,129 59.97 (国阵巫统) 法米仄沙列 20,841 11,288 609 78.68 68,261
4 P22 巴西马 (PASIR MAS) (回教党) 依布拉欣阿里 28,673 58.26 (国阵巫统) 罗斯迪玛哈末 19,682 8,991 864 82.74 59,640
5 P23 兰斗班让 (RANTAU PANJANG) (回教党) 茜蒂再拉 19,344 54.69 (国阵巫统) 莫哈末阿芬迪 14,858 4,486 837 78.11 45,384
6 P24 古邦阁亮 (KUBANG KERIAN) (回教党) 沙拉胡丁阿约 27,179 61.28 (国阵巫统) 阿都甘尼玛末 16,537 10,642 638 83.14 53,496
7 P25 万捷 (BACHOK) (回教党) 纳沙鲁丁 28,835 51.88 (国阵巫统) 阿旺阿迪 25,934 2,901 811 85.98 64,808
8 P26 格底里 (KETEREH) (公正党) 阿都阿兹 21,738 49.33 (国阵巫统) 安努亚慕沙 21,338 400 993 84.95 52,240
9 P27 丹那美拉 (TANAH MERAH) (公正党) 安南甘尼 17,554 48.72 (国阵巫统) 沙哈里哈山 15,970 1,584 1,064 81.46 44,347
10 P28 巴西富地 (PASIR PUTEH) (回教党) 莫哈末胡欣 28,365 52.87 (国阵巫统) 安兰末诺 24,397 3,968 886 83.52 64,393
11 P29 马樟 (MACHANG) (公正党) 赛夫丁 21,041 50.86 (国阵巫统) 沙兹米 19,581 1,460 748 84.41 49,157
12 P30 日里 (JELI) (国阵巫统) 慕斯达法 17,168 56.52 (回教党) 莫哈末阿邦迪 12,732 4,436 474 84.18 36,298
13 P31 瓜拉吉赖 (KUALA KRAI) (回教党) 莫哈末哈达南利 23,562 54.93 (国阵巫统) 仄慕沙 18,578 4,984 756 82.32 52,250
14 P32 话望生 (GUA MUSANG) (国阵巫统) 东姑拉沙里 14,063 58.06 (回教党) 祖基菲莫哈末 9,669 4,394 489 83.77 28,986
登嘉楼：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P33 勿述 (BESUT) (国阵巫统) 阿都拉辛 29,376 60.16 (回教党) 胡辛阿旺 18,786 10,590 668 84.49 58,353
2 P34 士兆 (SETIU) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末基汀 26,610 56.83 (回教党) 莫哈末宝兹慕达 19,378 7,232 833 85.88 54,520
3 P35 瓜拉尼鲁斯 (KUALA NERUS) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末纳西依布拉欣 26,439 50.60 (回教党) 慕哈曼苏克里姆 25,098 1,341 713 85.83 61,214
4 P36 瓜拉登嘉楼 (KUALA TERENGGANU) (国阵巫统) 拉查理依斯迈 32,562 49.25 (回教党) 莫哈末沙布 31,934 628 931 82.45 80,325
5 P37 马江 (MARANG) (回教党) 哈迪阿旺 33,435 51.49 (国阵巫统) 阿末兰兹 30,688 2,747 806 86.89 74,813
6 P38 乌鲁登嘉楼 (HULU TERENGGANU) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末诺奥斯曼 27,784 60.64 (回教党) 卡玛鲁查曼阿都拉 17,324 10,460 709 87.54 52,515
7 P39 龙运 (DUNGUN) (国阵巫统) 马督里迪祖索 29,264 53.73 (公正党) 三苏依斯干达尤斯里 24,270 4,994 930 83.98 64,851
8 P40 甘马挽 (KEMAMAN) (国阵巫统) 阿末沙比里 37,199 59.24 (公正党) 法里兹慕沙 24,516 12,683 1,077 83.82 75,006
檳城：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P41 甲拋峇底 (KEPALA BATAS) (国阵巫统) 阿都拉 23,445 64.63 (回教党) 索比利莫哈末亚尔沙 12,199 11,246 634 84.45 43,018
2 P42 打西汝莪 (TASEK GELUGOR) (国阵巫统) 诺莫哈末 20,448 55.34 (回教党) 依斯迈沙烈 15,901 4,547 600 87.98 44,466
3 P43 峇眼 (BAGAN) (行动党) 林冠英 33,748 73.06 (国阵马华) 宋彩苓 11,678 22,070 766 77.84 59,385
4 P44 峇东埔 (PERMATANG PAUH) (公正党) 旺阿兹莎 30,338 64.01 (国阵巫统) 菲道斯 16,950 13,388 110 81.10 58,449
5 P45 大山脚 (BUKIT MERTAJAM) (行动党) 章瑛 37,882 72.51 (国阵马华) 王嵣荃 13,431 24,451 931 79.31 64,080
6 P46 峇都交湾 (BATU KAWAN) (行动党) 拉玛沙米 23,067 61.86 (国阵民政党) 许子根 13,582 9,485 640 78.70 47,378
7 P47 高渊 (NIBONG TEBAL) (公正党) 陈智铭 20,210 53.02 (国阵巫统) 再纳阿比丁 17,123 3,087 784 80.20 47,540
8 P48 升旗山 (BUKIT BENDERA) (行动党) 刘镇东 31,243 66.45 (国阵民政党) 谢宽泰 15,131 16,112 642 72.98 64,545
9 P49 丹绒 (TANJONG) (行动党) 曹观友 28,248 73.11 (国阵民政党) 许文思 9,759 18,489 631 72.80 53,188
10 P50 日落洞 (JELUTONG) (行动党) 黄泉安 30,493 65.77 (国阵民政党) 涂仲仪 14,247 16,246 743 74.56 61,181
11 P51 武吉牛汝莪 (BUKIT GELUGOR) (行动党) 卡巴星 35,140 70.32 (国阵马华) 郭家驊 14,125 21,015 707 76.16 65,614
12 P52 峇央峇鲁 (BAYAN BARU) (公正党) 再林 27,618 61.56 (国阵马华) 黄秀金 16,589 11,029 655 73.90 60,713
13 P53 浮罗山背 (BALIK PULAU) (公正党) 尤斯马尼 15,749 50.17 (国阵巫统) 诺莱莎 15,041 708 601 77.40 39,765
霹靂：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P54 宜力 (GERIK) (国阵民政党) 陈莲花 12,526 62.23 (回教党) 莫哈末诺 6,953 5,573 649 78.13 26,229
2 P55 玲瓏 (LENGGONG) (国阵巫统) 三苏安华 10,992 63.26 (回教党) 莫哈末祖基菲 6,073 4,919 311 75.08 23,223
3 P56 拉律 (LARUT) (国阵巫统) 韩沙查鲁汀 15,878 52.00 (回教党) 莫哈末达里 13,967 1,911 687 77.06 39,697
4 P57 巴里文打 (PARIT BUNTAR) (回教党) 慕加希 21,221 59.76 (国阵巫统) 阿都拉曼苏丽曼 13,670 7,551 618 78.71 45,219
5 P58 峇眼色海 (BAGAN SERAI) (公正党) 慕辛法兹利 18,943 53.12 (国阵巫统) 再纳阿比丁辛 15,530 3,413 1,186 76.92 47,111
6 P59 武吉干当 (BUKIT GANTANG) (回教党) 罗斯兰 20,015 49.80 (国阵巫统) 阿欣查比迪 18,449 1,566 851 72.65 55,471
7 P60 太平 (TAIPING) (行动党) 倪可敏 28,098 60.41 (国阵进步党) 卡维斯 16,800 11,298 1,612 71.52 65,889
8 P61 硝山 (PADANG RENGAS) (国阵巫统) 纳兹里 9,830 53.80 (公正党) 阿里亚斯再润 8,081 1,749 362 75.21 24,397
9 P62 和丰 (SUNGAI SIPUT) (公正党) 再也古玛 16,458 49.93 (国阵国大党) 三美威鲁 14,637 1,821 1,001 69.91 47,424
10 P63 打捫 (TAMBUN) (国阵巫统) 阿末胡斯尼 27,942 54.34 (公正党) 莫哈末阿斯里 22,556 5,386 927 75.17 68,966
11 P64 怡保东区 (IPOH TIMOR) (行动党) 林吉祥 37,364 69.85 (国阵马华) 刘文汉 15,422 21,942 707 70.45 76,647
12 P65 怡保西区 (IPOH BARAT) (行动党) 古拉 32,576 64.57 (国阵马华) 易沛鸿 17,042 15,534 829 72.58 69,773
13 P66 华都牙也 (BATU GAJAH) (行动党) 冯宝君 39,922 71.13 (国阵马华) 谢玉权 15,295 24,627 911 72.78 77,313
14 P67 江沙 (KUALA KANGSAR) (国阵巫统) 拉菲达 10,735 52.66 (回教党) 凯鲁丁 9,277 1,458 373 73.34 28,325
15 P68 木威 (BERUAS) (行动党) 倪可汉 15,831 51.53 (国阵民政党) 郑可扬 14,003 1,828 889 71.22 43,273
16 P69 巴力 (PARIT) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末尼沙 12,399 54.98 (回教党) 娜芝哈 9,526 2,873 628 78.30 28,859
17 P70 金宝 (KAMPAR) (国阵马华) 李志亮 20,126 52.14 (行动党) 龚明勋 17,429 2,697 1,048 65.16 59,784
18 P71 务边 (GOPENG) (公正党) 李文材 29,696 55.71 (国阵马华) 林熙隆 22,328 7,368 1,279 71.70 74,344
19 P72 打巴 (TAPAH) (国阵国大党) 沙拉瓦南 14,084 52.53 (公正党) 陈升德 11,064 3,020 1,662 70.12 38,236
20 P73 巴西沙叻 (PASIR SALAK) (国阵巫统) 达祖丁 16,928 52.71 (公正党) 慕斯达化卡米尔 14,240 2,688 950 75.20 42,712
21 P74 红土坎 (LUMUT) (国阵马华) 江作汉 25,698 48.50 (公正党) 苏华迪沙夫万 25,400 298 1,884 72.81 72,766
22 P75 峇眼拿督 (BAGAN DATOK) (国阵巫统) 阿末扎希 13,115 53.86 (公正党) 马兹哈山 10,423 2,692 814 70.42 34,670
23 P76 安顺 (TELUK INTAN) (行动党) 马诺佳能 18,486 50.43 (国阵民政党) 马袖强 17,016 1,470 1,153 70.17 52,354
24 P77 丹绒马林 (TANJONG MALIM) (国阵马华) 黄家泉 21,016 55.37 (公正党) 莫哈末阿兹曼 15,594 5,422 1,344 71.25 53,481
彭亨：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P78 金马崙高原 (CAMERON HIGHLANDS) (国阵国大党) 迪温玛尼 9,164 55.89 (行动党) 亚巴拉三美 6,047 3,117 1,186 70.14 23,461
2 P79 立卑 (LIPIS) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末沙仑 12,611 58.26 (回教党) 莫哈末聂南 8,474 4,137 561 76.55 28,425
3 P80 劳勿 (RAUB) (国阵马华) 黄燕燕 18,078 52.68 (行动党) 阿布巴卡 15,326 2,752 915 74.18 46,454
4 P81 而连突 (JERANTUT) (国阵巫统) 东姑阿兹兰沙 19,543 51.47 (回教党) 韩沙惹化 17,597 1,946 829 78.01 48,812
5 P82 英迪拉马哥打 (INDERA MAHKOTA) (公正党) 阿占依斯迈 19,823 50.43 (国阵巫统) 沙拉蒙阿里 18,796 1,027 688 77.44 51,235
6 P83 关丹 (KUANTAN) (公正党) 傅芝雅 18,398 51.69 (国阵马华) 胡亚桥 16,572 1,826 623 74.92 47,745
7 P84 巴耶勿沙 (PAYA BESAR) (国阵巫统) 拿督阿都马南 19,355 62.75 (公正党) 莫哈末杰菲里 10,852 8,503 637 77.45 39,882
8 P85 北根 (PEKAN) (国阵巫统) 纳吉 36,262 76.63 (公正党) 凯鲁安华 9,798 26,464 1,261 82.23 58,217
9 P86 马兰 (MARAN) (国阵巫统) 依斯迈慕达利 15,868 62.01 (回教党) 纳斯鲁丁 9,227 6,641 495 78.95 32,517
10 P87 瓜拉吉挠 (KUALA KRAU) (国阵巫统) 依斯迈莫哈末赛 16,165 58.69 (回教党) 卡马沙利 10,900 5,265 479 80.83 34,139
11 P88 淡马鲁 (TEMERLOH) (国阵巫统) 赛夫丁 21,381 51.84 (公正党) 阿末尼占 18,940 2,441 924 76.37 54,010
12 P89 文冬 (BENTONG) (国阵马华) 廖中莱 25,134 64.44 (公正党) 波罗沙美 12,585 12,549 1,285 73.01 53,651
13 P90 百乐 (BERA) (国阵巫统) 依斯迈沙比利 18,051 54.59 (回教党) 马兹兰阿利曼 14,230 3,821 783 76.91 42,993
14 P91 云冰 (ROMPIN) (国阵巫统) 贾马鲁丁 21,308 65.04 (回教党) 马兹兰耶欣 10,629 10,679 824 79.04 41,701
雪兰莪：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P92 沙白安南 (SABAK BERNAM) (国阵巫统) 阿都拉曼 12,055 51.33 (公正党) 峇鲁阿敏 10,720 1,335 711 75.00 31,381
2 P93 大港 (SUNGAI BESAR) (国阵巫统) 诺丽雅 16,069 57.83 (回教党) 奥斯曼沙布朗 11,060 5,009 656 81.69 34,073
3 P94 乌鲁雪兰莪 (ULU SELANGOR) (公正党) 再纳阿比丁 23,177 48.67 (国阵国大党) G.巴拉尼威 22,979 198 1,466 74.89 63,593
4 P95 丹绒加弄 (TANJONG KARANG) (国阵巫统) 诺奥玛 16,073 55.42 (回教党) 莫哈末哈尼巴 12,253 3,820 674 79.83 36,391
5 P96 瓜拉雪兰莪 (KUALA SELANGOR) (回教党) 祖基菲里阿末 18,796 49.96 (国阵巫统) 阿兹再也 17,934 862 894 79.81 47,203
6 P97 士拉央 (SELAYANG) (公正党) 梁自坚 30,701 50.60 (国阵马华) 李丽友 27,134 3,567 1,506 76.57 79,557
7 P98 鹅嘜 (GOMBAK) (公正党) 阿兹敏阿里 40,334 54.05 (国阵巫统) 赛安华 33,467 6,867 820 76.26 99,153
8 P99 安邦 (AMPANG) (公正党) 祖莱达 26,995 52.98 (国阵巫统) 阿兹曼 23,319 3,676 636 73.70 69,132
9 P100 班登 (PANDAN) (国阵马华) 翁诗杰 25,236 52.24 (公正党) 赛沙希尔 22,275 2,961 798 74.90 64,497
10 P101 乌鲁冷岳 (HULU LANGAT) (回教党) 茦罗斯利 36,124 50.24 (国阵巫统) 马基曼 34,379 1,745 1,401 80.02 90,319
11 P102 沙登 (SERDANG) (行动党) 张念群 47,444 62.48 (国阵马华) 何啟利 26,419 21,025 2,072 80.35 94,877
12 P103 蒲种 (PUCHONG) (行动党) 哥宾星 35,079 60.77 (国阵民政党) 卢永平 22,486 12,593 158 78.44 75,625
13 P104 格拉那再也 (KELANA JAYA) (公正党) 罗国本 30,298 51.77 (国阵马华) 李华民 25,267 5,031 1,065 73.61 79,649
14 P105 八打灵再也南区 (PJ SELATAN) (公正党) 许来贤 28,598 54.44 (国阵马华) 林祥才 22,892 5,706 1,044 71.91 73,192
15 P106 八打灵再也北区 (PJ UTARA) (行动党) 潘俭伟 37,851 67.28 (国阵马华) 周美芬 17,879 19,972 527 73.47 76,618
16 P107 梳邦 (SUBANG) (公正党) 西华拉沙 35,024 53.54 (国阵国大党) 慕鲁根山 28,315 6,709 2,079 78.02 84,414
17 P108 沙亚南 (SHAH ALAM) (回教党) 卡利阿都沙末 33,356 57.36 (国阵巫统) 阿都阿兹三苏汀 24,042 9,314 749 77.47 75,334
18 P109 加埔 (KAPAR) (公正党) 马尼卡瓦沙甘 48,196 55.30 (国阵国大党) 柯玛拉 35,899 12,297 3,064 78.10 112,224
19 P110 巴生 (KLANG) (行动党) 查尔斯圣地亚哥 37,990 64.05 (国阵马华) 庄祷融 20,289 17,701 1,036 76.23 77,816
20 P111 哥打拉惹 (KOTA RAJA) (回教党) 希蒂玛丽亚 38,630 67.39 (国阵国大党) 威尼斯瓦兰 17,879 20,751 814 79.74 71,887
21 P112 瓜拉冷岳 (KUALA LANGAT) (公正党) 阿都拉沙尼 26,687 50.55 (国阵巫统) 哈芝苏莱曼 25,698 989 407 79.37 66,515
22 P113 雪邦 (SEPANG) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末欣 26,381 53.83 (回教党) 莫哈末玛奇 21,532 4,849 1,099 79.20 62,044
吉隆坡联邦直辖区：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P114 甲洞 (KEPONG) (行动党) 陈胜尧 35,552 74.90 (国阵民政党) 刘开强 11,704 23,848 212 78.10 60,775
2 P115 峇都 (BATU) (公正党) 蔡添强 29,785 58.71 (国阵民政党) 林时彬 20,330 9,455 614 72.72 70,544
3 P116 旺沙马朱 (WANGSA MAJU) (公正党) 黄朱强 19,637 49.74 (国阵马华) 姚长禄 19,487 150 357 73.01 54,509
4 P117 泗岩沫 (SEGAMBUT) (行动党) 林立迎 25,046 58.38 (国阵民政党) 马伟祺 17,314 7,732 541 72.93 59,690
5 P118 斯迪亚旺沙 (SETIAWANGSA) (国阵巫统) 朱哈斯南 25,489 58.24 (公正党) 依布拉欣 17,355 8,134 918 76.56 57,161
6 P119 帝帝皇沙 (TITIWANGSA) (回教党) 洛洛莫哈末卡扎里 17,857 52.62 (国阵巫统) 阿兹加马鲁丁 15,885 1,972 191 68.01 49,892
7 P120 武吉免登 (BUKIT BINTANG) (行动党) 方贵伦 26,811 67.35 (国阵马华) 李崇孟 12,534 14,277 466 66.37 59,986
8 P121 班底谷 (LEMBAH PANTAI) (公正党) 努鲁依莎 21,728 52.62 (国阵巫统) 莎丽扎 18,833 2,895 239 72.88 56,650
9 P122 士布爹 (SEPUTEH) (行动党) 郭素沁 47,230 81.23 (国阵马华) 周紫琳 10,738 36,492 174 75.70 76,891
10 P123 蕉赖 (CHERAS) (行动党) 陈国伟 39,253 77.81 (国阵马华) 吴心一 10,953 28,300 244 73.58 68,725
11 P124 敦拉萨镇 (BANDAR TUN RAZAK) (公正党) 卡立依布拉欣 28,123 51.66 (国阵马华) 陈财和 25,608 2,515 707 75.72 72,628
布城联邦直辖区：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P125 布城 (PUTRAJAYA) (国阵巫统) 东姑安南 4,038 75.06 (回教党) 莫哈末诺 1,304 2,734 38 81.96 6,608
森美兰：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P126 日叻务 (JELEBU) (国阵巫统) 莱士雅丁 19,737 68.93 (回教党) 诺曼依彬 8,127 11,610 769 75.05 38,682
2 P127 仁保 (JEMPOL) (国阵巫统) 利拉耶辛 25,294 64.33 (回教党) 茜蒂玛丽亚 12,974 12,320 1,054 73.53 53,478
3 P128 芙蓉 (SEREMBAN) (行动党) 约翰费南迪 32,970 51.32 (国阵马华) 尤绰韜 29,022 3,948 2,248 76.10 84,675
4 P129 瓜拉庇劳 (KUALA PILAH) (国阵巫统) 哈山马力 20,417 64.34 (公正党) 安华莫哈末沙烈 10,409 10,008 908 74.79 42,328
5 P130 亚沙 (RASAH) (行动党) 陆兆福 34,271 60.49 (国阵马华) 姚再添 21,120 13,151 1,261 78.56 72,115
6 P131 林茂 (REMBAU) (国阵巫统) 凯里 26,525 54.82 (公正党) 巴都鲁希山 20,779 5,746 1,086 77.75 62,896
7 P132 直落甘望 (TELOK KEMANG) (公正党) 卡玛鲁巴哈林 23,348 50.99 (国阵国大党) 索迪纳登 20,544 2,804 1,299 77.45 60,186
8 P133 淡边 (TAMPIN) (国阵巫统) 沙兹曼 24,022 66.58 (回教党) 拉查吉 10,943 13,079 1,115 76.24 47,655
马六甲：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P134 马日丹那 (MASJID TANAH) (国阵巫统) 阿布瑟曼尤索夫 21,582 68.31 (回教党) 阿都甘尼 9,297 12,285 717 78.10 40,606
2 P135 亚罗牙也 (ALOR GAJAH) (国阵马华) 冯镇安 26,354 63.08 (行动党) 陈丽香 13,470 12,884 1,953 77.37 54,097
3 P136 冬牙峇株 (TANGGA BATU) (国阵巫统) 伊德利斯哈仑 30,460 61.32 (公正党) 再农嘉化 15,960 14,500 3,255 82.53 60,188
4 P137 武吉卡迪 (BUKIT KATIL) (国阵巫统) 末西蜡阿布 30,975 50.48 (公正党) 卡立耶化 29,217 1,758 1,173 81.92 75,777
5 P138 马六甲市区 (KOTA MELAKA) (行动党) 沉同钦 38,640 57.38 (国阵马华) 王乃志 27,250 11,390 1,448 79.57 84,805
6 P139 野新 (JASIN) (国阵巫统) 阿末韩查 27,838 63.02 (公正党) 祖吉菲礼 15,348 12,490 990 78.72 56,121
柔佛：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P140 昔加末 (SEGAMAT) (国阵国大党) 苏巴马廉 15,921 53.61 (行动党) 彭学良 12,930 2,991 847 72.96 40,708
2 P141 士基央 (SEKIJANG) (国阵巫统) 巴哈仑 17,979 67.30 (公正党) 祖基菲沙烈 8,112 9,867 622 76.03 35,138
3 P142 拉美士 (LABIS) (国阵马华) 蔡智勇 13,658 56.82 (行动党) 张颖群 9,564 4,094 816 71.95 33,468
4 P143 巴莪 (PAGOH) (国阵巫统) 慕尤丁 21,028 69.49 (回教党) 莫哈末罗查礼 8,447 12,581 787 75.70 40,042
5 P144 礼让 (LEDANG) (国阵巫统) 哈敏 25,319 56.96 (公正党) 刘德海 17,702 7,617 1,433 75.99 58,501
6 P145 峇吉里 (BAKRI) (行动党) 余德华 21,051 49.02 (国阵马华) 郑贝川 20,329 722 1,561 76.55 56,372
7 P146 麻坡 (MUAR) (国阵巫统) 拉查里 16,986 56.22 (公正党) 娜布汀 12,325 4,661 902 73.81 41,019
8 P147 巴力士隆 (PARIT SULONG) (国阵巫统) 诺莱妮 26,066 65.88 (回教党) 费沙阿里 12,467 13,599 1,033 78.91 50,234
9 P148 亚依淡 (AYER HITAM) (国阵马华) 魏家祥 20,230 73.68 (回教党) 胡申苏嘉 6,321 13,909 907 78.98 34,805
10 P149 四加亭 (SRI GADING) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末阿兹士 19,641 67.39 (公正党) 阿里玛贡 8,767 10,874 738 79.43 36,845
11 P150 峇株巴辖 (BATU PAHAT) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末卜艾 32,461 60.13 (公正党) 莫哈末阿都拉 19,757 12,704 1,768 77.21 70,069
12 P151 新邦令金 (SIMPANG RENGGAM) (国阵民政党) 梁德明 16,450 63.34 (回教党) 阿丹贡邦 8,597 7,853 924 74.58 34,859
13 P152 居鑾 (KLUANG) (国阵马华) 何国忠 27,970 51.76 (行动党) 黄南华 24,189 3,781 1,884 76.60 71,233
14 P153 森波浪 (SEMBRONG) (国阵巫统) 希山慕丁 17,988 71.54 (公正党) 李尚 6,418 11,570 739 75.98 33,181
15 P154 丰盛港 (MERSING) (国阵巫统) 阿都拉迪夫 20,116 73.54 (回教党) 沙哈尔阿都拉 6,380 13,736 857 75.59 36,445
16 P155 东南镇 (TENGGARA) (国阵巫统) 哈丽玛 19,031 75.08 (回教党) 沙烈法敏 4,982 14,049 1,336 78.49 32,297
17 P156 哥打丁宜 (KOTA TINGGI) (国阵巫统) 赛哈密 22,682 83.83 (回教党) 翁嘉化 3,721 18,961 653 79.29 34,190
18 P157 边佳兰 (PENGERANG) (国阵巫统) 阿莎丽娜 不战而胜 33,002
19 P158 地不佬 (TEBRAU) (国阵马华) 邓文村 30,860 63.51 (回教党) 罗斯来尼 16,202 14,658 1,525 77.73 62,505
20 P159 巴西古当 (PASIR GUDANG) (国阵巫统) 莫哈末卡立 35,849 64.44 (公正党) 末尼占莫哈末沙曼 18,568 17,281 1,211 76.71 72,862
21 P160 新山 (JOHOR BAHRU) (国阵巫统) 沙里尔 43,143 69.22 (人民党) 哈山卡林 17,794 25,349 1,391 69.59 89,725
22 P161 埔来 (PULAI) (国阵巫统) 诺加兹兰 38,036 67.08 (回教党) 阿都拉 17,587 20,449 1,079 71.42 79,622
23 P162 振林山 (GELANG PATAH) (国阵马华) 曾亚英 33,630 55.45 (公正党) 查丽哈 24,779 8,851 2,244 77.19 78,676
24 P163 古来 (KULAI) (国阵马华) 黄家定 32,017 59.71 (行动党) 吴柏松 20,273 11,744 1,327 79.69 67,358
25 P164 笨珍 (PONTIAN) (国阵巫统) 阿末玛士兰 23,121 70.48 (公正党) 莫哈末安努亚 8,677 14,444 1,008 75.83 43,264
26 P165 丹绒比艾 (TANJONG PIAI) (国阵马华) 黄日升 23,302 65.92 (行动党) 阿末顿 10,931 12,371 1,117 77.35 45,701
纳闽联邦直辖区：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P166 纳闽 (LABUAN) (国阵巫统) 尤索夫玛哈 10,471 75.32 (独立人士) 刘成吉 2,014 8,457 311 68.08 20,783
沙巴：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P167 古达 (KUDAT) (国阵巫统) 阿都拉欣巴克里 17,634 66.72 (公正党) 耶也奥曼 7,739 9,895 1,058 66.98 39,643
2 P168 马鲁都 (KOTA MARUDU) (国阵团结党) 麦西慕 12,028 54.25 (公正党) 安东尼曼帝奥 7,830 4,198 748 69.51 31,938
3 P169 哥打毛律 (KOTA BELUD) (国阵巫统) 阿都拉曼达兰 17,842 52.93 (公正党) 沙依帝西莫依 14,822 3,020 1,046 78.27 43,071
4 P170 斗亚兰 (TUARAN) (国阵民统) 威弗烈邦布琳 17,645 57.80 (公正党) 安沙里阿都拉 11,023 6,622 979 74.89 40,761
5 P171 昔邦加 (SEPANGGAR) (国阵沙进步党) 依力马贞文 16,884 62.99 (公正党) 莫哈末依巴拉欣 5,423 11,461 790 68.76 39,251
6 P172 亚庇 (KOTA KINABALU) (行动党) 邱庆洲 9,464 33.89 (公正党) 刘静芝 9,358 106 340 64.09 43,714
7 P173 布达丹 (PUTATAN) (国阵民统) 马京马古斯莫吉高 13,737 60.90 (公正党) 少吉那尤索夫 7,292 6,445 608 66.68 34,935
8 P174 兵南邦 (PENAMPANG) (国阵民统) 柏纳东博 13,400 52.80 (公正党) 爱尔文波西 10,337 3,063 540 70.84 35,821
9 P175 吧巴 (PAPAR) (国阵巫统) 罗丝娜拉西 15,352 62.72 (公正党) 瓦合依德利斯 5,778 9,574 651 75.84 32,276
10 P176 金马利 (KIMANIS) (国阵巫统) 阿尼法阿曼 10,242 59.03 (独立人士) 查阿法依斯迈 4,789 5,453 500 78.09 22,239
11 P177 保佛 (BEAUFORT) (国阵巫统) 拉京奥津 14,780 76.47 (公正党) 拉津尤索夫 3,866 10,914 681 72.22 26,788
12 P178 实必丹 (SIPITANG) (国阵巫统) 沙巴威阿末 11,905 65.43 (公正党) 卡林达欣 5,759 6,146 531 75.00 24,145
13 P179 兰瑙 (RANAU) (国阵民统) 系林安古巴 14,074 63.49 (公正党) 佐纳丹耶辛 6,823 7,251 653 72.06 30,810
14 P180 根地咬 (KENINGAU) (国阵团结党) 拜林吉丁岸 14,958 56.84 (公正党) 杰菲里吉丁岸 10,334 4,624 464 73.97 35,578
15 P181 丹南 (TENOM) (国阵巫统) 莱米翁吉 9,535 60.76 (公正党) 安德利斯达利宾 2,652 6,883 523 75.20 20,874
16 P182 冰厢岸 (PENSIANGAN) (国阵人民团结) 佐瑟古律 不战而胜 19,712
17 P183 柏鲁兰 (BELURAN) (国阵巫统) 罗纳建迪 7,090 57.58 (独立人士) 兰沙达欣 2,738 4,352 468 64.00 19,181
18 P184 里巴兰 (LIBARAN) (国阵巫统) 朱斯里阿基罗 13,668 66.93 (公正党) 阿末丹林再尼 6,139 7,529 613 65.33 31,435
19 P185 巴都沙比 (BATU SAPI) (国阵团结党) 蒋国华 9,479 59.32 (独立人士) 钟广维 5,771 3,708 730 63.06 26,004
20 P186 山打根 (SANDAKAN) (国阵自民党) 刘伟强 8,297 41.50 (行动党) 章翠玲 8,121 176 644 61.00 32,847
21 P187 京那巴丹岸 (KINABATANGAN) (国阵巫统) 邦莫达拉丁 8,507 66.50 (公正党) 阿末阿都 2,181 6,326 589 66.00 19,554
22 P188 诗南 (SILAM) (国阵巫统) 沙礼卡比 18,111 66.05 (公正党) 哈斯布拉奥亨 8,319 9,792 989 63.37 43,488
23 P189 仙本那 (SEMPORNA) (国阵巫统) 沙菲益阿达 19,419 87.44 (公正党) 阿基斯阿都哈密 1,957 17,462 832 63.07 35,216
24 P190 斗湖 (TAWAU) (国阵沙进步党) 蔡顺梅 13,943 51.58 (行动党) 陈泓縑 9,076 4,867 735 63.52 42,560
25 P191 加拉巴干 (KALABAKAN) (国阵巫统) 阿都嘉夫 不战而胜 36,018
砂拉越：
No 选区 中选者 得票 得票率(%) 对手 对手得票 多数票 废票 投票率(%) 选民人数
1 P192 玛士加汀 (MAS GADING) (国阵民进党) 迪奇拉菲 8,551 57.89 (国民党) 巴岛鲁必士 4,250 4,301 188 67.37 21,968
2 P193 山都望 (SANTUBONG) (国阵土保党) 旺朱乃迪 15,800 79.39 (公正党) 拉末艾迪尔 3,855 11,945 248 64.73 30,836
3 P194 柏特拉再也 (PETRA JAYA) (国阵土保党) 法迪拉 19,515 78.39 (公正党) 莫哈末佐希 5,118 14,397 263 61.74 40,533
4 P195 古晋 (BANDAR KUCHING) (行动党) 张健仁 22,901 63.45 (国阵人联党) 沉耀荣 12,949 9,952 242 68.13 53,216
5 P196 实旦宾 (STAMPIN) (国阵人联党) 杨昆贤 21,966 50.51 (行动党) 温利山 18,896 3,070 428 65.31 67,257
6 P197 哥打三马拉汉 (KOTA SAMARAHAN) (国阵土保党) 苏莱曼泰益 15,559 72.61 (公正党) 胡先阿波 4,148 11,411 823 75.14 28,517
7 P198 曼旺 (MAMBONG) (国阵土保党) 詹姆士达弗 14,182 63.94 (公正党) 玛仁邦约 7,525 6,657 473 61.71 36,147
8 P199 西连 (SERIAN) (国阵人联党) 里察烈 15,793 85.41 (国民党) 柏拉勇阿纳查央 2,366 13,427 332 66.36 27,901
9 P200 峇丹砂隆 (BATANG SADONG) (国阵土保党) 南茜苏克利 8,183 73.65 (公正党) 毕依琳 2,758 5,425 170 66.21 16,794
10 P201 峇丹鲁巴 (BATANG LUPAR) (国阵土保党) 罗哈妮 11,015 76.59 (回教党) 阿邦依迪 2,923 8,092 193 64.21 22,417
11 P202 斯里阿曼 (SRI AMAN) (国阵砂人民党) 玛瑟古札 9,700 63.16 (独立人士) 古波阿纳鲁西 5,448 4,252 211 59.70 25,724
12 P203 鲁勃安都 (LUBOK ANTU) (国阵砂人民党) 威廉雅劳 6,769 56.28 (独立人士) 尼克拉斯巴威尔 5,159 1,610 99 69.97 17,190
13 P204 木中 (BETONG) (国阵土保党) 道格拉斯 13,708 85.93 (国民党) 史登里朱戈 1,999 11,709 246 72.22 22,088
14 P205 砂拉卓 (SARATOK) (国阵民进党) 惹拉因末萨 12,470 75.80 (公正党) 莫哈末耶也 3,764 8,706 218 68.66 23,982
15 P206 丹绒玛尼斯 (TANJONGＭANIS) (国阵土保党) 诺拉阿都拉曼 不战而胜 17,052
16 P207 伊干 (IGAN) (国阵土保党) 瓦合杜拉 不战而胜 15,735
17 P208 泗里街 (SARIKEI) (国阵人联党) 陈冠勋 10,588 47.98 (行动党) 黄华西 10,537 51 176 69.68 31,675
18 P209 如楼 (JULAU) (国阵砂人民党) 佐瑟沙朗 10,351 77.83 (公正党) 安布鲁斯拉邦 2,767 7,584 182 65.50 20,306
19 P210 加拿逸 (KANOWIT) (国阵砂人民党) 艾伦达干 不战而胜 17,613
20 P211 南兰 (LANANG) (国阵人联党) 张泰卿 19,476 56.71 (行动党) 黄培根 14,612 4,864 253 69.54 49,530
21 P212 诗巫 (SIBU) (国阵人联党) 刘会洲 19,138 52.61 (行动党) 黄和联 15,903 3,235 526 67.77 53,679
22 P213 沐胶 (MUKAH) (国阵土保党) 廖迈克 10,090 70.05 (独立人士) 海宾玛拉威因 3,792 6,298 521 63.17 22,851
23 P214 实兰沟 (SELANGAU) (国阵砂人民党) 佐瑟恩都鲁 不战而胜 20,057
24 P215 加帛 (KAPIT) (国阵土保党) 阿歷山大南达林奇 不战而胜 22,723
25 P216 乌鲁拉让 (HULU RAJANG) (国阵砂人民党) 比利阿必佐 6,590 59.08 (独立人士) 乔治拉贡 4,426 2,164 139 63.09 17,696
26 P217 民都鲁 (BINTULU) (国阵民进党) 张庆信 23,628 72.53 (行动党) 林素均 8,663 14,965 288 64.98 50,404
27 P218 实务地 (SIBUTI) (国阵土保党) 阿末莱 8,238 63.27 (公正党) 张有庆 4,590 3,648 192 58.84 22,143
28 P219 美里 (MIRI) (国阵人联党) 陈华贵 19,354 57.32 (行动党) 房保德 14,138 5,216 273 60.70 55,963
29 P220 峇南 (BARAM) (国阵民进党) 耶谷沙岸 7,996 66.00 (独立人士) 哥宾旺 3,952 4,044 167 49.65 24,425
30 P221 林梦 (LIMBANG) (国阵土保党) 哈斯比哈比波拉 6,427 52.29 (公正党) 刘烈贵 5,751 676 113 60.94 20,315
31 P222 老越 (LAWAS) (国阵土保党) 亨利宋艾贡 8,526 91.27 (公正党) 查巴苏友 734 7,792 82 59.44 15,717
发贴者 malaysia888 时间： 下午9:23
通过电子邮件发送
BlogThis!
共享给 Twitter
共享给 Facebook
0 评论:
发表评论
较新的帖子 较早的帖子 主页
订阅： 帖子评论 (Atom)
Malaysia777.com 大马最佳在线娱乐
以假筹码玩百家乐,2大马男子新国被控
还记得易胜博网站吗?
马六甲首长效应，地方政府严打非法马机
大马网球公开赛·锦织圭闯16强 达夫仁戈苦战晋级
疑遭内鬼爆料，扫荡15跑马机中心仅捣破1间
关注者
博客归档
▼ 2011 (14)
► 九月 (3)
► 八月 (1)
► 七月 (1)
► 六月 (4)
► 五月 (1)
► 四月 (2)
▼ 一月 (2)
2008年马来西亚第12届全国大选最新成绩(州席)
2008年马来西亚第12届全国大选最新成绩(国席)
► 2010 (1)
我的简介
malaysia888
查看我的完整个人资料
由 Blogger 强力驱动.
Malaysia888.com: 马来西亚人的赌博资讯网 - Malaysian Online Betting Guide
M88明陞:请您看张学友演唱会
2012年F1赛历:马来西亚第2站,新加坡第14站
水上德士直通金沙赌场!
Bodog博狗即将推出全新体育平台
一代千王"肥吕"走了
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)