In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

  • “In Search of Yijing’s Original Meaning: Zhu Xi’s Philosophy of Divination”
  • Tze-ki Hon (bio)
Zhu Xi, The Original Meaning of the Yijing: Commentary on the Scripture of Change. Translated and edited by Joseph A. Adler. New York: Columbia University Press, 2020. viii, 387 pp. Hardcover $65.00, isbn 978-0-231-19124-1.

Among Chinese classics, the Yijing 易經 (I Ching, Book of Changes) is known for being difficult to read. This difficulty arises partly due to the text itself. Although the Yijing is commonly considered one single text, in actuality it [End Page 149] consists of three distinct layers. The first layer comprises eight trigrams and sixty-four hexagrams, allegedly drawn by the mythical figure Fu Xi 伏羲. These graphics, being symbolic and suggestive, are thereby open to different interpretations and creative formulations. The second layer consists of statements accompanying each hexagram, allegedly written by King Wen 文王 and the Duke of Zhou 周公 during the eleventh century b.c.e. Unlike the first layer, which is abstract and symbolic, the second layer is concrete and specific. It provides an empirical account of the Shang–Zhou transition and suggests a course of action in a stressful time. The third layer is composed of seven pieces of writing from the fifth to second centuries b.c.e. Divided into ten segments (hence the name “Ten Wings”), the authors of these writings used the hexagrams to discuss cosmic patterns, the relations between humanity and nature, and the complexity of human life.1

With three distinct layers, another difficulty associated with reading the Yijing is finding its true meaning. Since its canonization as a Confucian classic in 136 b.c.e., the Yijing has been a subject of debate regarding what constitutes its core text (benjing 本經) and what can best be described as its early commentaries (zhuan 傳).2 Historical records show that, during the Han period (206 b.c.e.–220 c.e.), the core text of the Yijing referred strictly to the first two layers of the texts, and consequently the classic was often known as the Zhouyi 周易 (Changes from the Zhou Dynasty), highlighting its link to the Western Zhou period. Toward the end of the Eastern Han, however, three of the Wings—the Tuan 彖, the Xiang 象, and the Wenyan 文言—were added to the core text.3 Wang Bi’s 王弼 (226–49) popular commentary, the Zhouyi zhu 周易注 (A Commentary on the Changes from the Zhou Dynasty), followed this new structure of the Yijing text. Since Wang Bi, the distinction between the core text and the Ten Wings had become blurred, giving rise to different commentarial traditions, such as the “Images and Numbers School” (xiangshu 象數) and the “Principle and Meaning School” (yili 義理).4

The distinction between the core text and the Ten Wings diminished further in the eleventh century, when Cheng Yi 程頤 (1033–1107) added yet another Wing, the Xugua 序卦, to the core text in his Yichuan yizhuan 伊川易傳 (The Yi River Commentary on the Changes). This new formation of the Yijing text became the standard in the fifteenth century, when Emperor Chengzu 成祖 of the Ming dynasty (r. 1402–24) ordered a new official commentary, the Zhouyi daquan 周易大全 (Compendium on the Changes from the Zhou Dynasty, 1415), based on Cheng Yi’s commentary and supplemented by that of Zhu Xi 朱熹 (1130–1200). The sad irony is that Zhu Xi vehemently rejected the insertion of the Ten Wings into the core text, but in the Zhouyi daquan his attempt to exclude them was aborted. His own commentary, the Zhouyi benyi 周易本義 (The Original Meaning of the Changes from the Zhou Dynasty), was divided into fragments and inserted under each hexagram following Cheng Yi’s commentary.5 [End Page 150] In the Qing dynasty (1644–1911), the reverse took place. Zhu Xi’s commentary formed the core of the Zhouyi zhezhong 周易折中 (Balanced Annotation of the Changes of the Zhou Dynasty, 1715), and Cheng Yi’s commentary was divided into fragments and inserted into Zhu Xi’s commentary.6 In both the Zhouyi daquan and the Zhouyi zhezhong, Cheng Yi’s and Zhu Xi’s commentaries were presented as being compatible to support the image of the Cheng–Zhu school of Neo-Confucianism, even though Cheng Yi and...

pdf