Zhōuyì kǒng yì jí shuō 周易孔義集說
Collected Discourses on the Confucian-Wing Meanings of the Zhōuyì by 沈起元
About the work
A Qiánlóng-period Yìjīng commentary in twenty juàn by 沈起元 Shěn Qǐyuán (1685–1763) of Tàicāng 太倉. The work’s methodological principle: since the Ten Wings were composed by Confucius personally and were uniquely preserved through the Qín book-burning, the Yì student must take Confucius’s zhuàn as the primary interpretive authority. The title is taken from 高攀龍 Gāo Pānlóng’s Míng-period Zhōuyì kǒng yì 周易孔義 — Shěn explicitly takes Gāo’s title as inspiration. From all the standard Yì-commentary literature (ancient and modern, with no school commitment), Shěn extracts whatever agrees with the Wings and gathers it.
The compositional choices: the layout follows the jīn Yì arrangement (Tuàn zhuàn and Xiàng zhuàn attached under the canonical text), with the methodological position that “the Yì’s losing-or-not-losing does not depend on whether the old text is recovered or not; the [Wáng] Wángshì arrangement of Wing-attached-to-canon is also sufficient for observation-and-savoring.” The Dà xiàng zhuàn — which often establishes meaning separately — and the Wényán — which extends and class-touches — are not attached under the canonical text but separately laid out. Three foundational diagrams precede the canonical commentary: (1) eight-trigram positions; (2) Qián and Kūn generating the six children; (3) the doubling-into-sixty-four diagram. All are drawn directly from the Xìcí and Shuōguà. The HétúLuòshū, prior-and-posterior-heaven, square-and-circle diagrams are rejected as “Chén-and-Shào’s Yì, not what the Master originally had” and are entirely deleted.
The Sìkù editors single out specific substantive contributions: (1) on Qián’s Tuàn zhuàn dà míng zhōng shǐ 大明終始, where 王弼 Wáng Bì, the Chéng zhuàn, and 朱熹 Zhū Xī all left unclear glosses, Shěn alone takes 侯行果 Hóu Xíngguǒ’s reading “dà míng is the sun” — supported by Jìn’s Tuàn zhuàn “going-along and adhering to the great-bright” and the Lǐ jì’s “the sun arises in the east.” (2) on Guān 6/3, 9/5, and Top Nine’s guān wǒ shēng / guān qí shēng — where 孔穎達 Kǒng Yǐngdá and the post-Sòng tradition take shēng as “moving-rising and acting-doing” (always somewhat strained) — Shěn alone takes 虞翻 Yú Fān’s reading “shēng refers to Kūn engendering the people,” supported by 9/5’s xiàng zhuàn “observing the people” formula. (3) on the Dà xiàng zhuàn, his class-comparison method (extracting verbal meaning from passages where formula-similarity does not equal meaning-identity) is more careful than predecessors. The Sìkù editors call the work “of-rooted learning” (有本之學).
Tiyao
Sìkù tíyào (translated, condensed): The Zhōuyì kǒng yì jí shuō in twenty juàn was composed by Shěn Qǐyuán of our [Qīng] dynasty. Qǐyuán, zì Zǐdà, was a man of Tàicāng. Kāngxī xīnchǒu jìnshì; office to Vice-Minister of the Court of Imperial Sacrifices.
The book’s great import: holding that the Ten Wings were composed by the Master in his own hand, and were further not subjected to Qín fire, the book alone is complete; therefore those who study the Yì must necessarily take Confucius’s zhuàn as principal. He took the Míng Gāo Pānlóng’s Zhōuyì kǒng yì name and separately added compilation. Of ancient and modern Yì-discussion books, with no biased master, only what agrees with Confucius’s zhuàn is taken.
The chapter sequence still follows the present recension, with the Tuàn zhuàn and Xiàng zhuàn attached under the canonical text — holding that the Yì’s losing-or-not-losing does not depend on the old text’s being recovered or not; the Wángshì layout of zhuàn-attached-to-canon also suffices for observation-and-savoring. Only the Dà xiàng zhuàn often separately establishes meaning, and the Wényán extends-and-class-touches in order to elucidate the Yì-treasure — both not allowing attachment to the basic hexagram, hence separately laid out.
At the front, three diagrams: one for eight-trigram positions; one for QiánKūn engendering the six children; one for the doubling diagram — all based on the Xìcí and Shuōguà texts. As to the Hétú, Luòshū, prior-heaven, posterior-heaven, square, circle — the various diagrams: he holds these to be the Yì of Chén-and-Shào, not what the Master originally had, and deletes them all together. Quite able to sweep clean the entanglements.
Within he is also able to push-evidence the old doctrines and extend new meaning. For example, on Qián’s Tuàn zhuàn dà míng zhōng shǐ, Wáng’s note, the Chéng zhuàn, and Master Zhū all do not glow-fix the explanation; Qǐyuán alone takes Hóu Xíngguǒ’s “dà míng is the sun” doctrine, supported by Jìn’s Tuàn zhuàn “going-along and adhering to the great-bright” and the Lǐ’s saying “the sun arises in the east” — quite has rooting in canonical meaning. On Guān 6/3, 9/5, Top Nine’s “guān wǒ shēng” / “guān qí shēng” — from Kǒng shū taking moving-going-out as shēng, the later Confucians thereby took “moving-doing施-acting” to gloss it, all unavoidably forced. Qǐyuán alone takes Yú Fān’s “shēng refers to Kūn engendering the people” doctrine — especially fits with 9/5’s xiàng zhuàn “observing-the-people” import.
His glossing of the Dà xiàng zhuàn: comparing-by-class to seek meaning where words-and-phrases are similar but meaning differs — pushing-and-elucidating is even more careful-and-tight. Among recent Yì-exposition houses he can also be called of-rooted-learning.
Respectfully collated, the ninth month of the forty-sixth year of Qiánlóng (1781). Editor-in-chief: Jì Yún 紀昀, Lù Xīxióng 陸錫熊, Sūn Shìyì 孫士毅. Chief proofreader: Lù Fèichí 陸費墀.
Abstract
Composition is bracketed by Shěn’s 1721 jìnshì and the Sìkù’s 1781 publication; the bracket here adopts a conservative range from Shěn’s mature scholarship through approximately 1760 (he died in 1763).
The work is the principal mid-Qiánlóng Yì commentary in the Confucian-Wing-as-authority tradition. Methodologically it stands at a position close to but not identical with 李光地 Lǐ Guāngdì’s Zhé zhōng line: both reject the chart-tradition; both follow the jīn Yì arrangement; both operate within Sòng-Confucian limits. Shěn’s distinctive contribution is the principled methodological commitment to the Wings as the primary interpretive authority — not just one among many sources but the privileged source — and his careful handling of Dà xiàng and Wényán as separately-treated.
The substantive philological contributions the Sìkù editors single out — the Qián / dà míng zhōng shǐ reading via Hóu Xíngguǒ; the Guān / shēng reading via Yú Fān — both involve recovery of pre-Wáng-Bì Hàn-Táng readings that the dominant Sòng tradition had displaced. This places Shěn at a methodologically interesting middle position: doctrinally Sòng-aligned but philologically open to pre-Sòng evidence.
The pairing with Lǐ Guāngdì’s Zhé zhōng and Tōng lùn (KR1a0117 / KR1a0132) makes Shěn the principal Qiánlóng-period continuation of the Lǐ Guāngdì line outside the immediate court 楊名時 Yáng Míngshí (KR1a0141) tradition.
Translations and research
No substantial monograph in Western languages located. Shěn figures occasionally in Qīng Yìxué surveys.
Other points of interest
The work’s deliberate inversion of the post-Sòng commentary tradition (Wings as authority for the Yì, rather than canon as authority for the Wings) is methodologically substantive. Combined with the deletion of the chart-tradition, Shěn’s program represents a careful return to a strictly canonical Yìxué without the kǎozhèng-school’s polemical edge — and the Sìkù editors’ favorable reception reflects the Qiánlóng-court editorial preference for moderate orthodoxy over polemic.