郭店楚簡《老子》乃今所見年代最早之節抄本，經彭浩、劉祖信、王傳富先生編連竹簡及釋文，更經裘錫圭先生審訂，並加按語於注文之中，楚簡《老子》是能通讀，弘道傳經，功在士林。然大醇而小疵，在所不免，故指微瑕以略論之。簡文有原抄而訛誤者，如甲編簡一「絕巧棄利、盜賊無有」句當在「絕為棄作、民復孝慈」句下，而抄簡者誤移。乙編簡一三「閉其門、塞其穴」句，當作「塞其穴，閉其門」，此抄簡者誤倒。丙編簡三「大道廢，安有仁義」句下奪「智慧出，安有大偽」句。是知郭店楚簡《老子》三編原抄皆有訛誤也。簡文或有誤釋者，如甲編簡一「絕智棄辯」，「辯」當釋作「辨」；「三言以為辨」，「辨」當釋作「辬」。乙編簡九「上士聞道，堇能行之」，「堇」當釋作「勤」，不作「僅」，此裘按據劉殿爵說，並誤。丙編簡四「道」下殘三字，當是「之出焉」。「言」者，「焉」之借，故帛書本作「之出言」，而下衍「也」、「曰」字，王弼本並作「之出言」，而通行本「言」訛作「口」。注釋而不能定是非，決嫌疑，唯引帛書本而已，是亦微瑕也。今就簡文、釋文之訛誤者，指瑕而論述之，是為此論文。或有不足者，尚祈大方先進不吝賜正也。

The Defects of the "Guodian Bamboo-Slip Laozi"Guodian bamboo-slip Laozi was abridged from the original work. It's the earliest transcript we could see. There are some faults in the text of the "Guodian bamboo-slip Laozi". For example, in "Guodian bamboo-slip Laozi" A slip 1, "Jue Qiao Qi Li, Dao Ze Wu You絕巧棄利、盜賊無有" should be behind "Jue Wei Qi Zuo, Min Fu Xiao Ci 絕為棄作、民復孝慈", but the copyist invert it. In "Guodian bamboo-slip Laozi" B slip 13, "Bi Ji Men 閉其門" should be behind "Sai Ji Xue塞其穴", but the copyist invert it. In "Guodian bamboo-slip Laozi" C slip 3, "Zhi Hui Chu, An You Da Wei 智慧出，安有大偽" should be behind "Da Dao Fei, An You Ren Yi 大道廢，安有仁義", but the copyist miss it out. There are some faults in the transcription. For example, in "Guodian bamboo-slip Laozi" A slip 1 , the transcription "辯(Bian)"should be "辨(Bian)", and in "Guodian bamboo-slip Laozi" A slip2, the transcription "辨(Bian)" should be "辬(Ban)". In "Guodian bamboo-slip Laozi" B slip9, the transcription of "堇(Jin)" should be "勤(Qin)", not "僅(Jin)". In "Guodian bamboo-slip Laozi" C slip 4, "Zhi Chu Yan 之出焉"should be behind "Dao 道", the notes to C4 is not complete.