To acquire a more faithful interpretation of Wang Bi’s text, it is necessary to reflect what presumptions may work when we interpret it. Therefore, I started from examining the probable “prejudices” in modern interpretations of Wang Bi, especially the reason why different interpretations diverse in some specifically texts. This elaboration leaded us to questions which are more focused and clearer then we ever had. Ultimately, these questions in interpretations of Wang Bi should be answered by Wang’s text itself, so an attentively adjusted interpretation for each (relatively) appropriate unit of textual length would be proposed in the end. The methodology and methods of this research were introduced in chapter 1. First of all, Wang Bi’s Commentary on Laotz should be considered as a work of commentary, not a free creation of his own. Secondly, the methods of understanding him come from his personal writing style: the problem-solving-oriented style, the interlocking parallel style, and the style of interweaving keywords. Chapter 2 discusses the cosmological controversies in modern interpretations. Scholars disagreed on the question of whether Wang Bi constructed his cosmology, because if he did, this cosmology of “wu(無)” may be inconsistent with his own ontology. But in fact, this phantom can only threaten if his “cosmology” discourse the progress of the birth of the Universe, which he actually didn’t explicate. The most important thing to avoid misreading Wang’s texts, is to read the term “you(有)” not as “the whole existence” but as each incidence of existences. In chapter 3, we would face the extraordinary ambiguity in the meaning of “Ontology” used in modern Chinese philosophy. To clarify its meaning, we need to find the source of this term. There are two different prototype of “Ontology”, one comes from Western philosophy; and the other is the traditional “ti-yong(體用)” thoughts. Each of the two meanings of “Ontology” leads to some problems: the former meaning does not afford the pragmatic acquirement of Wang Bi’s “wu”; and the later was not really used by Wang Bi. Here’s the most significant point in my interpretation of Wang Bi’s Commentary on Laotz: his metaphysical theory was built on two main metaphors — “Dao”, a metaphor of road or way, and “Xuan/the Dark”, a metaphor of the background outside our cognitive focus. He suggested: the ideal way for everything to maintain their existence is to hide itself in its background. Therefore, the sovereigns should not see and intervene in his people’s life, in order that everything goes in a harmony as it originally does.