易象義

Yì xiàng yì 易象義

Yì-Imagery Meanings

by 丁易東 (Dīng Yìdōng, zì Hànchén 漢臣, hào Shítán 石潭, fl. late Sòng / early Yuán, jìnshì of Xiánchún 4 (1268), of Wǔlíng 武陵 / Chángdé 常德 in Húnán; Cháofèng dàfū 朝奉大夫, Tàifǔsì bù 太府寺簿 concurrent with Shūmìyuàn biānxiūguān 樞密院編修官 under late Sòng; declined Yuán service and taught locally at his Shítán jīngshè 石壇精舍)

About the work

A sixteen-juan systematic xiàngshù (imagery-and-numerology) reading of the Zhōuyì, by Dīng Yìdōng 丁易東 — one of the most methodologically articulate late-Sòng / early-Yuán xiàngshù synthesizers, who consciously drew across the entire post-Hàn Yì-tradition while bringing a distinctive structural-classification framework to the imagery-derivation question.

The work’s organizing principle: each yáo’s imagery can be derived from the hexagram-structure by one (or several) of twelve classes of qǔ xiàng 取象 (image-taking) procedures. The Sìkù tiyao enumerates these:

1. Běn tǐ 本體 (own-substance) — Qián = heaven, Kūn = earth, etc., from each hexagram’s upper-and-lower trigrams’ canonical Shuō guà attributions.
2. Hù tǐ 互體 (interlocking-trigrams) — the two trigrams formed by lines 2-3-4 and 3-4-5; the xiàngshù basis articulated in the Xìcí’s zá wù zhuàn dé 雜物撰德 passage.
3. Guàbiàn 卦變 (hexagram-transformation) — the Tuàn’s dà wǎng xiǎo lái 大往小來 and the zhuàn’s róu lái wén gāng, gāng shàng wén róu 柔來文剛剛上文柔.
4. Zhèng yìng 正應 (proper-correspondence) — the zhuàn’s gāngróu nèiwài zhī yìng 剛柔內外之應.
5. Dòng yáo 動爻 (active-line) — old-yáng transforming to yīn; old-yīn transforming to yáng.
6. Biàn guà 變卦 (transformed-hexagram) — the Zuǒzhuàn’s recorded ancients’ divinatory method (Qián zhī Gòu, Qián zhī Tóngrén type).
7. Fú guà 伏卦 (hidden-hexagram) — Qián hides Kūn; Zhèn hides Xùn; the Shuō guà’s tiāndì dìng wèi, léifēng xiāng bó 天地定位雷風相薄 framework.
8. Hù duì 互對 (mutual-pairing) — the Hàn pángtōng 旁通 doctrine; same as fú guà in operation but applied to whole-hexagram-against-whole-hexagram (rather than within-hexagram).
9. Fǎn duì 反對 (180-rotation-pair) — Sǔn and Yì’s 5-2 wording matches; Guài and Gòu’s 4-3 wording matches.
10. Bǐ yáo 比爻 (adjacent-line) — line 1 adjacent to 2; 2 adjacent to 3; etc.
11. Yuán huà 原畫 (original-drawing) — yáng lines all properly belong to Qián; yīn lines all properly belong to Kūn.
12. Nà jiǎ 納甲 (matching-stems) — Gǔ’s xiān jiǎ hòu jiǎ; Xùn’s xiān gēng hòu gēng; the calendrical-stem/branch matching.

For the substance of each gloss, Dīng Yìdōng draws principally on Lǐ Dǐngzuò’s Zhōuyì jí jiě (KR1a0008) and Zhū Zhèn’s Hànshàng Yì zhuàn (KR1a0024) — but, methodologically careful, judges that “Lǐ loses by sticking [too closely to the apparatus]; Zhū is harmed by cleverness”; therefore he does not master one school. For guàbiàn he takes Shào Yōng and Zhū Xī; for biàn guà he takes Shěn Gāi 沈該 and Dū Jié 都潔; for zhānshì (yarrow-stalk divinatory practice) he takes Zhū Xī, Cài Yuān (蔡淵), and Féng Yǐ (馮椅). The Sìkù tiyao praises this yuǎn shào páng sōu 遠紹旁搜 (far-inheritance, side-searching) approach, judging that the work “returns to the principle of variation-without-cessation, also worth consideration by imagery-discussers.”

The work opens with a substantial three-chapter Yì tǒng lùn 易統論 (“Comprehensive Discussion on the Yì”), one of the most ambitious Sòng/Yuán-period taxonomies of Yì-school types. Dīng Yìdōng classifies prior Yì expositors into twelve classes by methodological orientation:

1. By lǐ 理 (principle): Hú Yuán 胡瑗, Chéng Yí 程頤 (Yīchuān), Zhāng Zài 張載 (Héngqú).
2. By xiàng 象 (imagery): Lǐ Dǐngzuò, Zhū Zǐfā (= Zhū Zhèn), Zhèng Shǎoméi (= Zhèng Dōngqīng 鄭東卿).
3. By biàn 變 (transformation): Shěn Gāi 沈該, Dū Jié 都潔.
4. By zhān 占 (divination): Zhū Xī, Cài Yuān (Bójìng), Féng Yǐ.
5. By shù 數 (numerology): Shào Kāngjié (= Shào Yōng), Zhāng Wénráo (= Zhāng Xíngchéng), Liú Zhìxíng (= Liú Mù).
6. By lǜ 律 (musical-pitch): Zhèng Kāngchéng (Zhèng Xuán)‘s Zhōulǐ gloss.
7. By lì 厯 (calendar): Jīng Fáng’s guàqì doctrine, Yīxíng’s qǐlì.
8. By shù 術 (mantic-art): Yìlín, Guǐgé.
9. By shì 事 (historical-events): Gān Bǎo, Cháo Zǐzhǐ (Cháo Yuèzhī?), Yáng Tíngxiù (= Yáng Wànlǐ KR1a0040).
10. By xīn 心 (mind-doctrine): Yáng Jìngzhòng (= Yáng Jiǎn KR1a0037), Qián Zǐshì 錢子是, Huáng Jǐngyuán 黄景元.
11. By Lǎo 老 (Daoist): Wáng Bì, Hán Kāngbó, Chéng Tàizhī (= Chéng Dàchāng).
12. By Shì 釋 (Buddhist): Kǒng Yǐngdá’s Jiāngzuǒ yìshū citations; Lǐ Tōngxuán’s Huáyán lùn.

This 12-school taxonomy is one of the cleaner Sòng/Yuán-period systematic surveys of the Yì-tradition’s methodological spectrum.

Methodologically, Dīng Yìdōng’s own position is zhuān yǐ yīn lǐ míng xiàng wéi zhǔ 專以因理明象為主 (“specifically taking clarifying-imagery-by-way-of-principle as my master”) — combining yìlǐ anchoring with comprehensive xiàng deployment, supplemented by biàn (transformation) and shù (number).

The work’s scholarly substance is substantial. The Liú Chénwēng 劉辰翁 preface (dated jiǎwǔ / 1294 spring) celebrates Dīng Yìdōng’s accomplishment as “from my view of recent ages’ completed-books, none like this is rare; reaching to the Dà yǎn suǒ yǐn (Great-Extension Searching-Hidden), [Dīng Yìdōng] horizontally-and-vertically separated-and-combined nothing-not-discoverable — therefore his self-attainment is deep.” The Lǐ Jué 李珏 preface (dated Zhìyuán 28 / 1291 second-month-first-day) frames Dīng Yìdōng’s contribution: “[Speaking] of principle reaches Chéng Yīchuān and is exhausted; speaking of imagery-and-numerology reaches Zhū Hànshàng [Zhū Zhèn] and is refined. Ní Jiānshān [= Ní Pǔ 倪樸 of Jiānshān] said: ‘if these two books were combined, perhaps both principle and imagery-and-numerology would be obtained.’ Truly a deep saying. Master Shítán Dīng Hànchén observed-imagery and savored-wording, exploring-the-deep and searching-the-hidden, used effort on the Yì — also already several years; saying Yīchuān had detail on principle but was light on imagery — self-saying he could only expound seven-tenths — precisely on this account… [Dīng Yìdōng’s Xiàng yì] in fact supplements [Yīchuān’s missing] thirty-percent and unifies its whole. This is what one can say to a wise person — difficult to discuss with the vulgar. Regrettable that I cannot have Jiānshān see [the work].”

Bibliographic state: catalog records vary substantially — Cháo Mùyùn 朱睦㮮’s Shòujīng tú gives 11 juan; Jiāo Hóng’s Jīngjí zhì 14 juan; Zhū Yízūn’s Jīngyì kǎo 10 juan with note “extant.” All these reckonings differ in whether the Lùnlì (one juan) and Dà yǎn suǒ yǐn (three juan) supplementary sections are counted with or separately from the main canonical-exposition body. Sìkù: the world has only “ten parts in two-or-three” (i.e. ~20-30%) extant of what Zhū Yízūn saw; recovered from Yǒnglè dàdiǎn citations, lacking 7 hexagrams’ material (Yù, Suí, Wúwàng, Dàzhuàng, Kuí, Jiǎn, Zhōngfú) and Jìn’s bottom 4 lines, otherwise complete. Sìkù editors arranged into 16 juan based on volume.

The original base also had Dà yǎn cèshù charts, mostly already covered in the Dà yǎn suǒ yǐn; the Sìkù editors did not duplicate them. The Lùnlì (= the three-chapter Yì tǒng lùn + Fán lì / “general examples”) survives intact and is preserved as the head-matter of the Sìkù base.

The composition window 1290–1294 reflects the firmly-fixed 1294 Liú Chénwēng preface and the 1291 Lǐ Jué preface; Dīng Yìdōng’s auto-preface dated jiǎwǔ (1294) is the work’s terminus.

Tiyao

We respectfully submit that Zhōuyì xiàng yì in 16 juan was composed by Dīng Yìdōng of the Sòng. [Dīng] Yìdōng, zì Hànchén, a man of Wǔlíng. Held office to Cháofèng dàfū, Tàifǔsì bù, concurrent Shūmìyuàn biānxiūguān. Entered the Yuán; did not serve. Taught in his hometown to the end.

This compilation, because Yì-imagery [is the basis for] naming-meaning, hence titled Xiàng yì. Its taking-meaning’s example is twelve in number: běn tǐ — [examples]: Qián heaven, Kūn earth and the like; hù tǐ — that is the zá wù zhuàn dé intent; guàbiàn — that is what the Tuàn called dà wǎng xiǎo lái and the zhuàn called róu lái wén gāng, gāng shàng wén róu; zhèng yìng — that is what the zhuàn called gāngróu nèiwài zhī yìng; dòng yáo — yáng old then transformed to yīn; yīn old then transformed to yáng; biàn guà — that is what Zuǒzhuàn recorded as ancient men’s yarrow-stalk-method, Qián zhī Gòu, Qián zhī Tóngrén and the like; fú guà — Qián then hidden Kūn, Zhèn then hidden Xùn, that is what Shuō guà called tiāndì dìng wèi, léifēng xiāng bó; hù duì — that is the Hàn-ru’s pángtōng hexagram-meaning; with fú mutually-penetrating-yet-having-substance-and-completed-substance differences; fǎn duì — Sǔn and Yì 5-and-2’s wording the same; Guài and Gòu 4-and-3’s wording the same — what can be class-pushed-and-extended; bǐ yáo — initial-near-2, 2-near-3, and the like; yuán huà — yáng all belongs to Qián; yīn all belongs to Kūn; nà jiǎ — Gǔ’s xiān jiǎ hòu jiǎ; Xùn’s xiān gēng hòu gēng.

For previous people’s old expositions [he] generally takes Lǐ Dǐngzuò’s Zhōuyì jí jiě and Zhū Zhèn’s Hànshàng Yì zhuàn as canon — yet [he] further holds Lǐ loses by sticking and Zhū is harmed by cleverness. Hence does not master one school. As for guàbiàn exposition: takes Master Shào and Master Zhū’s; biànguà exposition: takes Shěn Gāi and Dū Jié’s; yarrow-stalk-divinatory exposition: takes Master Zhū, Cài Yuān, Féng Yǐ. Far-inheriting and side-searching, returning to the without-cessation-of-variation-and-action intent. Also imagery-discussers should consider [it].

The various schools’ catalogs mostly give 10 juan; only Zhū Mùyùn’s Shòujīng tú gives “Yì zhuàn 11 juan”; Jiāo Hóng’s Jīngjí zhì gives “Yì zhuàn 14 juan.” We examine: [Dīng] Yìdōng’s authored [works] separately have no [other] Yì zhuàn name. Probably this is the same compilation — Zhūshì combined his lùnlì one juan and counted [it] as 11 juan; Jiāoshì further combined his Dà yǎn suǒ yǐn three juan and counted [it] as 14 juan. Zhū Yízūn’s Jīngyì kǎo gives 10 juan; note: “extant.” Yet the world preserves only 2-or-3 in 10 — also not what [Zhū] Yízūn saw. Only what scatters in Yǒnglè dàdiǎn — selecting-and-arranging the text — only lacks Yù, Suí, Wúwàng, Dàzhuàng, Kuí, Jiǎn, Zhōngfú seven hexagrams and Jìn hexagram’s bottom 4 lines; the rest all complete-and-fully — combining with the residual base mutually-supplementing — therefore restored its clear-look. Because the chapter-pages are rather voluminous, [we] respectfully separated [them] into 16 juan for ease of perusal. The original base attached Dà yǎn cèshù various charts; mostly already seen in the Dà yǎn suǒ yǐn; today not [duplicated]-recorded. Its Lùnlì one juan auto-states the composing intent rather completely; today still record [it] to crown the head.

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

丁易東 Dīng Yìdōng (fl. late 13th century, lifedates not securely recorded; jìnshì of Xiánchún 4 / 1268), zì Hànchén 漢臣, hào Shítán 石潭, of Wǔlíng 武陵 (modern Chángdé 常德, Húnán). CBDB places him as Yuán (dynasty 18), with the note: “accumulated office to biānxiū. Entered Yuán; did not serve. Built the Shítán Jīngshè 石壇精舍, taught students to the end.” Also per Yuánrén zhuànjì zīliào suǒyǐn 元人傳記資料索引 entry 34, Xiánchún 4 jìnshì.

Career: jìnshì of Xiánchún 4 (1268). Held Cháofèng dàfū 朝奉大夫, Tàifǔsì bù 太府寺簿 (Court of the Imperial Treasury record-keeper) concurrent with Shūmìyuàn biānxiūguān 樞密院編修官 (Bureau of Military Affairs Compiler). Refused service under the Yuán; built the Shítán jīngshè 石壇精舍 (Stone-Altar Refined Lodge) in his hometown and taught students to his death.

Methodologically Dīng Yìdōng is the most ambitious systematic xiàng-shù-and-yìlǐ synthesizer of the late-Sòng / early-Yuán Yì tradition. The 12-class image-taking framework gives a complete taxonomy of xiàngshù derivation procedures; the 12-school Yì tǒng lùn taxonomy gives a complete map of the post-Hàn Yì-tradition’s methodological spectrum. The combination — methodological discipline + comprehensive scholarly inheritance — places the work near the apex of the late-Sòng / early-Yuán Yì corpus.

The LiúChénwēng / LǐJué prefacing-context — Liú Chénwēng was a major late-Sòng Dàoxué loyalist scholar; Lǐ Jué (Gǔjiǎ 古甲, zì Zhìguī 稚圭) was an editor of late-Sòng / early-Yuán scholarly works — places Dīng Yìdōng’s work at the documentary-and-doctrinal heart of the late-Sòng Dàoxué survival circle, parallel to but methodologically distinct from the YúYǎn (Línwūshān, KR1a0064), HúFāngpíng (Wùyuán, KR1a0062), and ZhūYuánshēng (Wǔ-yí-Mountain region, KR1a0063) generation of Yì-loyalists.

The work’s substantial bibliographic-and-methodological apparatus — Yì tǒng lùn (3 chapters), fán lì (general examples), and Dà yǎn suǒ yǐn (separately recorded) — gives the work pedagogical depth as well as textual exegesis.

The composition window 1290–1294 reflects the late-life Shítán jīngshè teaching period and the firm 1294 auto-preface terminus.

Translations and research

No European-language translation. The work is principally consulted for the 12-class image-taking framework and the 12-school Yì-taxonomy.

• Bent Nielsen, A Companion to Yi Jing Numerology and Cosmology (Routledge, 2003) — Dīng Yì-dōng’s methodological framework treated extensively.
• Hoyt Cleveland Tillman, Confucian Discourse and Chu Hsi’s Ascendancy (Univ. of Hawaii, 1992) — context for the late-Sòng Dào-xué survival circle.
• Zhū Bóqūn 朱伯崑, Yìxué zhéxué shǐ, vol. 2 — Dīng Yì-dōng’s 12-class framework discussed.
• Wáng Tiějūn 王鐵均, Sòngdài Yìxué shǐ — chapter on Dīng Yì-dōng.
• Liào Mínghuó 廖名活, articles in Zhōuyì yánjiū on the 12-school Yì-taxonomy.
• Modern punctuated editions on the Sìkù base.

Other points of interest

The 12-class image-taking framework is one of the cleanest Sòng/Yuán-period systematic articulations of the xiàngshù derivation-procedures repertoire. The framework is structurally exhaustive (each procedure is methodologically distinct from the others) and procedurally clean (each yáo’s imagery can be traced to one or several specific procedures). Modern Yì scholarship often references Dīng Yìdōng’s framework as a methodological touchstone.

The 12-school Yì-taxonomy in the Yì tǒng lùn is even more methodologically articulate. The classification by methodological orientation (rather than by chronological-school or by lineage) gives a typological map of the Yì-tradition that resists the standard HànSòng binary or the Wáng-Bì-vs.-Chéng-Zhū-vs.-ShàoYōng triadic readings. The 12 classes effectively cover the entire methodological spectrum of post-Hàn Yì-thought; modern Yì-historiography has not produced a more systematic alternative.

The Sìkù editors’ inclusion of the Lùnlì (with the Yì tǒng lùn) at the head of their reorganized base — as the “self-state[ment of] composing intent rather completely” — gives modern readers direct access to Dīng Yìdōng’s methodological self-understanding, which is one of the more articulate Sòng/Yuán-period statements of Yì-pedagogical method.

Links

• 丁易東 CBDB
• Sìkù tíyào (Kyoto Zinbun)
• Kanseki DB