I found the intro and commentary to be indispensable here. I say that not to praise either, as I think Needleman could have kept the former brief and expanded the latter, but because the text itself is incredibly obtuse. To be honest, I'm still not sure what to take away from it, apart from the concept (found in spiritual and philosophical texts of all description) that one cannot know a thing without experiencing its inverse, and that those dichotomies, while convenient for communication, are emphasized to too great a degree.

I'm glad I read this--it's a short read, and I have a better reference point for Taoism than I did before--but I doubt I'll revisit the text itself much.