馬王堆帛書〈道原〉、郭店竹簡〈太一生水〉與上傳簡〈亙先〉三篇戰國楚道家文獻，形式上呈現出相當程度的一致性：篇幅短少，論述層次也一致地分兩層－前半論道的本體或創生，後半論道的人事政治之用，而涉及名言，可能反映了戰國某時期楚地某學群共同的焦點論題及其所流行的表現形式。就第一層內容言：〈道原〉專論本體質性，〈太一生水〉專論生成，〈亙先〉則略論本體而詳述創生。〈道原〉鋪衍本體雖較繁富，不出《老子》道的基本特徵，與〈亙先〉所述相合，表達也有對應性；與其後《淮南子•原道》風格類似，應是黃老道論基本樣式。〈太一生水〉以行時成歲爲目的的生成論，反映出戰國楚地陰陽道家的終極關懷。〈亙先〉所論創生內容繁複多樣，爲迄今所見道家宇宙論中最豐富繽紛者，充分反映楚道家開闊之思維。就第二層內容言，三篇皆由道之始源論述，轉入人事政治與名言之討論，肯定其重要性與價值，大大側出《老子》之觀點，楚學多元、多面可見一斑。春秋戰國封建解體、名實淆亂，諸子論理說政，少有不及名言、名實者，三篇道家簡帛論「道」轉入名言，或許亦反映時代之一般風氣。

The three articles composed on silk or bamboo slips in the Chu region during the Warring States, “Daoyuan,” “Taiyi sheng shui” and “Hengxian,” are largely consistent in form period. Besides being short in length, all three are divided into two parts: Part 1 examines the substance or creation of Dao and Part 2 investigates the application of Dao to human and political affairs together with the problem of names. It is possible that they reflect the common concerns and popular forms advanced by a certain group of scholars in the Chu region during the period of the Warring States. As far as Part 1 is concerned, “Daoyuan” focuses on the nature of substance; “Taiyi sheng shui” dwells specifically on the problem of creation; and “Hengxian” explores the problem of substance and investigates the problem of creation in detail. Though richer and more complicated, “Daoyuan” still simply reflects the fundamental features of Dao similar to those considered in “Hengxian.” As its style resembles the “Yuandao” chapter of the Huainanzi, it must have belonged to the basic form of Huangdi’s and Laozi’s theory of Dao. “Taiyi sheng shui,” which aims at the description of the changes of the four seasons for the completion of one whole year, relates the ultimate concern towards organic growth of the Chu Yin-Yang Daoists. “Hengxian,” with its complicated and varied discourse on creation, is actually the richest and most colorful Daoist cosmology discovered so far. It fully demonstrates the open-minded worldview of the Chu Daoists. As regards Part 2, each of the three articles begins with a discourse on the origin of Dao, proceeds to a discussion of human and political affairs, and finally confirms their importance and values. This is very different from the viewpoint of the Laozi. It shows how varied the thought of Chu scholars was. With the disintegration of feudal systems during the Spring and Autumn and the Warring States periods, as well as the confusion of name and reality, scholars rarely left the problems of name and reality untouched in their discussions. All three articles, whose discussions proceed from Dao to Nominalism, in all probability mirror the general practices of the times.