Zhōuyì jí wén 周易輯聞
Compiled-Hearings on the Zhōuyì
by 趙汝楳 Zhào Rǔméi (撰) — fl. mid-thirteenth century, of Biànshuǐ 汴水 / Kāifēng; descendant of Sòng prince Shāngwáng 趙元份 Zhào Yuánfèn in the seventh generation; son of 趙善湘 Zhào Shànxiāng (Zīzhèngdiàn dàxuéshì); Hùbù shìláng 戶部侍郎 (Vice-Minister of Revenue) under Lǐzōng.
About the work
A six-juan Yì-commentary, with two appendices — Yì yǎ 易雅 (Yǎ-style Glossary on the Yì, 1 juan) and Shì zōng 筮宗 (The Yarrow-Stalk Source-Doctrine, 1 juan) — by Zhào Rǔméi 趙汝楳, an imperial-clan high official of the late-Lǐzōng / Dùzōng period. The work consolidates and continues the substantial Yì-corpus of Zhào Rǔméi’s father Zhào Shànxiāng 趙善湘, whose Yì-writings (Yuē shuō 約説 8 juan, Huò wèn 或問 4 juan, Zhǐ yào 指要 4 juan, Xù wèn 續問 8 juan, Bǔ guò 補過 6 juan) the auto-preface specifies. Zhào Rǔméi heard much of the Yì-doctrine directly from his father; “the [final draft of the] Bǔ guò — what I obtained from oral instruction is largest.”
Methodological positions:
-
Doubt about the wing-treatises. Per Hànshū Rúlín zhuàn: Fèi Zhí 費直 used only the Tuàn, Xiàng, Xìcí (10 piān), and Wén yán to gloss the upper-and-lower jīng. From this Zhào Rǔméi infers that the Shuō guà, Xù guà, and Zá guà — not in Fèi Zhí’s apparatus — are “all Hàn ru’s intrusions” rather than original wings. Furthermore: the Xìcí itself often says zǐ yuē 子曰 (Confucius said) — Zhào Rǔméi infers it was recorded by disciples, not by Confucius. Therefore he “sets aside these various traditions and only annotates the canonical text.”
-
Editorial structural intervention. Zhào Rǔméi retains Wáng Bì’s recension’s broken-up structure (Tuàn zhuàn dispersed into the Tuàncí; Xiǎo xiàng dispersed into the yáocí), but goes further: he moves the Dà xiàng to between the hexagram-drawing and the Tuàncí; he distributes the Wén yán below the Qián and Kūn hexagrams’ Tuàn zhuàn and Xiǎo xiàng. He further removes the marker characters Tuàn yuē / Xiàng yuē / Wén yán yuē — making canon-and-commentary indistinguishable on the page. The Sìkù tiyao sharply criticizes this: “splitting and overturning, especially attached to teacher-mind (shī xīn 師心); Wáng Bì’s text, although moving the wings to be appended-to-the-canon, still preserves the marker characters Tuàn yuē , Xiàng yuē , Wén yán yuē to maintain identifiability. [Zhào] Rǔméi removed even these — making canon-and-commentary mixed-and-confused, making it impossible to distinguish — especially treating the silk so as to make it tangled ( zhì sī ér fén ).”
-
Hexagram-transformation reading. Each hexagram-head opens with a guàbiàn 卦變 (“hexagram-transformation”) discussion — a xiàngshù-leaning structural gesture. The tiyao notes: “also not free of partial-attachment-to-one-corner.”
-
Substantive merit. Despite the editorial criticisms, the running exposition is “pushing-and-illuminating in detail-and-clarity; on the principles of bǐyìng (near-responding) and chéngchéng (riding-bearing), on the mechanism of yíngxū xiāozhǎng (waxing-and-waning) — [the work] has its developments. Different from arbitrary-speculation; among the Sòng-people’s Yì-expositions, [it is] still rather clear-and-substantive.”
The Yì yǎ 易雅 (appendix 1, 1 juan) is a general lexical-and-conceptual glossary on the Yì, modeled on the Ěr yǎ’s exposition of the Shī. Its 18 chapters: tōng shì 通釋 (general gloss), shū shì 書釋 (book gloss), xué shì 學釋 (learning gloss), qíng shì 情釋 (feeling gloss), wèi shì 位釋 (position gloss), xiàng shì 象釋 (image gloss), cí shì 辭釋 (wording gloss), biàn shì 變釋 (transformation gloss), zhān shì 占釋 (divination gloss), guàbiàn shì 卦變釋 (hexagram-transformation gloss), yáobiàn shì 爻變釋 (line-transformation gloss), déshī shì 得失釋 (gain-loss gloss), bā guà shì 八卦釋 (eight-trigrams gloss), liù yáo shì 六爻釋 (six-lines gloss), yīnyáng shì 隂陽釋, Tàijí míngyì shì 太極名義釋 (Tàijí name-and-meaning gloss), xiàngshù tǐyòng shì 象數體用釋 (imagery-numerology, substance-and-function gloss), Túshū shì 圖書釋 (HétúLuòshū gloss).
The Túshū shì contains a notable methodological argument: the Yì has yǎn shù 衍數 (extending-numbers, e.g. the dà yǎn 大衍 50) and jī shù 積數 (accumulating-numbers, summing 1+2+3+4+5 = 15 or 1+2+…+10 = 55). The HétúLuòshū numbers belong to the jī shù category, not the yǎn shù — therefore they cannot be the canonical basis for shī fǎ (yarrow-stalk procedure, which uses the dà yǎn 50). “Discarding the Túshū names and discussing the two numbers separately, there is naturally subtle principle; forcing the two numbers under the Túshū names lacks evidence in the canon.” The Sìkù editors approve: “may be called pleased-to-resolve-knotty-issues (xǐ yú jiě fēn 喜於解紛).”
The Shì zōng 筮宗 (appendix 2, 1 juan in Sìkù base; 3 juan in Zhū Yízūn’s Jīngyì kǎo — the original three sections Míng běn 明本, Shù shì 述筮, Xiān zhuàn kǎo 先傳考 each counted as one juan; Sìkù’s 1-juan reckoning combines them) systematically expounds the dà yǎn zhī shù and critiques earlier school-expositions of the yarrow-stalk procedure. The tiyao judgment: “pushes-and-illuminates the dà yǎn number rather clearly; on the various schools’ old expositions, item-by-item argues-and-distinguishes; also has evidential basis.”
The Sìkù base is a yǐng Sòng chāo 影宋鈔 — a Sòng-print “shadow-copy” hand-copy preserving the original block-print appearance.
The composition window 1250–1265 reflects: the auto-preface’s “outside-mourning for the late father, over twenty years” plus “teeth grown old, learning withered” — implying a late-career composition; the father Zhào Shànxiāng’s death c. 1242 (per CBDB context) sets the lower bound; the upper bound is constrained by the late-Lǐzōng / early-Dùzōng period in which Zhào Rǔméi held Hùbù shìláng.
Imperial Topic-Poem
(Prefixed to the Sìkù base, by the Qiánlóng Emperor; an imperial five-character composition praising the work.)
Broad-and-vast, nothing not encompassed — only this Way of the Yì*. The* Jí wén tradition: from Biànshuǐ [= Kāifēng region]; description-and-extension of the Xiāntiān [Before-Heaven]. Examining it, much accords with the Sage; close in lineage to the Master. The hexagram-photograph still recognizes the Sòng — distance now turns from the leather-bound editions.
Tiyao
We respectfully submit that Zhōuyì jí wén in six juan, with appendices Yì yǎ in one juan and Shì zōng in one juan, was composed by Zhào Rǔméi of the Sòng. [Zhào] Rǔméi is the seventh-generation grandson of Shāngwáng [Zhào] Yuánfèn; son of Zīzhèngdiàn dàxuéshì [Zhào] Shànxiāng. Under Lǐzōng he held office to Hùbù shìláng.
We examine the Sòngshǐ Zhào Shànxiāng zhuàn, which records his books expounding the Yì: Yuē shuō 8 juan, Huò wèn 4 juan, Zhǐ yào 4 juan, Xù wèn 8 juan, Bǔ guò 6 juan. Evidently he had researched this canon for the longest time. Hence [Zhào] Rǔméi inherited the family-line learning to make this compilation.
His exposition takes the Hànshū Rúlín zhuàn as authoritative — saying Fèi Zhí used only the Tuàn, Xiàng, the Xìcí 10 piān, and the Wén yán to gloss the upper-and-lower jīng — and so suspects that the Shuō guà, Xù guà, and Zá guà are all Hàn-ru’s intrusions. Further, taking the Xìcí’s frequent zǐ yuē as proof, [he] determines [it] to be the disciples’ record, not the Master’s book. Therefore he sets aside these various wing-traditions, only annotating the canonical text. His distributing-and-attaching the Tuàn zhuàn under the Tuàncí, the Xiǎo xiàng under the yáocí — still uses Wáng Bì’s base. His moving the Dà xiàng to be between the hexagram-drawing and the Tuàncí, distributing the Wén yán under the Qián-Kūn Tuànzhuàn and Xiǎo xiàng — these are also [Zhào] Rǔméi’s new ideas. The splitting-and-overturning is especially attached to teacher-mind. Further, although Wáng Bì’s base moved the wings appended-to-the-canon, it still preserves the marker characters Tuàn yuē, Xiàng yuē, Wén yán yuē to maintain identifiability. [Zhào] Rǔméi removed even these — bringing canon-and-commentary into mixed-confusion — fánrán mò biàn (impossible-to-distinguish-vague-confusion). Especially treating-the-silk-to-make-it-tangled.
For each hexagram, the head opens with a guàbiàn discussion — also not free of partial-attachment-to-one-corner. Yet his exposition’s pushing-and-illuminating in detail and clarity — on the principles of bǐyìng and chéngchéng, on the mechanism of yíngxū xiāozhǎng — has its developments. Not the same as forced-and-arbitrary speculation; among the Sòng-people’s Yì-expositions, still relatively clear-and-substantive.
Yì yǎ in one juan: a general-gloss-of-name-meanings, roughly modeled on the Ěr yǎ’s exposition of the Shī; hence titled yǎ. Its sections are tōng shì, shū shì, xué shì, qíng shì, wèi shì, xiàng shì, cí shì, biàn shì, zhān shì, guàbiàn shì, yáobiàn shì, déshī shì, bā guà shì, liù yáo shì, yīnyáng shì, Tàijí míngyì shì, xiàngshù tǐyòng shì, Túshū shì — eighteen piān in all.
Its Túshū discussion says: the Yì has yǎn shù, has jī shù. From 5 extended to 50 — that is yǎn shù. From 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 accumulated to 55 — that is jī shù. The Túshū’s two numbers are both companions of jī shù — cannot enter into the shī-procedure. Hence: setting aside the Túshū names and discussing the two numbers, there is naturally subtle principle; forcing the two numbers under the Túshū names — there is no evidence in the canon. — May be called pleased-to-resolve-knotty-issues.
Shì zōng in one juan — Zhū Yízūn’s Jīngyì kǎo gives three juan. For this book’s original-base titles: first Míng běn; second Shù shì; third Xiān zhuàn kǎo — [Zhū] Yízūn took each piān as one juan. Its pushing-and-illuminating of the dà yǎn number is rather clear; on the various schools’ old expositions, item-by-item argues-and-distinguishes; also possesses evidential basis.
Respectfully revised and submitted, ninth month of the forty-fourth year of Qiánlóng [1779].
General Compilers: Jǐ Yún 紀昀, Lù Xīxióng 陸錫熊, Sūn Shìyì 孫士毅. General Reviser: Lù Fèichí 陸費墀.
Abstract
Zhào Rǔméi (趙汝楳, fl. mid-thirteenth century; lifedates not securely recorded), of Biànshuǐ 汴水 (Kāifēng region — the family-resident-place after the Northern Sòng’s loss of Kāifēng was Héběi-area; Zhào Rǔméi himself resided in late-Sòng Línān). Imperial-clan member, seventh-generation descendant of Shāngwáng 趙元份 Zhào Yuánfèn (a Northern-Sòng prince).
CBDB records him without lifedates, with biographical references at the Sòngshǐ (PRC ed.; the imperial genealogies do not include him) and at Níngbō fǔzhì 17.1096; Yuán Jué 袁桷’s Wénjí 33.6b. As the youngest son of Zhào Shànxiāng, he is reckoned son #4. Hùbù shìláng under Lǐzōng or early Dùzōng.
Father 趙善湘 Zhào Shànxiāng (documentary references at Sòngshǐ PRC ed. 230.7296, Níngbō fǔzhì 17.1089) was a Zīzhèngdiàn dàxuéshì and a substantial Yì-scholar in his own right. The five works the tiyao enumerates (Yuē shuō / Huò wèn / Zhǐ yào / Xù wèn / Bǔ guò) are no longer extant in independent transmission; the Jí wén’s methodology and substantive readings preserve the family-line tradition.
Methodologically Zhào Rǔméi is a late-Sòng xiàngshù-with-textual-criticism synthesizer. His most distinctive position is the radical-reductionist textual-criticism: rejecting the Shuō guà, Xù guà, and Zá guà as Hàn-ru intrusions, treating the Xìcí as disciples’ record. This anticipates by several centuries the late-Míng / Qīng Yì-text-criticism programs of 王禕 Wáng Yī, Yáo Jìhéng 姚際恆, and others. For an yìlǐ-and-xiàngshù-bridge synthesizer to also doubt the canonical wings is methodologically distinctive.
The Yì yǎ’s 18-section glossary is one of the cleaner late-Sòng systematic-conceptual Yì lexicons. The Sìkù-praised Túshū analysis — distinguishing yǎn shù from jī shù — is methodologically clean and was widely cited in the YuánMíng Yì-numerology criticism literature. The Shì zōng’s exposition of the dà yǎn and its critique of school-expositions provides one of the more systematic Sòng treatments of the procedural Yì.
The composition window 1250–1265 is consistent with the auto-preface’s late-life self-description and the constraints from the father’s death and Zhào Rǔméi’s own Hùbù shìláng tenure.
Translations and research
No European-language translation. The work is principally consulted in the Chinese-language Yì-historical literature.
- Zhū Bóqūn 朱伯崑, Yìxué zhéxué shǐ, vol. 2 — Zhào Rǔméi treated as a late-Sòng family-line Yì-scholar with significant text-critical commitments.
- Wáng Tiějūn 王鐵均, Sòngdài Yìxué shǐ — chapter on the late-Lǐzōng / Dùzōng-period Yì tradition.
- Liào Mínghuó 廖名活, articles in Zhōuyì yánjiū on Zhào Rǔméi’s yǎn shù / jī shù distinction.
- Modern punctuated editions on the Sìkù yǐng-Sòng chāo base.
Other points of interest
Zhào Rǔméi’s text-critical position on the wing-treatises — a substantial advance on the Wú Rénjié (KR1a0042) program of Xìcí / Shuō guà relabeling, going further to reject Shuō guà, Xù guà, Zá guà outright as Hàn intrusions and to treat the Xìcí itself as disciple-record — is one of the most aggressive Sòng-period text-critical positions on the Yì canonical structure. Modern excavated-text studies (the Mǎwángduī and Shànghǎi Bówùguǎn manuscripts) have not generally confirmed Zhào Rǔméi’s specific reductions, but his methodological rigor is recognizable.
The HétúLuòshū / yǎn shù distinction — the HétúLuòshū numbers are jī (accumulating) not yǎn (extending), and so cannot be canonical for shī (yarrow-stalk) — is one of the cleaner methodological clarifications of the entire late-Sòng xiàngshù tradition. The position effectively demotes the HétúLuòshū from canonical status within the Yì-procedure proper, while maintaining their relevance for general Yì-cosmology.
The Zhào-family family-line Yì-scholarship is one of the cleaner imperial-clan scholastic-dynasty examples: Zhào Shànxiāng’s substantial five-work corpus + Zhào Rǔméi’s continuation in a unified work provides a multi-generational documentary record of Yì-pedagogy within the imperial-clan high-official social stratum.