Zhōuyì zhuànyì fù lù 周易傳義附錄
Appended Records to the Zhōuyì Tradition-and-Meaning [of Chéng Yí and Zhū Xī]
by 董楷 (Dǒng Kǎi, zì Zhèngshū 正叔, b. 1226, of Tāizhōu Línhǎi 台州臨海, modern Zhèjiāng — jìnshì of Bǎoyòu 4 / 1256, Lìbù lángzhōng 吏部郎中)
About the work
A fourteen-juan combined-edition of Chéng Yí’s Yì zhuàn (KR1a0016) and Zhū Xī’s Zhōuyì běnyì — appended throughout with supplementary materials gathered from the two masters’ Wén jí and Yǔlù. The work’s bibliographic-historical importance is double: substantively, it is one of the earliest Sòng-period combined ChéngZhū Yì-commentaries; structurally, it inadvertently launched the post-Sòng standardization of the Běnyì in a Wáng-Bì-recension structural form rather than the gǔyì form Zhū Xī himself had preferred.
Dǒng Kǎi’s auto-preface (dated Xiánchún bǐngyín / 1266, hòuxué Tiāntāi Dǒng Kǎi) gives the rationale. The two masters of the ChéngZhū line have between them mastered the Yì-canonical tradition: Chéng Yí “from the rotation of a thousand years arose, beginning to expound — by means of the marvel of yīnyáng transformation, by imagery clarifying principle, by principle threading-through events; encompassing substance-and-function, uniting manifest-and-subtle”; Zhū Xī “the wording is more concise-and-strict; deeply explored the ancient sage’s original-intent of using divination to teach people, and did not fall into the various ru’s mantic-numerology branch-flow.” Dǒng Kǎi assembled passages from the two masters’ Wén jí and Yǔlù “as I came across them, appended each passage at the end of each chapter; over months and years, the gathered records grew.”
The work’s methodological-position is given in the auto-preface as a quotation from Dǒng Kǎi’s teacher Chén Qìzhī 陳器之 (a second-generation Zhū-Xī-school transmission figure, hào Běixī 北溪 in Dǒng Kǎi’s report — distinct from the canonically more famous Běixī Chénshì Chén Chún 陳淳 of 1159–1223 who was a direct ZhūXī disciple; Dǒng Kǎi’s Chén Qìzhī is the next-generation figure, with whom Dǒng Kǎi could have studied):
The Yì*‘s rise originates from imagery-and-numerology; once imagery-and-numerology has formed, principle is again contained within imagery-and-numerology — and one cannot bifurcate the substance into root-and-branch. The* Yì*‘s composition originates from divination; once divination has been established, principle is again housed within divination — and one cannot bifurcate the use into refined-and-coarse. This is precisely what Master Chéng calls ‘substance-and-function having one source, manifest-and-subtle without gap.’ If one inclines partial to imagery-and-divination and does not encompass principle-and-rightness, then Confucius’s intent is extinguished; if one inclines partial to principle-and-rightness and does not extend to imagery-and-divination, then Fúxī, Wénwáng, and Duke-of-Zhōu’s heart is also nearly choked.*
The structural problem the work creates: Chéng Yí’s Yì zhuàn uses Wáng Bì’s recension (Tuànzhuàn dispersed under hexagram-statements; Xiàngzhuàn dispersed under line-statements; Wén yán under QiánKūn; etc.). Zhū Xī’s Běnyì, by contrast, uses Lǚ Zǔqiān’s gǔyì recension (KR1a0043) — keeping the wing-treatises as continuous independent texts (12-piān structure). When Dǒng Kǎi combined the two commentaries into a single edition with Chéng Yí as primary (because Chéng Yí is chronologically prior and methodologically Zhū Xī’s acknowledged precursor), he had to break up Zhū Xī’s Běnyì’s continuous wing-treatise commentary and redistribute it to fit Wáng Bì’s structural form.
The Sìkù tiyao registers the consequence: “Reaching down to the Míng Yǒnglè era, Hú Guǎng 胡廣 and others’ composing of the Zhōuyì dàquán 周易大全 still continued his error. Down to Chéng Jǔ 成矩’s separate cutting of the Běnyì — using the Chéng zhuàn’s sequence — the rural-school students [therefore] no longer knew there was a gǔjīng*. So [Dǒng] Kǎi originated the start.*”
This is one of the most consequential single-editorial-intervention statements in the entire Sìkù Yì lèi. The standard YuánMíngQīng Běnyì — used in the examination-system canonization (1313), reprinted in the Sìshū wǔjīng dàquán (1415), and circulating into the modern era — is the Dǒng-Kǎi-ified version with ChéngYí ordering, not Zhū Xī’s own gǔyì form. Modern critical editions (twentieth century onward) have largely restored the gǔyì form.
A small further note on Dǒng Kǎi’s editorial care: in his original base text, Dǒng Kǎi maintained typographic distinctions — the canonical text flush left, the Ten Wings indented one character; where the Běnyì had no canonical-passage to attach to, he marked the position with red ink notes giving the relevant passage-range. The Sìkù base-text has lost even these distinctions: “Today’s base [where] canon-and-transmission unified-as-one [are] flush-written, and the Běnyì is also intent-cut-and-pieced — [is] the more-and-more-lost. Also not what [Dǒng] Kǎi could have predicted.” The text we have is more corrupted than Dǒng Kǎi’s original.
The composition window 1260–1266 reflects: Dǒng Kǎi’s jìnshì of 1256 and subsequent Lìbù lángzhōng tenure as the broader scholarly context; the auto-preface’s Xiánchún bǐngyín (1266) date as the firm terminus.
Tiyao
We respectfully submit that Zhōuyì zhuànyì fù lù in fourteen juan was composed by Dǒng Kǎi of the Sòng. [Dǒng] Kǎi, zì Zhèngshū, a man of Tāizhōu Línhǎi. Jìnshì of Bǎoyòu 4 [1256]; held office to Lìbù lángzhōng. His learning came out of Chén Qìzhī, [Chén] Qìzhī came out of Master Zhū. Hence his exposition of the Yì takes only LuòMǐn [= ChéngYí + ZhūXī] as canon.
This compilation was completed in Xiánchún bǐngyín [1266]; combines Master Chéng’s zhuàn and Master Zhū’s Běnyì as one book, drawing on the two masters’ remaining-expositions to append at the end of [each canonical passage] — the intent being to bridge principle-and-numerology, and further to cite ChéngZhū’s words to wing ChéngZhū. [Therefore the work] is also better than indulging-in-private-opinion or chiseling-the-empty, working-to-seek-the-strange beyond the old expositions.
But Master Chéng’s zhuàn uses the Wáng Bì base; Master Zhū’s Běnyì uses Lǚ Zǔqiān’s settled gǔ base. [Dǒng] Kǎi, taking Master Chéng as in front, accordingly cut-and-broke up the Master Zhū Běnyì and appended it after the Chéng zhuàn. Reaching down to the Míng Yǒnglè era, Hú Guǎng et al. composing the Zhōuyì dàquán still continued his error. Reaching Chéng Jǔ’s separately cutting the Běnyì, also using the Chéng zhuàn’s sequence — the rural-school students [therefore] no longer knew there was a gǔjīng. [Dǒng] Kǎi originated the start.
But [Dǒng] Kǎi’s base, on the canonical text, writes flush; the Ten-Wings text he writes indented-one-character. Where the Běnyì has nothing to attach, [he] following the various canons’ sub-commentary’s “from such-passage to such-passage” example, [used] red text to mark its title to clarify it — still maintaining distinction. Today’s base — canon-and-tradition uniformly flush-written, and the Běnyì also intent-cut-and-pieced — [is] the more-and-more lost. Also not what [Dǒng] Kǎi could have predicted.
Respectfully revised and submitted, seventh month of the forty-fifth year of Qiánlóng [1780].
General Compilers: Jǐ Yún 紀昀, Lù Xīxióng 陸錫熊, Sūn Shìyì 孫士毅. General Reviser: Lù Fèichí 陸費墀.
Abstract
董楷 Dǒng Kǎi (b. 1226, death year unrecorded), zì Zhèngshū 正叔, of Tāizhōu Línhǎi 台州臨海 (modern Línhǎi county, Zhèjiāng). Jìnshì of Bǎoyòu 4 (1256). Career to Lìbù lángzhōng 吏部郎中.
Pedagogical lineage: Dǒng Kǎi’s teacher Chén Qìzhī 陳器之 → Chén Qìzhī’s teacher (per the Sìkù tiyao) Zhū Xī. The Chén Qìzhī here is identified by hào Běixī 北溪 in Dǒng Kǎi’s report, but is not the canonical Běixī Chén Chún 陳淳 (1159–1223, direct ZhūXī disciple) — chronological constraints make Chén Chún too early for Dǒng Kǎi (b. 1226) to have been a direct student. Dǒng Kǎi’s Chén Qìzhī is therefore a next-generation figure also styled Běixī, with whom Dǒng Kǎi could have studied.
Methodologically Dǒng Kǎi is a strict ChéngZhū yìlǐ-and-xiàng-shù-united synthesizer. The work’s approach — citing the masters to amplify the masters — is one of the cleaner late-Sòng instances of self-restrained meta-commentary, and the Sìkù editors register this approvingly: “[the work] is also better than indulging-in-private-opinion or chiseling-the-empty, working-to-seek-the-strange beyond the old expositions.”
The work’s structural-bibliographic significance, however, is what the Sìkù editors emphasize. The gǔyì recension that Lǚ Zǔqiān (KR1a0043) had restored and that Zhū Xī had preserved as the textual base for the Běnyì — establishing the 12-piān structure with continuous wing-treatises — was broken up by Dǒng Kǎi’s editorial intervention: the Běnyì commentary was redistributed to fit Wáng Bì’s recension (the structural base of Chéng Yí’s Yì zhuàn). This redistribution propagated into:
- The Yuán-period jiàojì (orthodox-text) circulation of the Běnyì.
- The 1313 examination-system canonization of the Běnyì.
- The Míng Yǒnglè-period Zhōuyì dàquán (1415, Hú Guǎng et al.) — the orthodox Míng Yì textbook.
- Chéng Jǔ’s separate Míng-period Běnyì cutting, also using ChéngYí ordering.
By the time the Qīng Sìkù editors were working, the gǔyì form of the Běnyì “had no transmission”; rural-school students had no awareness it existed. Modern critical editions (Zhōnghuá shūjú, Shànghǎi gǔjí) have restored the gǔyì form.
The Běixī Chénshì citation (Chén Qìzhī?) preserved in the auto-preface — yì zhī qǐ yuán yú xiàngshù… yì zhī zuò běn yú zhānshì 易之起原於象數… 易之作本於占筮 — gives one of the cleaner Chéng-Zhū-mainline statements of the Yì’s origin in xiàngshù with yìlǐ as inseparable companion. The position is methodologically continuous with Cài Yuān (KR1a0053) and Zhū Xī’s own Běnyì-prefatorial framing.
The composition window 1260–1266 reflects Dǒng Kǎi’s mature scholarly years post-jìnshì and the firm 1266 auto-preface terminus.
Translations and research
The work is principally consulted in the secondary literature on the Chéng-Zhū Yì-tradition’s textual transmission.
- Joseph A. Adler, Reconstructing the Confucian Dao: Zhu Xi’s Appropriation of Zhou Dunyi (SUNY, 2014) — context for Zhū Xī’s gǔ-yì commitment and its post-Sòng disruption.
- John W. Chaffee, The Thorny Gates of Learning in Sung China (Cambridge, 1985) — examination-system context for the Yuán-Míng Běn-yì circulation.
- Hoyt Cleveland Tillman, Confucian Discourse and Chu Hsi’s Ascendancy (Univ. of Hawaii, 1992) — Zhū-school transmission context.
- Zhū Bóqūn 朱伯崑, Yìxué zhéxué shǐ, vol. 2 — Dǒng Kǎi treated as the textual-disruption point in Běn-yì transmission.
- Wáng Tiějūn 王鐵均, Sòngdài Yìxué shǐ — chapter on the late-Sòng Chéng-Zhū combined-edition development.
- Modern critical editions of the Běn-yì (Zhōnghuá shū-jú, Shànghǎi gǔ-jí) restore the gǔ-yì form against the Dǒng-Kǎi-ified line.
Other points of interest
The DǒngKǎi structural intervention is one of the cleanest cases in the post-Sòng canonical-commentary tradition where a bibliographic-editorial decision (combining two commentaries by privileging the chronologically-prior author’s structural form) had decisive transmission-history consequences (the YuánMíngQīng standardization of the Běnyì in a structurally non-Zhū-Xī form). The Sìkù editors’ attention to this single editorial moment, and their detailed criticism, reflects the Qīng evidential-studies attention to textual-bibliographic precision.
The red-ink-marker typographic technique Dǒng Kǎi himself used — to mark which Běnyì commentary corresponded to which canonical-passage even when the structural redistribution had broken the natural correspondence — was lost in subsequent transmission. The compounding of editorial-decision plus loss-of-typographic-discipline produced a transmitted text that lost both Zhū Xī’s structural intent and Dǒng Kǎi’s mitigating typographic discipline.
The methodological framing — citing the masters to amplify the masters — anticipates the late-Yuán and Míng jíshuō (collected-expositions) genre that compiles disciple-and-second-generation glosses around a master’s commentary. The genre’s foundational examples include the Sìshū dàquán and Wǔjīng dàquán compilations of 1415; Dǒng Kǎi’s Fù lù is one of the cleaner late-Sòng pre-figurations.