Yòng Yì xiáng jiě 用易詳解
Detailed Glosses on the Use of the Yì
by 李杞 Lǐ Qǐ (撰) — zì Zǐcái 子才, hào Qiānzhāi 謙齋, fl. 1203, of Méishān 眉山 in Sìchuān.
About the work
A sixteen-juan Yì-commentary by Lǐ Qǐ 李杞 — not the Northern-Sòng Lǐ Qǐ (1080-death year, of 蘇軾 Sū Shì’s Wūtái shī àn circle) and not the Zhū-Xī-disciple Lǐ Qǐ (zì Liángzhòng 良仲, of Píngjiāng, recorder of the Jiǎyín wèndá 甲寅問答). The Sìkù tiyao explicitly disambiguates these three Sòng-period Lǐ Qǐ’s. Of these the present author Lǐ Qǐ of Méishān (Sìchuān) is the third, recorded only by his auto-preface (dated Jiātài guǐhài / 1203) and by the surviving work itself.
The original work was 20 juan; the Sìkù base, recovered from Yǒnglè dàdiǎn citations, lacks 7 hexagrams’ material (Yù 豫, Suí 隨, Wúwàng 無妄, Dàzhuàng 大壯, Kuí 睽, Jiǎn 蹇, Zhōngfú 中孚) plus the bottom four lines of the Jìn hexagram, but otherwise is “completely good”; the Sìkù editors reorganized it into 16 juan. Bibliographic note: 焦竑 Jiāo Hóng’s Jīngjí zhì 經籍志 lists the work as Qiānzhāi xiáng jiě 謙齋詳解; 朱彝尊 Zhū Yízūn’s Jīngyì kǎo (KR2n0011) lists it as Zhōuyì xiáng jiě 周易詳解. The auto-preface confirms the work’s title is Yòng Yì; “Jiāo Hóng and Zhū Yízūn evidently had not seen the original book, hence transmitted-hearings became disordered.”
The methodological program of the work is articulated in a memorable auto-preface paradox: jīngxué bù kě yǐ shǐ zhèng, jīngxué bì yǐ shǐ zhèng 經學不可以史證，經學必以史證 — “Canonical-studies cannot be evidenced by history; canonical-studies must be evidenced by history.” Lǐ Qǐ explains: “The Sage’s canon establishes its principle; history records its events. With this principle there must be these events; the two are mutually-related and one-cannot-lack. From later ages — taking empty-talk as study, splitting canon-and-history into two, exalting the canon too much — the Six Canons’ books often consequently fall into the realm of the vacuous-and-deserted-vast.”
The Yì specifically: “The Yì is the Sage’s coming-into-action; therefore he uses it to ride-the-times. Times’ transformations come without limit, and the Yì*‘s principle also goes-with-them without limit. Use it well — auspicious; use it ill — regret-or-trouble. The ancient sages’ flowing-circulation-and-transformation, leading-the-people in usage, all are the marvel of using-the-* Yì. YáoShùn’s abdication, TāngWǔ’s punitive expedition, Yī-[Yǐn]-Zhōu-[gōng]‘s flourishing, KǒngMèng’s hardship — in the world there are these times, in the Yì there are these principles, in the sages there are these uses.”
The title Yòng Yì (Using-the-Yì) invokes 王通 Wáng Tōng’s (Suí Wénzhōngzǐ 文中子) signature formula “the Yì is the sage’s coming-into-action” (Yì, shèngrén zhī dòng yě 易，聖人之動也).
The methodology: each yáo gloss is followed by citation-of-historical-event showing the principle in concrete action. Sìkù examples:
- Qián chūjiǔ “qián lóng wù yòng” (submerged dragon, do not use): citation of Shùn 舜 still-of-low-station before his elevation.
- Qián jiǔèr “xiàn lóng zài tián, lì jiàn dàrén” (appearing dragon in the field, beneficial to see the great man): citation of the Four Mountains’ recommendation of Shùn to Yáo.
The Sìkù tiyao establishes the methodological precedent: 鄭玄 Zhèng Xuán’s gloss of Qián’s yòngjiǔ invoked the historical event of “Shùn and Yǔ, Jì, Xiè, GāoYáo all at court”; Zhèng’s gloss of Suí’s chūjiǔ invoked “Shùn welcoming guests at the Four Gates.” The Yì’s own yáocí contains historical-name references (Dìyǐ 帝乙, Gāozōng 高宗); the zhuàn contains Wénwáng 文王 and Jīzǐ 箕子. So “the sage was originally not setting forth empty-words to make doctrine.” The Sòng-period historical-cases tradition continued through 李光 Lǐ Guāng’s Yì commentary and especially 楊萬里 Yáng Wànlǐ’s Chéngzhāi Yì zhuàn (KR1a0040); Lǐ Qǐ stands in this trajectory.
The Sìkù tiyao’s substantive criticism is directed at a different citation-pattern in Lǐ Qǐ’s work: extensive citation of Lǎozǐ and Zhuāngzǐ. Examples:
- Méng 蒙 hexagram chūliù: cited Lǎozǐ’s “Cry all day and not become hoarse” (= the Dàodé jīng 55 image) as the meaning of tóngméng (childhood-folly).
- Lǚ 履 hexagram Tuàn: cited Zhuāngzǐ’s “The tiger is a different species from man, yet is fond of his keeper” as the meaning of lǚ hǔ wěi (treading-on-the-tiger’s-tail).
The Sìkù editors’ substantive criticism: “The books of LǎoZhuāng — although their language seems close to the Yì*, their strong-and-weak-attack-and-take mechanism and their form-following-mind-resonant discussion are decidedly different in direction from the* Yì*‘s without-position-without-substance and stable-by-centeredness-correctness-humanity-rightness orientation.” The genealogical context: 葉夢得 Yè Mèngdé’s Yánxià fàng yán 巖下放言 (Northern Sòng / early-Southern-Sòng) had claimed “the Yì’s refined storehouse is fully in ZhuāngLiè.*” 程大昌 Chéng Dàchāng then composed YìLǎo tōng yán 易老通言 (a programmatic YìLǎo synthesis). Lǐ Qǐ’s work continues this YìLǎo line, “extending and amplifying it.”
The Sìkù verdict: this is “the most-clear demonstration of the endless mischief of Wáng Bì’s company’s having swept-clean Hàn-learning [from the Yì]. Setting it apart-and-recording, [we] also can [serve] as a warning against the Qīngtán fashion.”
The composition window 1203 reflects the firmly fixed auto-preface date.
Tiyao
We respectfully submit that Yòng Yì xiáng jiě in sixteen juan was composed by Lǐ Qǐ of the Sòng. [Lǐ] Qǐ, zì Zǐcái, hào Qiānzhāi, a man of Méishān; his official-career is unclear.
We note: in the Sòng there were three Lǐ Qǐ’s. One was a Northern-Sòng man, holding office as Dàlǐsì chéng, who exchanged poetry-and-rhyme with Sū Shì — see Wūtái shī àn. One was Master Zhū’s disciple, zì Liángzhòng, of Píngjiāng — the one who recorded the Jiǎyín wèndá. He and the present author are decidedly not one person; those who confuse them and treat them as the same are wrong.
His book originally has twenty juan; Jiāo Hóng’s Jīngjí zhì gives Qiānzhāi xiáng jiě; Zhū Yízūn’s Jīngyì kǎo gives Zhōuyì xiáng jiě. We examine [Lǐ] Qǐ’s auto-preface, which says: “Canon must be evidenced by history; later ages have split into two, exalting the canon too much, conversely fall into the realm of vacuous-vast. So [we] cannot see the canon as a for-all-ages-useful study — therefore I take Wénzhōngzǐ’s saying and use Yòng Yì as the title of the compilation.” His description of the title-meaning is very detailed. [Jiāo] Hóng and [Zhū] Yízūn evidently had not seen the original book; hence transmitted-hearings became disordered.
In the world long without transmission-base; only the Yǒnglè dàdiǎn still scatters [the text] under each rhyme. Selecting-and-collecting-and-gathering, [we now] lack only seven hexagrams — Yù, Suí, Wúwàng, Dàzhuàng, Kuí, Jiǎn, Zhōngfú — and the Jìn hexagram’s bottom four lines; the rest is completely good. We respectfully sequenced and collated, organized as sixteen juan.
In the book, the example: for each yáo, gloss its wording-and-meaning; then cite past-and-current historical events to substantiate it. As: Qián chūjiǔ citing Shùn-still-low-station; Qián jiǔèr citing the Four-Mountains’ recommendation of Shùn — and the like.
We examine: the Yì’s yáo has Dìyǐ and Gāozōng imagery; the zhuàn has Wénwáng and Jīzǐ wording. So the sages were originally not setting forth empty-words to establish-instruction. Therefore Zhèng Kāngchéng [Zhèng Xuán]‘s discussion of Qián’s yòngjiǔ extended-to Shùn and YǔJìXièGāoYáo at court; his discussion of Suí’s chūjiǔ took the meaning of Shùn welcoming guests at the Four Gates — clarifying the Yì’s closeness to human-affairs.
In Sòng-times Lǐ Guāng and Yáng Wànlǐ, etc., extended-by broadly-drawing-from historical records to mutually verify-and-clarify [the canon]. Although there is some little drift-into-overflow, [the work’s] pushing-and-illuminating’s preciseness — on the matters of establishing imagery to leave warning — is genuinely much-clarifying. [Lǐ] Qǐ’s exposition of the Yì takes the same orientation.
Within it, what is unteachable is: only that he much cites LǎoZhuāng texts. As: Méng chūliù citing Lǎozǐ’s “Cry all day and not become hoarse” — taking it as the meaning of tóng méng. As: Lǚ Tuàn citing Zhuāngzǐ’s “The tiger is a different species from man, yet is fond of his keeper” — taking it as the meaning of lǚ hǔ wěi. The books of LǎoZhuāng, although their language seems to be close to the Yì, [yet] the strong-and-weak attack-and-take mechanism and form-following-mind-resonant discussion — with the Yì’s without-position-without-substance and stable-by-centeredness-correctness-humanity-rightness — the orientations are clearly different.
From Yè Mèngdé’s Yánxià fàng yán, declaring that “the Yì*‘s refined storehouse is fully in ZhuāngLiè,*” and Chéng Dàchāng then composing YìLǎo tōng yán, [Lǐ] Qǐ in composing this compilation again extends-and-amplifies it. This is the all-too-clear demonstration of the endless mischief from Wáng Bì’s company having swept-clean Hàn-learning. Setting it apart-and-recording, [we] also serve as a warning against the Qīngtán (pure-discussion) fashion.
Respectfully revised and submitted, ninth month of the forty-sixth year of Qiánlóng [1781].
General Compilers: Jǐ Yún 紀昀, Lù Xīxióng 陸錫熊, Sūn Shìyì 孫士毅. General Reviser: Lù Fèichí 陸費墀.
Abstract
Lǐ Qǐ (李杞, fl. 1203), zì Zǐcái 子才, hào Qiānzhāi 謙齋, of Méishān 眉山 in Sìchuān (modern Méishān prefecture, central Sìchuān). The CBDB-recorded Sòng Lǐ Qǐ entries are several: the Northern-Sòng Wūtái shī àn figure d. 1080; a 1168–1220 figure documented by an epitaph in Xiāngyáng zhǒngmù yíwén; and several unidentified Sòng entries. The present author of Yòng Yì is most plausibly one of the unidentified Sòng entries without dates. The Sìkù editors’ careful disambiguation against the two more-distinguished Lǐ Qǐ’s preserves the present author’s distinct identity.
The methodological program — jīngxué bì yǐ shǐ zhèng (canonical-studies must be evidenced by history) — places the Yòng Yì xiáng jiě in the line of historical-case readings that runs from Zhèng Xuán’s late-Hàn historical-allusion-glossing through Lǐ Guāng (early Southern Sòng), reaching its richest articulation in Yáng Wànlǐ’s Chéngzhāi Yì zhuàn (KR1a0040), and continuing through to Lǐ Qǐ’s 1203 work. The Wáng Tōng (Wénzhōngzǐ) inheritance — the Yì as the sage’s coming-into-action — gives the methodology its Suí-Táng-anchored framework.
The LǎoZhuāng-citation dimension is the work’s distinctive contribution and the principal source of Sìkù-period criticism. The YìLǎo tōng yán line that runs from Yè Mèngdé through Chéng Dàchāng to Lǐ Qǐ — treating Lǎozǐ and Zhuāngzǐ materials as substantively glossing Yì-imagery — represents one strand of late-Sòng sānjiào héyī 三教合一 (three-teachings-as-one) thought. The Sìkù editors’ criticism that this represents the “endless mischief of Wáng-Bì-line sweeping-away of Hàn-learning” is methodologically significant: the editors locate the YìLǎo synthesis as an unintended consequence of the Wáng Bì line’s having displaced the Hàn-period xiàngshù and jiāfǎ readings.
Methodologically, the Yòng Yì xiáng jiě is therefore distinctive in combining the historical-case method (a Sòng-period yìlǐ development) with the YìLǎo synthesis (a parallel Sòng-period yuánxū development). The combination produces a hybrid hermeneutic that the Sìkù editors find problematic: historical cases for the yìlǐ dimension; Daoist allusions for the yuánxū dimension; with no clear methodological principle for choosing which is appropriate where.
The composition window of 1203 (single year) reflects the firmly-fixed auto-preface date. No internal evidence suggests an extended composition arc; the work appears to have been finished in a single sustained period of writing.
Translations and research
No European-language translation. The work is principally treated in the Chinese-language Yì-history literature.
- Hoyt Cleveland Tillman, Confucian Discourse and Chu Hsi’s Ascendancy (Univ. of Hawaii, 1992) — context for the late-Sòng sānjiào héyī fashion.
- Zhū Bóqūn 朱伯崑, Yìxué zhéxué shǐ, vol. 2 — Lǐ Qǐ briefly treated as a Yì-Lǎo synthesizer.
- Wáng Tiějūn 王鐵均, Sòngdài Yìxué shǐ — chapter on the historical-case method and its development.
- Liào Mínghuó 廖名活, articles in Zhōuyì yánjiū on the late-Sòng Yì-Lǎo synthesis line.
- Modern punctuated editions on the Sìkù base.
Other points of interest
The auto-preface paradox — jīngxué bù kě yǐ shǐ zhèng, jīngxué bì yǐ shǐ zhèng — is one of the more elegant Sòng-period methodological paradoxes for canon-and-history relations. The first half acknowledges that history alone cannot exhaust the canon’s principle; the second half asserts that without historical evidence the canon’s principle dissipates into vacuity. The synthesis is a complementary-and-mutually-correcting hermeneutic.
The Sìkù editors’ implication that the YìLǎo synthesis is an unintended consequence of Wáng Bì’s having displaced Hàn-learning — that, by removing the Hàn-period xiàngshù discipline, Wáng Bì opened the door to LǎoZhuāng infiltration that the Hàn discipline had kept out — is methodologically interesting. It places the responsibility for Sòng-period YìChán and YìLǎo drift not on the xīnxué readers (Yáng Jiǎn KR1a0037, Wáng Zōngchuán KR1a0047) directly but on the structural fact of post-Hàn Yì-tradition having lost its disciplining technical apparatus.