Yì yì zhuàn 易翼傳
Wing-Tradition on the [ChéngYí] Yì-Tradition
by 鄭汝諧 Zhèng Rǔxié (撰) — zì Shùnjǔ 舜舉, hào Dōnggǔ 東谷, fl. 1187–1194+, of Chǔzhōu 處州 in Zhèjiāng; jìnshì by educational-officer examination; rose to Lìbù shìláng 吏部侍郎 per 陳振孫 Chén Zhènsūn’s Shūlù jiětí.
About the work
A two-juan supplementary-commentary on 程頤 Chéng Yí’s Yì zhuàn (KR1a0016) by Zhèng Rǔxié 鄭汝諧 — explicitly framed as yì 翼 (“wing”) to Chéng Yí’s zhuàn (“tradition”). The title Yì yì zhuàn therefore reads literally as “Wing-Tradition on [Chéng’s] Yì-Tradition” — a methodologically self-conscious supplementary-commentary genre. The work is also titled, in some witnesses, Zhèng Dōnggǔ Yì yì zhuàn 鄭東谷易翼傳, prepending Zhèng Rǔxié’s hào.
The methodological program is given in Zhèng Rǔxié’s auto-preface. Chéng Yí is taken as canonical: “from the past to today, expounders of the Yì have been many; only after Hénán Master Chéng [Yí] did he set aside the various schools’ difficult-and-deep sayings and analyze [the Yì] with bright-and-easy principle. The students of one age knew where to take their learning-orientation: like a blind man becoming clear-sighted, like a deaf man becoming hearing-keen, like a stumbling-traveler in dark roads recognizing the direction of his journey — Ah! how flourishing!” Zhèng Rǔxié’s program: he could not “disturb [Chéng] with other sayings” lest he confuse the doctrine, nor “place his own view first” lest he prejudice the result; he therefore wrote his own additions only where Chéng Yí had not addressed a passage or where he had addressed it incompletely.
The compositional revision: in the first version, Zhèng Rǔxié placed Chéng’s Yì zhuàn below the canonical text and his own Yì yì zhuàn below Chéng — making the resulting volume too thick. In the published version, where he simply follows Chéng he writes the marker “follows Chéng” (cóng Chéngshì 從程氏); where he has a wing-addition, he writes “the rest follows Chéng” (yú cóng Chéngshì 餘從程氏). This is a methodologically self-conscious form of meta-commentary writing.
The work has occasional substantive disagreements with Chéng Yí. The most striking, registered in detail by the Sìkù tiyao, is on the Gèn 艮 hexagram’s Tuàn statement “Gèn qí bèi, bù huò qí shēn, xíng qí tíng, bù jiàn qí rén” 艮其背，不獲其身，行其庭，不見其人 (“[He] gèn’s his back, does not obtain his body; walks in his courtyard, does not see his person”):
- Chéng Yí reads: “external things do not contact; internal desires do not sprout” (i.e. perfect contemplative tranquility — the sage’s accomplishment).
- Guō Zhōngxiào 郭忠孝 (郭忠孝, see KR1a0033) — the principal Jiānshān school Yì-master — accepted Chéng’s reading and styled himself Jiānshān 兼山 (Doubled-Mountain) on its strength. Chéng’s reading became the ru’s ultimate teaching for that school.
- Zhū Xī, slightly differently: “overcoming-self and returning-to-Lǐ” (kèjǐ fùlǐ 克己復禮).
- Zhèng Rǔxié, alone in the Sòng tradition, reads: “‘gèn-his-back’ is what is meant by ‘not seeing the desire-able, [so that] the heart is not disturbed’ — not-seeing first, then not-disturbed; if seen, then disturbed. Hence [the hexagram] is merely wú jiù (no-fault), not the sage’s affair. Those who exalt the matter as the sage’s affair are wrong.”
This is a deflationary reading: the Gèn hexagram is not about the saint’s perfect contemplative discipline but about the more modest practical strategy of avoiding occasions of temptation. Zhèng Rǔxié is unique among the Southern-Sòng Yì-tradition in offering this reading.
A second substantive disagreement: Zhèng Rǔxié reads Kùn 困 (hex. 47) and Jǐng 井 (hex. 48) as xìngmìng zhī guà 性命之卦 (“hexagrams of nature-and-mandate”). The tiyao notes the position is “also distinct.”
The Sìkù tiyao’s overall verdict is principled: “Master Zhū’s gloss-of-the-canon also has many revisions of Chéng Yí’s. The sages’-and-worthies’ refined meaning — the more it is expounded, the deeper. Submerging-and-meditating in the previous-ru’s sayings: what fits, expand; what does not fit one’s heart, separately offer one’s view to clarify — this is for the previous ru contributing-merit. One need not stick to one master’s words and merely become a faction-view (ménhù zhī jiàn 門戶之見).” The Sìkù editors thereby endorse Zhèng Rǔxié’s methodological pluralism within the Dàoxué mainstream.
The auto-preface concludes with a Kuí 睽 (hex. 38) hexagram-citation: “The gentleman by means of being-the-same-yet-different. The mutual-displaying of same-and-different is like the mutual-extinguishing-yet-mutual-completing of water and fire. The same-without-different loses what makes it the same. This book is not setting itself apart from Chéngshì; it is precisely making it the same.” The hexagram-citation is methodologically resonant: same-and-different mutually constitute each other; supplementary-commentary makes the original commentary more itself.
Bibliographic note: the front of the work has Zhèng Rǔxié’s auto-preface; the back has his son Zhèng Rúgāng 鄭如岡 and his great-grandson Zhèng Táosūn 鄭陶孫’s tí yǔ 題語 (titlings/colophons). Zhèng Rúgāng records that he had once obtained a 真德秀 Zhēn Déxiù (1178–1235) preface for the work — but the present Sìkù base does not preserve it; “evidently already lost.”
The composition window 1190–1200 reflects: Zhèng Rǔxié’s CBDB-recorded floruit (1187 as Liǎngzhè yùnfù, 1191 as Jiāngnánxī yùnfù) extending through to the catalog’s “fl. 1194” floruit-end. The Zhēn Déxiù preface (Zhēn Déxiù b. 1178) implies the work was complete and circulating before c. 1235 (and probably substantially before — Zhēn Déxiù would have been writing the preface in his maturity, after c. 1210).
Tiyao
We respectfully submit that Zhèng Dōnggǔ’s Yì yì zhuàn in two juan was composed by Zhèng Rǔxié of the Sòng. [Zhèng] Rǔxié, zì Shùnjǔ, hào Dōnggǔ, a man of Chǔzhōu. Chén Zhènsūn’s Shūlù jiětí says he held office up to Lìbù shìláng; the Zhèjiāng tōngzhì says he passed the jiàoguānkē examination, was promoted Zhī Xìnzhōu, summoned as Kǎogōng láng, accumulated-and-rose to Xūnyóugé dàizhì. [Chén] Zhènsūn is closer in time to [Zhèng] Rǔxié — perhaps the Tōngzhì errs.
His expounding of the Yì takes Master Chéng’s exposition as canon; what is called yì zhuàn (wing-tradition) is to wing Chéng’s Tradition. Yet there are also points of agreement-and-disagreement.
The most striking: as Master Chéng glosses Gèn qí bèi, bù huò qí shēn; xíng qí tíng, bù jiàn qí rén — taking it as “external things do not contact, internal desires do not sprout” — Guō Zhōngxiào received this exposition and held to it, even self-styling himself Jiānshān, taking it as the ultimate learning of ru. Master Zhū’s exposition, although slightly different, also takes [the hexagram] as the meaning of kèjǐ fùlǐ. Only [Zhèng] Rǔxié takes “gèn-his-back” as the so-called not seeing the desirable so that the heart is not disturbed. Not-seeing first, then not-disturbed; if seen, then disturbed. Hence merely wú jiù. Those who exalt the matter, taking it as the sage’s affair, are wrong. The view is decidedly different.
Further, as he expounds Kùn and Jǐng as xìngmìng hexagrams — his exposition is also distinct.
But Master Zhū’s gloss-of-the-canon is also of Master Chéng much-revising. The sages’-and-worthies’ refined meaning — the more it is expounded, the deeper. Submerging-and-meditating in previous-ru’s sayings: what fits, expand; what does not fit one’s heart, separately offer one’s view to clarify — for the previous ru this is contributing-merit. One need not stick to one master’s words and merely become a faction-view.
This book has at the front an auto-preface; at the back, his son Zhèng Rúgāng and great-grandson Zhèng Táosūn’s titlings. Rúgāng claims to have once obtained Zhēn Déxiù’s preface; this base does not have it — evidently already lost.
Respectfully revised and submitted, tenth month of the forty-first year of Qiánlóng [1776].
General Compilers: Jǐ Yún 紀昀, Lù Xīxióng 陸錫熊, Sūn Shìyì 孫士毅. General Reviser: Lù Fèichí 陸費墀.
Abstract
Zhèng Rǔxié (鄭汝諧, fl. 1187–1194+; lifedates not securely recorded), zì Shùnjǔ 舜舉, hào Dōnggǔ 東谷, of Chǔzhōu 處州 (modern Lìshuǐ 麗水 region, southern Zhèjiāng). Documentary references at Sòng huìyào jígǎo (SHY:ZG) 72.47b and 73.6a; Jiāngxī tōngzhì 11.23b; Xiánchún Línān zhì 50.8b; Zhèjiāng tōngzhì 125.20b. CBDB’s Hartwell-table activity record: 1187 appointed Liǎngzhè yùnfù 兩浙運副 (Liǎngzhè Fiscal Vice-Commissioner); 1191 in office as Jiāngnánxī yùnfù 江南西運副.
Career: passed the jiàoguānkē 教官科 (educational-officer examination, the jìnshì-equivalent for educational track), rose through Liǎngzhè and Jiāngnánxī fiscal posts, finally to Lìbù shìláng 吏部侍郎 (Vice-Minister of Personnel). The Zhèjiāng tōngzhì’s alternative career-trajectory (rising to Xūnyóugé dàizhì) is judged by the Sìkù editors as less reliable than Chén Zhènsūn’s contemporary record.
Methodologically Zhèng Rǔxié is a Chéng-Yí-supplementing commentator — operating decisively within the Chéng-school yìlǐ tradition but maintaining the freedom to differ on substantive points. His Gèn hexagram reading — deflationary against the prestigious ChéngYí / GuōZhōngxiào / ZhūXī readings — is one of the methodologically interesting Sòng-period instances of within-school dissent.
The Gèn reading deserves further note. The ChéngYí / GuōZhōngxiào reading takes Gèn qí bèi as the achievement of the contemplative discipline that suspends the dichotomy of internal-and-external; the Gèn hexagram becomes the canonical text-base for the Jiānshān school’s contemplative-still meditation practice. Zhèng Rǔxié’s reading, by contrast, is psychologically realistic: do not allow yourself into situations where temptation arises (turn your back); if you avoid the temptation-stimulus, the heart will not be disturbed; if you are exposed to it, you will be disturbed despite your best efforts. The Sòng-period contemplative-discipline reading is replaced by a Hellenistic-Stoic-style avoidance ethics. This is a substantive philosophical disagreement, not merely a textual gloss.
The composition window 1190–1200 follows the catalog’s “fl. 1194” floruit-end and Zhèng Rǔxié’s CBDB-recorded floruit. The Zhēn Déxiù preface — implied to predate Zhēn’s death in 1235 — gives a soft external terminus.
The attribution puzzle (Zhèng Rǔxié as the author): he is sometimes confused in the secondary literature with the more famous Lùshān-school philosopher Zhèng Yí 鄭頤 (a near-contemporary), but the zì Shùnjǔ and hào Dōnggǔ are distinctive.
Translations and research
No European-language translation. The work’s Gèn-hexagram reading is occasionally cited in modern Chinese-language Yì-comparative-studies.
- Hoyt Cleveland Tillman, Confucian Discourse and Chu Hsi’s Ascendancy (Univ. of Hawaii, 1992) — context for the Gèn-hexagram-as-discipline reading and its social-circulation in the Sòng Dàoxué.
- Zhū Bóqūn 朱伯崑, Yìxué zhéxué shǐ, vol. 2 — Zhèng Rǔxié briefly treated.
- Liào Mínghuó 廖名活, articles in Zhōuyì yánjiū on Sòng Yì-readings of Gèn.
- Modern punctuated editions on the Sìkù base.
Other points of interest
The methodological self-positioning — yì zhuàn (wing-tradition) on Chéng’s zhuàn — is one of the cleaner Sòng-period instances of self-conscious supplementary-commentary writing. Zhèng Rǔxié’s typographic-and-editorial revision (from triple-tier text-with-Chéng-with-Zhèng to flat-text-with-marker-codes) anticipates the YuánMíng pedagogical-textbook formatting traditions.
The disclosed tension between Yì hexagrams as contemplative-discipline-icons (the ChéngYí / GuōZhōngxiào / ZhūXī line for Gèn) versus practical-ethical-guidance (Zhèng Rǔxié’s reading for Gèn) is a real intellectual disagreement within Sòng Yì-pedagogy. Modern reception has generally followed the ChéngZhū line; Zhèng Rǔxié’s deflationary reading is a minority position with continuing scholarly interest.
The Kuí-hexagram closing motto in Zhèng Rǔxié’s auto-preface — jūnzǐ yǐ tóng ér yì 君子以同而異 (“the gentleman by means of being-the-same-yet-different”) — is one of the more elegant Sòng-period methodological self-positionings on the supplementary-commentary genre. The Kuí hexagram is itself a discord-and-difference hexagram in the Yì; reading the supplementary-commentary as a Kuí-style relationship (different in order to be more truly the same) is a distinctly Sòng yìlǐ gesture.