论文部分内容阅读
Abstract： Since 1978， the study of the Book of Changes in China has flourished， displaying multi-layered and multi-directional creation and innovation in transforming and developing traditional Chinese scholarship. This paper makes a panoramic review of the research on the Book of Changes in the past forty years， focused on the themes of the four decades of reform and opening-up， that is， （1） breaking fresh ground by returning to origin， （2） interpreting Chinese materials by Western approaches， （3） pursuing all-round innovation， and （4） advancing into the future. The sustained growth of research on the Book of Changes and the ever–new understandings of its unique value and significance will become a fresh academic support and the cornerstone for the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation in the new era.
Keywords： reform and opening-up， research on the Book of Changes
In the wake of the reform and opening-up policy in the late 1970s， China’s research on the Book of Changes （Yixue 易學） recovered from a closed status and started to gain increasing momentum. Over the past forty years， it began with displaying its philosophical and scientific orientations in response to the times， and while sticking to its own research domain as ever， it has gradually gotten rid of its dependence on the study of traditional Confucian classics and Western philosophy for its concepts and methods. In the process of probing and fortifying its own disciplinary subjectivity and self-consistency， research on the Book of Changes has displayed great vitality in its multi-layered and multi-directional creative transformation and innovative development of traditional Chinese scholarship. The forty years of research on the Book of Changes in the mainland of China can be divided into four decades， each salient with its own theme of the times. Under such a framework， I will attempt to make a panoramic review.
First Decade （1978–1987）： Returning to Origin and
Breaking Fresh Ground [Refer to page 53 for Chinese. Similarly hereinafter]
During the beginning decade of reform and opening-up， with the breakthrough out of ideological shackles and an old academic framework， research on the Book of Changes blazed a new trail for the innovation of Chinese thought and culture， ideology， and research methodology， manifesting the everlasting value of traditional Chinese scholarship.
In the academic conference on ancient Chinese scripts held in Changchun in December 1978， Zhang Zhenglang 张政烺 （1912–2005） proposed that the methodological principles of operating the divinatory milfoil stalks recorded in “Appended Remarks” [系辞] of the Book of Changes might be applied to deciphering those numerical signs found in the inscriptions on oracle bones and bronzes of the Shang and Zhou dynasties， in light of the opinion put forth by Li Xueqin 李学勤 （1933–2019） in 1956 concerning the possible relationship between unidentified ancient characters and the numbers nine and six in the Book of Changes. It was the first attempt in Chinese intellectual history to systematically examine the unknown characters on the unearthed Shang and Zhou materials by associating them with the trigrams in the Book of Changes; hence it was of great academic significance. After the conference， Zhang published “An Interpretation of the Divinatory Inscriptions on Early Zhou Bronzes” [试释周初青铜器铭文中的易卦]. Later on， Zhang Yachu 张亚初 and Liu Yu 刘雨 published “On Several Questions of the Divinatory Method in Light of the Numerical Signs in the Shang and Zhou Hexagrams” [从商周八卦数字符号谈筮法的几个问题]. Responding to each other in their topics but contrasting in content， from the perspective of archaeology the two articles brought about a landslide in research on the Book of Changes， introducing the issue of shuzi gua 数字卦 （lit. numerical hexagrams or trigrams）， a completely new field. The discovery and systematic study of shuzi gua represents a major achievement of contemporary research on the Book of Changes， which has broadened its vision， extended its domain， and provided strong support to the academic probes into the original mechanism of two trigrams composing one hexagram and the ancient divinatory methods. However， since the shuzi gua took place at least several thousand years after the legendary Fuxi was held by tradition to have first drawn trigrams， if it was used to reveal the actual formation of the hexagram system in a logical way， that would be a solution only those scholars given to doubting ancient history could imagine. Consequently， it was inevitable that the approach informed by the concept of shuzi gua to studying the origination of the hexagrams in the Book of Changes reached an impasse.
Apart from the studies of shuzi gua， the silk manuscripts of the Book of Changes including the jing 经 （text） and zhuan 传 （commentaries） also attracted much scholarly attention and achieved considerable research results. The newly unearthed text of the Book of Changes and its commentaries added to the material of the “Mawangdui Silk Text of Sixty Four Hexagrams” [馬王堆帛书《六十四卦》释文] with two appendices， “A Postscript for the Silk Text of Sixty Four Hexagrams” [帛书《六十四卦》跋] and “On the Silk Text of the Book of Changes” [帛书《周易》]， authored by Zhang Zhenglang and Yu Haoliang 于豪亮 respectively. Henceforth， scholars engaged for a long time in discussing the order of the sixty-four hexagrams in the silk text of the Book of Changes， the relationship between the silk text and the traditional received text， and analysis and interpretation of the statements attached to the hexagram lines of the silk text. After 1992， the silk editions of the “Ten Commentaries on the Book of Changes” [易传] began to come out， bringing about heated discussions among scholars which continue to the present day.
Gao Heng’s 高亨 （1900–1986） Ten Commentaries on the Book of Changes Annotated in Modern Chinese [周易大传今注] was an outstanding work devoted to annotating the ten pieces of Commentaries strictly from the historical point of view. In his remarks on the image–number parts in the Commentaries， he attempted to make an accurate account of them. For example， he wrote，
According to some records in Zuo’s Explanation of the Spring and Autumn Annals [左传] and Discourses of the States [国语]， two books of Spring and Autumn Period （770–476 BCE）， when the people consulted the text of the Book of Changes in divination or cited it discussion， they only talked about the hexagram images， including not only the images of the sixty-four regular hexagrams but also those of the varied hexagrams， and never mentioned the images of the individual lines and the numbers represented by them. Probably what they followed was a school of learning from before the Qin dynasty （221–206 BCE）， which seemed to be the old school from before the Spring and Autumn period. As regards the Commentaries， they were more liable to talk about the images of the sixty-four regular hexagrams and of the lines and their numbers but not mention the images of the varied hexagrams. Probably what they practiced was another one of the pre-Qin schools of learning on the Book of Changes， which seemed to be a new school in Warring States Period （475–221 BCE）. The above citation from Gao indicates his sensitive perception and unique understanding of the significance of the hexagram images and that of the images of the lines and their numbers in the sense of intellectual history. His research achievements were significantly informative and precursory to the studies aiming to reveal the original historical meaning of the classical texts of the Book of Changes.
Liu Dajun’s 劉大钧 Introduction to the Book of Changes [周易概论]， published in 1986， was the first work since 1949 to make a positive affirmation of the scholarly efforts for image–number-oriented research on the Book of Changes. Though meant only as an introductory work， Liu’s book played a groundbreaking role and， particularly considering the general tendency toward denying the image–number school completely， his affirmations were valuable indeed. Liu presents a brief survey of the scholarship on the Book of Changes over the past dynasties in feudal China， where he pays special attention to the two traditional approaches， the one focusing on philosophical content and the other on the image–number side. He advocates applying both approaches and thus， by rehabilitating the traditional image–number approach， he pushed ahead research on the Book of Changes on that front.
Jin Jingfang 金景芳 （1902–2001） published such books as Lectures on the Book of Changes [周易讲座] and A Complete Interpretation of the Book of Changes [周易全解] and a series of important articles. In these articles， Jin puts forward a host of opinions ahead of his time that helped guide scholarly efforts toward studying the early history of the Book of Changes. His representative work on the Book of Changes is A Complete Interpretation of the Book of Changes， which is the most mature and the most complete as far as its system is concerned. Its emphasis is on clarifying “the ideological system underlying the structure of the sixty-four hexagrams in the Book of Changes.” Jin thoroughly interprets both the text of the Book of Changes and its commentaries from the angles of exegesis， hexagram line positions， and hexagram images. This achievement represents the decade’s most representative work for its systemic study of the philosophy embraced in the Book of Changes.
Qu Wanli’s 屈万里 （1907–1979） Review of the Principles for Explaining the Book of Changes in the Pre-Qin， Han， and Wei Dynasties [先秦汉魏易例述评] is a creative work in which he reflects on and analyzes the ancient principles for interpreting the Book of Changes. In his opinion， the image–number based explanation of the Book of Changes was started by Meng Xi 孟喜 （ca. 90–40 BCE）. He is emphatic in elaborating the Han dynasty principles， such as the shi’er xiaoxi gua 十二消息卦 （the twelve sets of numbers in seasonal correspondence to the twelve lunar months）， gua qi 卦气 （the Changes based explanation of the calendric numbers）， hu ti 互体 （exchanging the two trigrams composing a hexagram to generate a new hexagram） and yao bian 爻变 （hexagram line variations）， bagong gua 八宫卦 （the sixty-four hexagrams arranged into eight houses）， and fei fu 飞伏 （regarding a visible hexagram as flying and an invisible one as hiding， symbolic of the past and the future respectively）， and analyzed their errors. Featuring a well-arranged structure and deep analysis， Qu’s thesis is a classic work among modern studies of the principles for explaining the Book of Changes. Second Decade （1988–1997）： Interpreting Chinese Traditions
with Western Approaches [58]
A large number of Western philosophical works were translated into Chinese in the last twenty years of the twentieth century， causing a fever of studying the traditional Chinese scholarship through the concepts and frameworks of Western philosophy， which is still in full swing with no signs of slowing down. Centered on Western metaphysics， epistemology， methodology， and values， those studies analyzed the conceptual patterns of induction and thinking underlying the texts of traditional Chinese classics in the hope of finding something therein compatible with Western philosophy. By recasting the philosophy of the Book of Changes in foreign frameworks， any people insisted on the fundamental status of the Book of Changes as a Confucian classic and sought for contemporary advances in pursuing research on the Book of Changes in the Confucian way.
Zhu Bokun 朱伯崑 （1923–2007） was a renowned Book of Changes philosopher， whose representative work was the four-volume History of Philosophical Research on the Book of Changes [易学哲学史]. This is a large-scale contemporary work on the history of the study of Book of Changes， which makes a systematic and complete exposition of the philosophical discourses presented by Book of Changes scholars over the dynasties either in their image–number innovation or their principle creation. It marks the decade’s monumental attainment in Book of Changes philosophical studies， which qualifies research on the Book of Changes as an integral part of the Chinese history of philosophy.
The topic under the history of Changes philosophical studies is not concerned with the Book of Changes itself， nor is it concerned with whether the various annotations of the book are advisable or not by using the method of text exegesis， but rather with the philosophical thoughts conveyed by the various schools of research on the Book of Changes in their explanations of the book. It does not matter whether the thoughts are congruent with the original meaning of the book or not.
As far as such a macro viewpoint goes， Zhu was selective in extracting the topics of traditional research on the Book of Changes， and what drove him in combing the large number of relevant materials was his clear train of thought on how to write the history of Chinese philosophy. With regard to the framework of his History of Philosophical Research on the Book of Changes， its value goes far beyond the borders defining a history of Chinese philosophy， and its connecting of traditional studies of Confucian classics with modern philosophy is， no doubt， one of the respects with the greatest import. Zhu， in this creative work， broke through the bondage of the times in a somewhat veiled way and achieved much more than merely completing the task of writing a history of Chinese philosophy， thus gaining a certain significance in returning to traditional Chinese scholarship. In this regard， his idea of writing is quite different from that of Feng Youlan’s 馮友兰 （1895–1990） New History of Chinese Philosophy [中国哲学史新编]. Another clear contrast is the philosophical approach pursued by Zhu Bokun and the traditional Confucian approach to the philosophical content of the Book of Changes insisted on by Huang Shouqi 黃寿祺 （1912–1990） and Zhang Shanwen 张善文， the two authors of An Annotated Modern Chinese Translation of the Book of Changes [周易译注]. In this work， adhering to their orientation to traditional Chinese scholarship and continuing on the historical track of studying the Book of Changes as a Confucian classic， they make great efforts to probe the modern significance of the philosophical content in its text and commentaries. They adopt a layout of arranging the corresponding sections in the Text and the Commentaries together and then offer a lengthy modern Chinese version with annotation and explanation， followed by further philosophical elaboration. Containing a large collection of detailed data concerning research on the Book of Changes over the past dynasties， their work offers， on a sentence by sentence basis， minute annotations to the statements attached to the hexagrams and their lines and of the commentaries on the hexagram and line images， with a thorough and readily intelligible explanation， and afterward presents a systematic exposition of its philosophical discourse. Opening their book is a long introduction and “A Guide for Reading the Book of Changes” [读易要例]， securing both its academic status and its accessibility to a mass audience. Small wonder that as soon as it was published in 1989， it was accepted by many scholars as a classic introductory book and today is still reprinted. However， this modern work， though it covers the entire range of traditional Confucian philosophy and research on the Book of Changes， fails to make clear the prerequisites and presuppositions for the beginners’ study， so that in actuality it is not an ideal primer for research on the Book of Changes.
Dai Lianzhang’s 戴琏璋 The Formation of the Changes Commentaries and Their Thought [易传之形成及其思想] is an excellent work on the philosophical connotations of the Commentaries， echoing Zhu Bokun’s study of the philosophy in research on the Book of Changes. It probes into the Commentaries and is known as a must-read for relevant studies. Since the Qin and Han dynasties， the Commentaries have occupied a pivotal position in research on the Book of Changes and the Confucian tradition. It is necessary to make great effort to examine it punctiliously. Through research Dai found that：
Of the ten commentaries， the earliest two， “Commentary on the Decisions” [彖传] and “Commentary on the Images” [象传]， take gang-rou 刚柔 （firmness and softness） as the main concepts as a pair. They appear ninety-eight times in the former and nineteen times in the latter. By contrast， the yin-yang 阴阳 （negative force and positive force， the two opposing principles in nature） appear only four times in the former and only two times in the latter. . . . In “Commentary on the Sequence of the Hexagrams” [序卦传] and “Miscellaneous Notes on the Hexagrams” [杂卦传]， yin and yang are not mentioned at all. In the remaining three， that is， “Commentary on the Words of the Text” [文言传]， “Appended Remarks” [系辞传]， and “Commentary on the Trigrams” [说卦传]， the main concepts are qian-kun 乾坤 （Heaven and Earth， the creative and the receptive）， where the number of times of mentioning gang-rou and that of mentioning yin-yang are similar， both fewer than qian-kun. This finding provides an important clue and basis for studying the intellectual content of each of the ten pieces in the Commentaries.
In many respects， A History of the Studies on the Book of Changes [周易研究史] by Liao Mingchun 廖名春， Kang Xuewei 康学伟， and Liang Weixian 梁韦弦 took a step further than Zhu Bokun’s work， in that it not only covers the research on the Book of Changes in modern times but treats specific details in an original way as well. For example， as regards the pre-Qin form of research on the Book of Changes， Liao offers a concise definition of the field： “Research on the Book of Changes are called Yixue.” He further stated， “The pre-Qin period is the incipient phase of research on the Book of Changes.” The work collects a big number of yishuo 易說 （discourses on the Book of Changes） and divides them into two types： one subscribes to the theory treating the book as one of divination， and the other focusing on its philosophical content. This division no doubt conforms to reality. For another example， after making detailed and complete textual research of each piece in the Commentaries， Liao summarized， “it can be basically concluded that the creation of the Commentaries was not later than middle Warring State Period.” Therefore， most of the Commentaries were written collaboratively by Confucius and some of his disciples and the most appropriate research method is to treat all of them as an entirety， to make overall analysis of and argumentation on them under the general name of pre-Qin Confucian research on the Book of Changes. Only in this way can its theoretical connotations and academic attributes be clarified more definitely.
Chen Guying 陈鼓应， in his inspiring The Changes Commentaries and the Daoist Doctrines [易传与道家思想]， clarifies a lot of original ideas. In his work， he tries to argue that：
All the philosophical topics and intellectual patterns as well as all the concepts， categories， and propositions conveyed by the various doctrines on the origin of the myriad things， natural circulation， yin-yang and qi 气 （vital energy） based transformation， Heaven and humankind as one， change and development， optimistic and philosophical attitude to life， and gang-rou in mutual complementarity bear out that the philosophical content in all the pieces of the Commentaries pertains to the tradition of Daoism.
In the Commentaries are retained many Daoist ideas and concepts， indeed. In other words， the creation of the Commentaries was under tremendous influence from the doctrine of Daoism. I agree with many of the views and arguments proposed by Chen in his work， but his conclusion that “the philosophical content in the Commentaries pertains to the tradition of Daoism” seems a little extreme. Third Decade （1998–2007）： Pursuing All-Round Innovation [63]
The third decade saw a liberal academic environment in China， where research on the Book of Changes entered a phase of rapid and deep development. There were two dominant features： One was the further diversification of research methodology and interpretive approaches; and the other was that the studies were more in-depth， in which diversified studies， periodization studies， and case studies constituted the mainstream. A group of middle-aged and young scholars came on the scene and produced a body of research rich in innovation. The various academic views and research methods， past and present， Chinese and foreign， agitated among one another and brought about more or less an advance in all the areas of research on the Book of Changes， thus presenting an impressive picture of substantial achievement.
Yang Qingzhong’s 楊庆中 A History of Research on the Book of Changes in the Twentieth Century China [二十世纪中国易学史] introduces systematically the colorful development of research on the Book of Changes during this period. Yang divides research on the Book of Changes in the twentieth century into two periods， first from 1900 to 1949 and the second from 1950 to 1997， corresponding to part one and part two of his work. In part one， he lays emphasis on research on the Book of Changes by scholars of Confucian classics， and research by the school of doubting ancient history and the school of historical materialism， as well as their new explorations. Part two covers research on the Book of Changes in the mainland and Taiwan of China. Yang divides research on the Book of Changes in the mainland into two consecutive phases. The first phase （1950s and 1960s） introduces the formation， nature， authorship， and philosophical thought of the text and commentaries of the Book of Changes， and discusses the immediately relevant methods of studying the history of Chinese philosophy. The second phase （1980s and 1990s） covers research on the text and commentaries of the Book of Changes， the history of research on the Book of Changes， and ancient classics concerned with the Book of Changes， as well as work on archaeological materials and the modern concepts of humanism and science. A special chapter in its second part is devoted to the research on the Book of Changes in the Taiwan region since 1949， discussing the outstanding achievements of some Taiwan-based scholars working on literature， history， and thought. This work by Yang deserves to be called an excellent model of studying the history of research on the Book of Changes， representing the highest level in studying the periodization of research on the Book of Changes in the third decade. Another of Yang’s works， A Study of the Text and Commentaries of the Book of Changes [周易经传研究]， is also composed of two parts. Part one contains seven chapters focusing on studying the Text， with seven topics respectively concerning the images of the hexagrams and their lines， the statements attached to the hexagrams and their lines， the relationship between the images and the statements， the hexagram names and their sequence， the period in which the Text was formed， the nature of the Text， and the doctrine on the dao of Humanity （人道） in the Text. The eight chapters of part two turn to the Commentaries， discussing these eight topics： the relation between Confucius and the Commentaries， the age when the Commentaries came into being， the ideological and cultural resources fostering the Commentaries， the rationale of the Commentaries in explaining the Text， the train of thought by which the Commentaries explain the Text， the relationship between Heaven and humankind conveyed by the Commentaries， the dao 道 （the Way） in the Commentaries， and the Commentaries in relation to Chinese philosophy. The work makes a systematic and all-round summary of the studies of the text and commentaries of the Book of Changes in the previous several decades and in many caps off their lessons with further contributions， making it a mostly highly esteemed work in scholarly circles.
Gao Huaimin 高懷民， in his A History of Pre-Qin Research on the Book of Changes [先秦易学史]， divides pre-Qin research on the Book of Changes into three periods： the period of symbolic Changes， the period of divinatory Changes， and the period of Confucian Changes. According to him，
When we observe the cases of divination by using the Book of Changes recorded in Zuo’s Explanation of the Spring and Autumn Annals and Discourses of the States， we find that the Changes was treated like a spent bullet. At that time， divination became a mere formality. When people got an auspicious statement， they would naturally be glad， but when otherwise， they would read into the statement something auspicious. Such people as Duke Xian of Jin （d. 651 BCE） and Cui Zhu 崔杼 （d. 546 BCE） went so far as to run the risk of calamity and act against the divination result. Clearly， the authority of divination was already lost completely.
Gao goes further to argue for his opinion from three angles， for which purpose， he cites eight examples from other sources. His exemplification seems to fall short in comprehensiveness， and his analysis of those examples is rather simple， even leaving several of them entirely unexplained. Nonetheless， I agree with his opinion that pre-Qin research on the Book of Changes is where the true spirit of China’s Yixue lies. He regards Fuxi and King Wen of Zhou as the sages of the subject and though his account of their thoughts on the Changes is very rough and shallow， he preserves the continuity and completeness of the earliest history of research on the Book of Changes. His work may be seen as a supplement to the studies of the mainland scholars who have tended to apply the “headless” model in studying the history of Chinese philosophy. It is especially encouraging that， in the new environment where all-round innovation is advocated， some scholars have attempted new approaches and methods in explaining the Book of Changes. Though still leaving much to be desired， their studies are beneficial and worthy of being pushed ahead. Below， I will introduce and make some comments on three which are more distinctive in their argumentation.
Wen Shaofeng’s 温少峰 Interpreting the Images of the Eight Trigrams in the Book of Changes [周易八卦释象] is an achievement which takes the lead in studying the images of the trigrams. He describes his method this way： “The method of extracting images to compose the Book of Changes must have been similar to that of extracting images prevalent in Spring and Autumn Period， because this period is the closest to the time when the book was made，” and setting up a hexagram， observing the image， and attaching statements to it and its lines are the basic method and pattern of the Book of Changes. Regrettably， when he tries to probe how the author of the Book of Changes set up the hexagrams by extracting images， he returns to the old track taken in the Han in search of yi xiang 逸象 （lost images）. Thus， despite his going farther than the Han scholars， his advance is very limited.
Zhu Xingguo 朱兴国， in his Comprehensive Interpretation of the Three Changes [三易通义]， by examining the literature passed down from the Sui dynasty （581–618） found a new path to revealing the method of the Book of Changes in extracting images for the eight trigrams. He introduces the theory of bagua xiuwang 八卦休王 （alternate quiescence and activity of the eight trigrams） from The Great Meaning of the Five Phases [五行大义] by Xiao Ji 萧吉 （fl. 554–605） and saw it as the principles underlying the composition of the Book of Changes， which serves as the basis for his explanation of the Text. Though， in his work， Zhu’s argumentation is not preceded with preliminary discussion or followed by necessary verification， on the whole his way of probing the trigram images of the Book of Changes is innovative and his efforts represent the right direction of pursuing image–numbers in contemporary research on the Book of Changes.
Lu Tai’s 盧泰 Explanation of Divination with the Book of Changes [周易筮解] starts from studying how the book was used for divination in attempt to address the question of imagery for the eight trigrams. Lu holds that the canwu 参伍 （interspersing） method， not the dayan 大衍 （great expansion） method， was the original divinatory method used with the Book of Changes. He holds that the main point of the canwu method is to conduct divination by using the tray structure of the two trigrams composing a hexagram， and this is the basis on which he explains the twenty-two cases of divination using the Book of Changes recorded in Zuo’s Explanation of the Spring and Autumn Annals and Discourses of the States. The substance of his work can be seen as a study of how to explain hexagram images. His exploration of the tray structures of the trigrams， doubtless， is of considerable reference value to studying how to explain the hexagram images in the Text. Fourth Decade （2008–2017）： Advancing into the Future [67]
Echoing the fever for studying traditional Chinese culture and the ancient classics， more efforts were made during this period to popularize the Book of Changes through modern interpretations. Research during this decade was more meticulous， diversified， and thoroughgoing in research content. Nevertheless， for lacking academic criticism， research varied quite a bit in quality and many problems troubling the growth of research on the Book of Changes called for attention but remained unsolved. This deplorable situation caused many uncertainties to the future research on the Book of Changes that will make the situation very hard to recover indeed. As regards academic criticism of research on the Book of Changes， some scholars have taken the lead in a display of courage which is worth of our respect.
In discussing the way out of the current plight， Yang Qingzhong emphasizes the need to return with caution to the knowledge system of traditional research on the Book of Changes so as to renew concepts， integrate new knowledge， and seek new patterns for explaining the Book of Changes in a modern context. Of course， his “new pattern for explaining the Book of Changes in a modern context” is relative to the old pattern established by traditional research， and no new method can extricate itself completely from the traditional research on the Book of Changes. In this regard， Wu Qianheng’s 吳前衡 Research on the Book of Changes Prior to the Commentaries [《传》前易学] is， no doubt， a forerunner. According to Wu， “the divination cases recorded in Zuo’s Explanation of the Spring and Autumn Annals and Discourses of the States provide considerable evidence for the existing status of the statements attached to the hexagrams and lines of the Book of Changes as a divination manual.” Though the received edition of the book is probably passed down from the Western Zhou dynasty （1046–771 BCE）， it displays differences from the edition of the Spring and Autumn period. In particular， the difference in the hexagram line titles containing six and nine directly causes different readings of the bases for the image–numbers of those lines. Therefore Wu’s painstaking textual research of the Book of Changes as a divination manual is important.
In 1987， Xu Qinting’s 徐芹庭 Source and Development of Research on the Book of Changes [易学源流] was published by National Institute for Compilation and Translation of Taiwan， and in 2008 its simplified Chinese edition was published by Cathay Bookshop. Its new title， Source and Development of Research on the Book of Changes： A History of the Book of Research on the Book of Changes in China， makes clear its academic nature， manifesting its unique significance and value. From the viewpoint of the development history of the Book of Changes， Xu gives a comprehensive summary of the trends， sources， schools， and purpose of research on the Book of Changes over the past dynasties. Meanwhile， he makes precise and pertinent comments on almost all important works dedicated to the subject in different periods， thus filling a gap in the map of contemporary research on the Book of Changes. Constructing Daoist Research on the Book of Changes [道家易学建构] is another important achievement by Chen Guying in studying Daoist research on the Book of Changes. Of the eight articles collected there， “Probing Pre-Qin Daoist Research on the Book of Changes” [先秦道家易学发微] and “Interpreting Daoism in Relation to the Text and Commentaries of the Book of Changes” [道家与《周易》经传思想脉络诠释] fully represent Chen’s theoretical attainment and scholarship. The former is a holistic argument that the philosophical central thought of the Book of Changes pertains to the Daoist doctrine and meanwhile， from the viewpoint of pre-Qin Daoism， toward constructing pre-Qin Daoist research on the Book of Changes. The latter focuses on discussing the doctrine of Daoism， rendering the implicit topic of the dialectical thinking featuring the Book of Changes to an explicit one. His viewpoints are various： the dialectical thinking implied in the yin-yang theory， dao-qi 道器 （doctrine and implement） theory， and Taiji 太极 （Supreme Ultimate） theory; concepts such as duidai 对待 （opposition and unification）， liuxing 流行 （flow and movement）， dong-jing 动静 （action and stillness）， and bian-dong 变动 （change and movement）. From these perspectives he comprehensively constructs a Daoist system of research on the Book of Changes.
Wang Bo 王博 has published a series of articles dedicated to studying the Commentaries， most of which are collected in his “Pre-Qin Volume” [先秦卷] of A History of Confucianism in China [中國儒学史]. In his opinion， the Commentaries have exerted tremendous influence and constraint on later people’s understandings of the text of the Book of Changes.
Via the explanation of the Book of Changes by the Commentaries， the original book （Text） turned gradually from a divination manual， an old canonical work which had been in the hands of the Great Diviner in the era of official divination， to a book on virtue and righteousness as a new classic in the era of Confucian classical studies. In that process， the original book even lost its textual independence， for it had to be transmitted together with the Commentaries. In appearance， the Commentaries is attached to the Text， but actually the Text depends on the Commentaries.
It can be said that it is for this reason that the explanations which had been able to break through the confines of virtue and righteousness imposed by the Commentaries and concern themselves with the Text itself were a rarity among rarities.
In 2012， Zhang Peng 张朋 published A Study of Research on the Book of Changes in the Spring and Autumn Period， With Reference to the Hexagram Interpreting Method [春秋易学研究——以《周易》卦爻辞的卦象解说方法为中心]. In this work， aimed at tracing sources， Zhang starts from the earliest materials of research on the Book of Changes， studies them creatively， and ultimately reveals the Spring and Autumn textual structure and philosophical connotations of the Book of Changes. He begins with focusing on the Changes images in the Spring and Autumn period and divides the complicated contents of the “Ten Wings” （or Commentaries） into two parts， the Spring and Autumn period materials and Warring States period materials， and thereby isolates the Spring and Autumn research on the Book of Changes from that of the Warring States. As the most important part of his work， he examines systematically all twenty-two cases of using the Book of Changes for divination recorded in Zuo’s Explanation of the Spring and Autumn Annals and Discourses of the States and concludes that the explaining system of the Spring and Autumn research on the Book of Changes was centered on the hexagram images. It applied the method of the hexagram imagery and analogy to making 4，096 judgments about good fortune， misfortune， regret， and trouble. This is the most probable original picture that we can draw at present. Through iterative argumentation， Zhang has proved that the core of the Spring and Autumn research on the Book of Changes is the system of explanation via the hexagram-based imagery and analogy. This work is an achievement abundant in original views and not only fills in a long-standing hole in our understanding clarifies the font of the history of research on the Book of Changes， but also is of considerable significance for writing accurately the history of Chinese philosophy and the intellectual history of China and to gaining a new understanding of the earliest Chinese civilization. Wang Xiansheng 王先勝 is a courageous forerunner of academic criticism of research on the Book of Changes. As regards shuzi gua， the opinion prevailing long among scholars is that the hexagrams came from ancient practices of divination. By analyzing the basis of academic principles and drawing on a large body of archaeological evidence， Wang noted clearly， “the opinion and understanding of the trigrams originating from divining via numbers， tortoise shells， or milfoil stalks are groundless.” In addition， he expressed his disagreement with some of Li Xueqin’s arguments about the historical materials of the hexagrams and is critical of some of Liu Dajun’s points about gua qi. Of Wang’s many writings， the most representative is Lifting the Mysterious Veil over the Research on the Book of Changes： Reflecting on Research in Contemporary China [揭开易学界的神秘面纱——当代中国易学研究反思录]， which involves the research and opinions of over 120 scholars of the Book of Changes， archeology， Chinese thought， and cultural studies. Wang analyzed and reflected for the first time the five major problems with contemporary research on the Book of Changes in China， which are that （1） all sides claim to be in the right and it is hard to distinguish the right and the wrong， （2） many scholars ignore archaeological findings and cut off their own way forward， （3） thinking is rigid and academic principles are neglected， （4） studies are done behind closed doors with self-complacency， and （5） subjective assumptions and groundless speculation are too commonly seen. The archaeology of research on the Book of Changes that Wang advocates undoubtedly extends the theory and deepens the question of shuzi gua， which indicates the way forward for the field in the early decades of this new century.
Conclusion [71]
The revival of traditional Chinese culture will certainly usher in the revival of Chinese intellectual and academic traditions. Research on the Book of Changes， as far as its content goes， stretches over various subjects. Over the past four decades， its development has constantly manifested its unique value and significance and will surely become a fresh support and cornerstone for the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation in the new era. That is probably the reason why modern New Confucians， almost without exception， set store by the Book of Changes.
Bibliography of Cited Translations
Baynes， Cary F.， and Richard Wilhelm， trans. The I Ching or Book of Changes. 3rd ed. Princeton： Princeton University Press， 1967.
Lynn， Richard， trans. The Classic of Changes： A New Translation of the I Ching as Interpreted by Wang Bi. New York： Columbia University Press， 1994.
Translated by Wang Xiaonong
Keywords： reform and opening-up， research on the Book of Changes
In the wake of the reform and opening-up policy in the late 1970s， China’s research on the Book of Changes （Yixue 易學） recovered from a closed status and started to gain increasing momentum. Over the past forty years， it began with displaying its philosophical and scientific orientations in response to the times， and while sticking to its own research domain as ever， it has gradually gotten rid of its dependence on the study of traditional Confucian classics and Western philosophy for its concepts and methods. In the process of probing and fortifying its own disciplinary subjectivity and self-consistency， research on the Book of Changes has displayed great vitality in its multi-layered and multi-directional creative transformation and innovative development of traditional Chinese scholarship. The forty years of research on the Book of Changes in the mainland of China can be divided into four decades， each salient with its own theme of the times. Under such a framework， I will attempt to make a panoramic review.
First Decade （1978–1987）： Returning to Origin and
Breaking Fresh Ground [Refer to page 53 for Chinese. Similarly hereinafter]
During the beginning decade of reform and opening-up， with the breakthrough out of ideological shackles and an old academic framework， research on the Book of Changes blazed a new trail for the innovation of Chinese thought and culture， ideology， and research methodology， manifesting the everlasting value of traditional Chinese scholarship.
In the academic conference on ancient Chinese scripts held in Changchun in December 1978， Zhang Zhenglang 张政烺 （1912–2005） proposed that the methodological principles of operating the divinatory milfoil stalks recorded in “Appended Remarks” [系辞] of the Book of Changes might be applied to deciphering those numerical signs found in the inscriptions on oracle bones and bronzes of the Shang and Zhou dynasties， in light of the opinion put forth by Li Xueqin 李学勤 （1933–2019） in 1956 concerning the possible relationship between unidentified ancient characters and the numbers nine and six in the Book of Changes. It was the first attempt in Chinese intellectual history to systematically examine the unknown characters on the unearthed Shang and Zhou materials by associating them with the trigrams in the Book of Changes; hence it was of great academic significance. After the conference， Zhang published “An Interpretation of the Divinatory Inscriptions on Early Zhou Bronzes” [试释周初青铜器铭文中的易卦]. Later on， Zhang Yachu 张亚初 and Liu Yu 刘雨 published “On Several Questions of the Divinatory Method in Light of the Numerical Signs in the Shang and Zhou Hexagrams” [从商周八卦数字符号谈筮法的几个问题]. Responding to each other in their topics but contrasting in content， from the perspective of archaeology the two articles brought about a landslide in research on the Book of Changes， introducing the issue of shuzi gua 数字卦 （lit. numerical hexagrams or trigrams）， a completely new field. The discovery and systematic study of shuzi gua represents a major achievement of contemporary research on the Book of Changes， which has broadened its vision， extended its domain， and provided strong support to the academic probes into the original mechanism of two trigrams composing one hexagram and the ancient divinatory methods. However， since the shuzi gua took place at least several thousand years after the legendary Fuxi was held by tradition to have first drawn trigrams， if it was used to reveal the actual formation of the hexagram system in a logical way， that would be a solution only those scholars given to doubting ancient history could imagine. Consequently， it was inevitable that the approach informed by the concept of shuzi gua to studying the origination of the hexagrams in the Book of Changes reached an impasse.
Apart from the studies of shuzi gua， the silk manuscripts of the Book of Changes including the jing 经 （text） and zhuan 传 （commentaries） also attracted much scholarly attention and achieved considerable research results. The newly unearthed text of the Book of Changes and its commentaries added to the material of the “Mawangdui Silk Text of Sixty Four Hexagrams” [馬王堆帛书《六十四卦》释文] with two appendices， “A Postscript for the Silk Text of Sixty Four Hexagrams” [帛书《六十四卦》跋] and “On the Silk Text of the Book of Changes” [帛书《周易》]， authored by Zhang Zhenglang and Yu Haoliang 于豪亮 respectively. Henceforth， scholars engaged for a long time in discussing the order of the sixty-four hexagrams in the silk text of the Book of Changes， the relationship between the silk text and the traditional received text， and analysis and interpretation of the statements attached to the hexagram lines of the silk text. After 1992， the silk editions of the “Ten Commentaries on the Book of Changes” [易传] began to come out， bringing about heated discussions among scholars which continue to the present day.
Gao Heng’s 高亨 （1900–1986） Ten Commentaries on the Book of Changes Annotated in Modern Chinese [周易大传今注] was an outstanding work devoted to annotating the ten pieces of Commentaries strictly from the historical point of view. In his remarks on the image–number parts in the Commentaries， he attempted to make an accurate account of them. For example， he wrote，
According to some records in Zuo’s Explanation of the Spring and Autumn Annals [左传] and Discourses of the States [国语]， two books of Spring and Autumn Period （770–476 BCE）， when the people consulted the text of the Book of Changes in divination or cited it discussion， they only talked about the hexagram images， including not only the images of the sixty-four regular hexagrams but also those of the varied hexagrams， and never mentioned the images of the individual lines and the numbers represented by them. Probably what they followed was a school of learning from before the Qin dynasty （221–206 BCE）， which seemed to be the old school from before the Spring and Autumn period. As regards the Commentaries， they were more liable to talk about the images of the sixty-four regular hexagrams and of the lines and their numbers but not mention the images of the varied hexagrams. Probably what they practiced was another one of the pre-Qin schools of learning on the Book of Changes， which seemed to be a new school in Warring States Period （475–221 BCE）. The above citation from Gao indicates his sensitive perception and unique understanding of the significance of the hexagram images and that of the images of the lines and their numbers in the sense of intellectual history. His research achievements were significantly informative and precursory to the studies aiming to reveal the original historical meaning of the classical texts of the Book of Changes.
Liu Dajun’s 劉大钧 Introduction to the Book of Changes [周易概论]， published in 1986， was the first work since 1949 to make a positive affirmation of the scholarly efforts for image–number-oriented research on the Book of Changes. Though meant only as an introductory work， Liu’s book played a groundbreaking role and， particularly considering the general tendency toward denying the image–number school completely， his affirmations were valuable indeed. Liu presents a brief survey of the scholarship on the Book of Changes over the past dynasties in feudal China， where he pays special attention to the two traditional approaches， the one focusing on philosophical content and the other on the image–number side. He advocates applying both approaches and thus， by rehabilitating the traditional image–number approach， he pushed ahead research on the Book of Changes on that front.
Jin Jingfang 金景芳 （1902–2001） published such books as Lectures on the Book of Changes [周易讲座] and A Complete Interpretation of the Book of Changes [周易全解] and a series of important articles. In these articles， Jin puts forward a host of opinions ahead of his time that helped guide scholarly efforts toward studying the early history of the Book of Changes. His representative work on the Book of Changes is A Complete Interpretation of the Book of Changes， which is the most mature and the most complete as far as its system is concerned. Its emphasis is on clarifying “the ideological system underlying the structure of the sixty-four hexagrams in the Book of Changes.” Jin thoroughly interprets both the text of the Book of Changes and its commentaries from the angles of exegesis， hexagram line positions， and hexagram images. This achievement represents the decade’s most representative work for its systemic study of the philosophy embraced in the Book of Changes.
Qu Wanli’s 屈万里 （1907–1979） Review of the Principles for Explaining the Book of Changes in the Pre-Qin， Han， and Wei Dynasties [先秦汉魏易例述评] is a creative work in which he reflects on and analyzes the ancient principles for interpreting the Book of Changes. In his opinion， the image–number based explanation of the Book of Changes was started by Meng Xi 孟喜 （ca. 90–40 BCE）. He is emphatic in elaborating the Han dynasty principles， such as the shi’er xiaoxi gua 十二消息卦 （the twelve sets of numbers in seasonal correspondence to the twelve lunar months）， gua qi 卦气 （the Changes based explanation of the calendric numbers）， hu ti 互体 （exchanging the two trigrams composing a hexagram to generate a new hexagram） and yao bian 爻变 （hexagram line variations）， bagong gua 八宫卦 （the sixty-four hexagrams arranged into eight houses）， and fei fu 飞伏 （regarding a visible hexagram as flying and an invisible one as hiding， symbolic of the past and the future respectively）， and analyzed their errors. Featuring a well-arranged structure and deep analysis， Qu’s thesis is a classic work among modern studies of the principles for explaining the Book of Changes. Second Decade （1988–1997）： Interpreting Chinese Traditions
with Western Approaches [58]
A large number of Western philosophical works were translated into Chinese in the last twenty years of the twentieth century， causing a fever of studying the traditional Chinese scholarship through the concepts and frameworks of Western philosophy， which is still in full swing with no signs of slowing down. Centered on Western metaphysics， epistemology， methodology， and values， those studies analyzed the conceptual patterns of induction and thinking underlying the texts of traditional Chinese classics in the hope of finding something therein compatible with Western philosophy. By recasting the philosophy of the Book of Changes in foreign frameworks， any people insisted on the fundamental status of the Book of Changes as a Confucian classic and sought for contemporary advances in pursuing research on the Book of Changes in the Confucian way.
Zhu Bokun 朱伯崑 （1923–2007） was a renowned Book of Changes philosopher， whose representative work was the four-volume History of Philosophical Research on the Book of Changes [易学哲学史]. This is a large-scale contemporary work on the history of the study of Book of Changes， which makes a systematic and complete exposition of the philosophical discourses presented by Book of Changes scholars over the dynasties either in their image–number innovation or their principle creation. It marks the decade’s monumental attainment in Book of Changes philosophical studies， which qualifies research on the Book of Changes as an integral part of the Chinese history of philosophy.
The topic under the history of Changes philosophical studies is not concerned with the Book of Changes itself， nor is it concerned with whether the various annotations of the book are advisable or not by using the method of text exegesis， but rather with the philosophical thoughts conveyed by the various schools of research on the Book of Changes in their explanations of the book. It does not matter whether the thoughts are congruent with the original meaning of the book or not.
As far as such a macro viewpoint goes， Zhu was selective in extracting the topics of traditional research on the Book of Changes， and what drove him in combing the large number of relevant materials was his clear train of thought on how to write the history of Chinese philosophy. With regard to the framework of his History of Philosophical Research on the Book of Changes， its value goes far beyond the borders defining a history of Chinese philosophy， and its connecting of traditional studies of Confucian classics with modern philosophy is， no doubt， one of the respects with the greatest import. Zhu， in this creative work， broke through the bondage of the times in a somewhat veiled way and achieved much more than merely completing the task of writing a history of Chinese philosophy， thus gaining a certain significance in returning to traditional Chinese scholarship. In this regard， his idea of writing is quite different from that of Feng Youlan’s 馮友兰 （1895–1990） New History of Chinese Philosophy [中国哲学史新编]. Another clear contrast is the philosophical approach pursued by Zhu Bokun and the traditional Confucian approach to the philosophical content of the Book of Changes insisted on by Huang Shouqi 黃寿祺 （1912–1990） and Zhang Shanwen 张善文， the two authors of An Annotated Modern Chinese Translation of the Book of Changes [周易译注]. In this work， adhering to their orientation to traditional Chinese scholarship and continuing on the historical track of studying the Book of Changes as a Confucian classic， they make great efforts to probe the modern significance of the philosophical content in its text and commentaries. They adopt a layout of arranging the corresponding sections in the Text and the Commentaries together and then offer a lengthy modern Chinese version with annotation and explanation， followed by further philosophical elaboration. Containing a large collection of detailed data concerning research on the Book of Changes over the past dynasties， their work offers， on a sentence by sentence basis， minute annotations to the statements attached to the hexagrams and their lines and of the commentaries on the hexagram and line images， with a thorough and readily intelligible explanation， and afterward presents a systematic exposition of its philosophical discourse. Opening their book is a long introduction and “A Guide for Reading the Book of Changes” [读易要例]， securing both its academic status and its accessibility to a mass audience. Small wonder that as soon as it was published in 1989， it was accepted by many scholars as a classic introductory book and today is still reprinted. However， this modern work， though it covers the entire range of traditional Confucian philosophy and research on the Book of Changes， fails to make clear the prerequisites and presuppositions for the beginners’ study， so that in actuality it is not an ideal primer for research on the Book of Changes.
Dai Lianzhang’s 戴琏璋 The Formation of the Changes Commentaries and Their Thought [易传之形成及其思想] is an excellent work on the philosophical connotations of the Commentaries， echoing Zhu Bokun’s study of the philosophy in research on the Book of Changes. It probes into the Commentaries and is known as a must-read for relevant studies. Since the Qin and Han dynasties， the Commentaries have occupied a pivotal position in research on the Book of Changes and the Confucian tradition. It is necessary to make great effort to examine it punctiliously. Through research Dai found that：
Of the ten commentaries， the earliest two， “Commentary on the Decisions” [彖传] and “Commentary on the Images” [象传]， take gang-rou 刚柔 （firmness and softness） as the main concepts as a pair. They appear ninety-eight times in the former and nineteen times in the latter. By contrast， the yin-yang 阴阳 （negative force and positive force， the two opposing principles in nature） appear only four times in the former and only two times in the latter. . . . In “Commentary on the Sequence of the Hexagrams” [序卦传] and “Miscellaneous Notes on the Hexagrams” [杂卦传]， yin and yang are not mentioned at all. In the remaining three， that is， “Commentary on the Words of the Text” [文言传]， “Appended Remarks” [系辞传]， and “Commentary on the Trigrams” [说卦传]， the main concepts are qian-kun 乾坤 （Heaven and Earth， the creative and the receptive）， where the number of times of mentioning gang-rou and that of mentioning yin-yang are similar， both fewer than qian-kun. This finding provides an important clue and basis for studying the intellectual content of each of the ten pieces in the Commentaries.
In many respects， A History of the Studies on the Book of Changes [周易研究史] by Liao Mingchun 廖名春， Kang Xuewei 康学伟， and Liang Weixian 梁韦弦 took a step further than Zhu Bokun’s work， in that it not only covers the research on the Book of Changes in modern times but treats specific details in an original way as well. For example， as regards the pre-Qin form of research on the Book of Changes， Liao offers a concise definition of the field： “Research on the Book of Changes are called Yixue.” He further stated， “The pre-Qin period is the incipient phase of research on the Book of Changes.” The work collects a big number of yishuo 易說 （discourses on the Book of Changes） and divides them into two types： one subscribes to the theory treating the book as one of divination， and the other focusing on its philosophical content. This division no doubt conforms to reality. For another example， after making detailed and complete textual research of each piece in the Commentaries， Liao summarized， “it can be basically concluded that the creation of the Commentaries was not later than middle Warring State Period.” Therefore， most of the Commentaries were written collaboratively by Confucius and some of his disciples and the most appropriate research method is to treat all of them as an entirety， to make overall analysis of and argumentation on them under the general name of pre-Qin Confucian research on the Book of Changes. Only in this way can its theoretical connotations and academic attributes be clarified more definitely.
Chen Guying 陈鼓应， in his inspiring The Changes Commentaries and the Daoist Doctrines [易传与道家思想]， clarifies a lot of original ideas. In his work， he tries to argue that：
All the philosophical topics and intellectual patterns as well as all the concepts， categories， and propositions conveyed by the various doctrines on the origin of the myriad things， natural circulation， yin-yang and qi 气 （vital energy） based transformation， Heaven and humankind as one， change and development， optimistic and philosophical attitude to life， and gang-rou in mutual complementarity bear out that the philosophical content in all the pieces of the Commentaries pertains to the tradition of Daoism.
In the Commentaries are retained many Daoist ideas and concepts， indeed. In other words， the creation of the Commentaries was under tremendous influence from the doctrine of Daoism. I agree with many of the views and arguments proposed by Chen in his work， but his conclusion that “the philosophical content in the Commentaries pertains to the tradition of Daoism” seems a little extreme. Third Decade （1998–2007）： Pursuing All-Round Innovation [63]
The third decade saw a liberal academic environment in China， where research on the Book of Changes entered a phase of rapid and deep development. There were two dominant features： One was the further diversification of research methodology and interpretive approaches; and the other was that the studies were more in-depth， in which diversified studies， periodization studies， and case studies constituted the mainstream. A group of middle-aged and young scholars came on the scene and produced a body of research rich in innovation. The various academic views and research methods， past and present， Chinese and foreign， agitated among one another and brought about more or less an advance in all the areas of research on the Book of Changes， thus presenting an impressive picture of substantial achievement.
Yang Qingzhong’s 楊庆中 A History of Research on the Book of Changes in the Twentieth Century China [二十世纪中国易学史] introduces systematically the colorful development of research on the Book of Changes during this period. Yang divides research on the Book of Changes in the twentieth century into two periods， first from 1900 to 1949 and the second from 1950 to 1997， corresponding to part one and part two of his work. In part one， he lays emphasis on research on the Book of Changes by scholars of Confucian classics， and research by the school of doubting ancient history and the school of historical materialism， as well as their new explorations. Part two covers research on the Book of Changes in the mainland and Taiwan of China. Yang divides research on the Book of Changes in the mainland into two consecutive phases. The first phase （1950s and 1960s） introduces the formation， nature， authorship， and philosophical thought of the text and commentaries of the Book of Changes， and discusses the immediately relevant methods of studying the history of Chinese philosophy. The second phase （1980s and 1990s） covers research on the text and commentaries of the Book of Changes， the history of research on the Book of Changes， and ancient classics concerned with the Book of Changes， as well as work on archaeological materials and the modern concepts of humanism and science. A special chapter in its second part is devoted to the research on the Book of Changes in the Taiwan region since 1949， discussing the outstanding achievements of some Taiwan-based scholars working on literature， history， and thought. This work by Yang deserves to be called an excellent model of studying the history of research on the Book of Changes， representing the highest level in studying the periodization of research on the Book of Changes in the third decade. Another of Yang’s works， A Study of the Text and Commentaries of the Book of Changes [周易经传研究]， is also composed of two parts. Part one contains seven chapters focusing on studying the Text， with seven topics respectively concerning the images of the hexagrams and their lines， the statements attached to the hexagrams and their lines， the relationship between the images and the statements， the hexagram names and their sequence， the period in which the Text was formed， the nature of the Text， and the doctrine on the dao of Humanity （人道） in the Text. The eight chapters of part two turn to the Commentaries， discussing these eight topics： the relation between Confucius and the Commentaries， the age when the Commentaries came into being， the ideological and cultural resources fostering the Commentaries， the rationale of the Commentaries in explaining the Text， the train of thought by which the Commentaries explain the Text， the relationship between Heaven and humankind conveyed by the Commentaries， the dao 道 （the Way） in the Commentaries， and the Commentaries in relation to Chinese philosophy. The work makes a systematic and all-round summary of the studies of the text and commentaries of the Book of Changes in the previous several decades and in many caps off their lessons with further contributions， making it a mostly highly esteemed work in scholarly circles.
Gao Huaimin 高懷民， in his A History of Pre-Qin Research on the Book of Changes [先秦易学史]， divides pre-Qin research on the Book of Changes into three periods： the period of symbolic Changes， the period of divinatory Changes， and the period of Confucian Changes. According to him，
When we observe the cases of divination by using the Book of Changes recorded in Zuo’s Explanation of the Spring and Autumn Annals and Discourses of the States， we find that the Changes was treated like a spent bullet. At that time， divination became a mere formality. When people got an auspicious statement， they would naturally be glad， but when otherwise， they would read into the statement something auspicious. Such people as Duke Xian of Jin （d. 651 BCE） and Cui Zhu 崔杼 （d. 546 BCE） went so far as to run the risk of calamity and act against the divination result. Clearly， the authority of divination was already lost completely.
Gao goes further to argue for his opinion from three angles， for which purpose， he cites eight examples from other sources. His exemplification seems to fall short in comprehensiveness， and his analysis of those examples is rather simple， even leaving several of them entirely unexplained. Nonetheless， I agree with his opinion that pre-Qin research on the Book of Changes is where the true spirit of China’s Yixue lies. He regards Fuxi and King Wen of Zhou as the sages of the subject and though his account of their thoughts on the Changes is very rough and shallow， he preserves the continuity and completeness of the earliest history of research on the Book of Changes. His work may be seen as a supplement to the studies of the mainland scholars who have tended to apply the “headless” model in studying the history of Chinese philosophy. It is especially encouraging that， in the new environment where all-round innovation is advocated， some scholars have attempted new approaches and methods in explaining the Book of Changes. Though still leaving much to be desired， their studies are beneficial and worthy of being pushed ahead. Below， I will introduce and make some comments on three which are more distinctive in their argumentation.
Wen Shaofeng’s 温少峰 Interpreting the Images of the Eight Trigrams in the Book of Changes [周易八卦释象] is an achievement which takes the lead in studying the images of the trigrams. He describes his method this way： “The method of extracting images to compose the Book of Changes must have been similar to that of extracting images prevalent in Spring and Autumn Period， because this period is the closest to the time when the book was made，” and setting up a hexagram， observing the image， and attaching statements to it and its lines are the basic method and pattern of the Book of Changes. Regrettably， when he tries to probe how the author of the Book of Changes set up the hexagrams by extracting images， he returns to the old track taken in the Han in search of yi xiang 逸象 （lost images）. Thus， despite his going farther than the Han scholars， his advance is very limited.
Zhu Xingguo 朱兴国， in his Comprehensive Interpretation of the Three Changes [三易通义]， by examining the literature passed down from the Sui dynasty （581–618） found a new path to revealing the method of the Book of Changes in extracting images for the eight trigrams. He introduces the theory of bagua xiuwang 八卦休王 （alternate quiescence and activity of the eight trigrams） from The Great Meaning of the Five Phases [五行大义] by Xiao Ji 萧吉 （fl. 554–605） and saw it as the principles underlying the composition of the Book of Changes， which serves as the basis for his explanation of the Text. Though， in his work， Zhu’s argumentation is not preceded with preliminary discussion or followed by necessary verification， on the whole his way of probing the trigram images of the Book of Changes is innovative and his efforts represent the right direction of pursuing image–numbers in contemporary research on the Book of Changes.
Lu Tai’s 盧泰 Explanation of Divination with the Book of Changes [周易筮解] starts from studying how the book was used for divination in attempt to address the question of imagery for the eight trigrams. Lu holds that the canwu 参伍 （interspersing） method， not the dayan 大衍 （great expansion） method， was the original divinatory method used with the Book of Changes. He holds that the main point of the canwu method is to conduct divination by using the tray structure of the two trigrams composing a hexagram， and this is the basis on which he explains the twenty-two cases of divination using the Book of Changes recorded in Zuo’s Explanation of the Spring and Autumn Annals and Discourses of the States. The substance of his work can be seen as a study of how to explain hexagram images. His exploration of the tray structures of the trigrams， doubtless， is of considerable reference value to studying how to explain the hexagram images in the Text. Fourth Decade （2008–2017）： Advancing into the Future [67]
Echoing the fever for studying traditional Chinese culture and the ancient classics， more efforts were made during this period to popularize the Book of Changes through modern interpretations. Research during this decade was more meticulous， diversified， and thoroughgoing in research content. Nevertheless， for lacking academic criticism， research varied quite a bit in quality and many problems troubling the growth of research on the Book of Changes called for attention but remained unsolved. This deplorable situation caused many uncertainties to the future research on the Book of Changes that will make the situation very hard to recover indeed. As regards academic criticism of research on the Book of Changes， some scholars have taken the lead in a display of courage which is worth of our respect.
In discussing the way out of the current plight， Yang Qingzhong emphasizes the need to return with caution to the knowledge system of traditional research on the Book of Changes so as to renew concepts， integrate new knowledge， and seek new patterns for explaining the Book of Changes in a modern context. Of course， his “new pattern for explaining the Book of Changes in a modern context” is relative to the old pattern established by traditional research， and no new method can extricate itself completely from the traditional research on the Book of Changes. In this regard， Wu Qianheng’s 吳前衡 Research on the Book of Changes Prior to the Commentaries [《传》前易学] is， no doubt， a forerunner. According to Wu， “the divination cases recorded in Zuo’s Explanation of the Spring and Autumn Annals and Discourses of the States provide considerable evidence for the existing status of the statements attached to the hexagrams and lines of the Book of Changes as a divination manual.” Though the received edition of the book is probably passed down from the Western Zhou dynasty （1046–771 BCE）， it displays differences from the edition of the Spring and Autumn period. In particular， the difference in the hexagram line titles containing six and nine directly causes different readings of the bases for the image–numbers of those lines. Therefore Wu’s painstaking textual research of the Book of Changes as a divination manual is important.
In 1987， Xu Qinting’s 徐芹庭 Source and Development of Research on the Book of Changes [易学源流] was published by National Institute for Compilation and Translation of Taiwan， and in 2008 its simplified Chinese edition was published by Cathay Bookshop. Its new title， Source and Development of Research on the Book of Changes： A History of the Book of Research on the Book of Changes in China， makes clear its academic nature， manifesting its unique significance and value. From the viewpoint of the development history of the Book of Changes， Xu gives a comprehensive summary of the trends， sources， schools， and purpose of research on the Book of Changes over the past dynasties. Meanwhile， he makes precise and pertinent comments on almost all important works dedicated to the subject in different periods， thus filling a gap in the map of contemporary research on the Book of Changes. Constructing Daoist Research on the Book of Changes [道家易学建构] is another important achievement by Chen Guying in studying Daoist research on the Book of Changes. Of the eight articles collected there， “Probing Pre-Qin Daoist Research on the Book of Changes” [先秦道家易学发微] and “Interpreting Daoism in Relation to the Text and Commentaries of the Book of Changes” [道家与《周易》经传思想脉络诠释] fully represent Chen’s theoretical attainment and scholarship. The former is a holistic argument that the philosophical central thought of the Book of Changes pertains to the Daoist doctrine and meanwhile， from the viewpoint of pre-Qin Daoism， toward constructing pre-Qin Daoist research on the Book of Changes. The latter focuses on discussing the doctrine of Daoism， rendering the implicit topic of the dialectical thinking featuring the Book of Changes to an explicit one. His viewpoints are various： the dialectical thinking implied in the yin-yang theory， dao-qi 道器 （doctrine and implement） theory， and Taiji 太极 （Supreme Ultimate） theory; concepts such as duidai 对待 （opposition and unification）， liuxing 流行 （flow and movement）， dong-jing 动静 （action and stillness）， and bian-dong 变动 （change and movement）. From these perspectives he comprehensively constructs a Daoist system of research on the Book of Changes.
Wang Bo 王博 has published a series of articles dedicated to studying the Commentaries， most of which are collected in his “Pre-Qin Volume” [先秦卷] of A History of Confucianism in China [中國儒学史]. In his opinion， the Commentaries have exerted tremendous influence and constraint on later people’s understandings of the text of the Book of Changes.
Via the explanation of the Book of Changes by the Commentaries， the original book （Text） turned gradually from a divination manual， an old canonical work which had been in the hands of the Great Diviner in the era of official divination， to a book on virtue and righteousness as a new classic in the era of Confucian classical studies. In that process， the original book even lost its textual independence， for it had to be transmitted together with the Commentaries. In appearance， the Commentaries is attached to the Text， but actually the Text depends on the Commentaries.
It can be said that it is for this reason that the explanations which had been able to break through the confines of virtue and righteousness imposed by the Commentaries and concern themselves with the Text itself were a rarity among rarities.
In 2012， Zhang Peng 张朋 published A Study of Research on the Book of Changes in the Spring and Autumn Period， With Reference to the Hexagram Interpreting Method [春秋易学研究——以《周易》卦爻辞的卦象解说方法为中心]. In this work， aimed at tracing sources， Zhang starts from the earliest materials of research on the Book of Changes， studies them creatively， and ultimately reveals the Spring and Autumn textual structure and philosophical connotations of the Book of Changes. He begins with focusing on the Changes images in the Spring and Autumn period and divides the complicated contents of the “Ten Wings” （or Commentaries） into two parts， the Spring and Autumn period materials and Warring States period materials， and thereby isolates the Spring and Autumn research on the Book of Changes from that of the Warring States. As the most important part of his work， he examines systematically all twenty-two cases of using the Book of Changes for divination recorded in Zuo’s Explanation of the Spring and Autumn Annals and Discourses of the States and concludes that the explaining system of the Spring and Autumn research on the Book of Changes was centered on the hexagram images. It applied the method of the hexagram imagery and analogy to making 4，096 judgments about good fortune， misfortune， regret， and trouble. This is the most probable original picture that we can draw at present. Through iterative argumentation， Zhang has proved that the core of the Spring and Autumn research on the Book of Changes is the system of explanation via the hexagram-based imagery and analogy. This work is an achievement abundant in original views and not only fills in a long-standing hole in our understanding clarifies the font of the history of research on the Book of Changes， but also is of considerable significance for writing accurately the history of Chinese philosophy and the intellectual history of China and to gaining a new understanding of the earliest Chinese civilization. Wang Xiansheng 王先勝 is a courageous forerunner of academic criticism of research on the Book of Changes. As regards shuzi gua， the opinion prevailing long among scholars is that the hexagrams came from ancient practices of divination. By analyzing the basis of academic principles and drawing on a large body of archaeological evidence， Wang noted clearly， “the opinion and understanding of the trigrams originating from divining via numbers， tortoise shells， or milfoil stalks are groundless.” In addition， he expressed his disagreement with some of Li Xueqin’s arguments about the historical materials of the hexagrams and is critical of some of Liu Dajun’s points about gua qi. Of Wang’s many writings， the most representative is Lifting the Mysterious Veil over the Research on the Book of Changes： Reflecting on Research in Contemporary China [揭开易学界的神秘面纱——当代中国易学研究反思录]， which involves the research and opinions of over 120 scholars of the Book of Changes， archeology， Chinese thought， and cultural studies. Wang analyzed and reflected for the first time the five major problems with contemporary research on the Book of Changes in China， which are that （1） all sides claim to be in the right and it is hard to distinguish the right and the wrong， （2） many scholars ignore archaeological findings and cut off their own way forward， （3） thinking is rigid and academic principles are neglected， （4） studies are done behind closed doors with self-complacency， and （5） subjective assumptions and groundless speculation are too commonly seen. The archaeology of research on the Book of Changes that Wang advocates undoubtedly extends the theory and deepens the question of shuzi gua， which indicates the way forward for the field in the early decades of this new century.
Conclusion [71]
The revival of traditional Chinese culture will certainly usher in the revival of Chinese intellectual and academic traditions. Research on the Book of Changes， as far as its content goes， stretches over various subjects. Over the past four decades， its development has constantly manifested its unique value and significance and will surely become a fresh support and cornerstone for the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation in the new era. That is probably the reason why modern New Confucians， almost without exception， set store by the Book of Changes.
Bibliography of Cited Translations
Baynes， Cary F.， and Richard Wilhelm， trans. The I Ching or Book of Changes. 3rd ed. Princeton： Princeton University Press， 1967.
Lynn， Richard， trans. The Classic of Changes： A New Translation of the I Ching as Interpreted by Wang Bi. New York： Columbia University Press， 1994.
Translated by Wang Xiaonong