Center for Zhouyi & Ancient Chinese Philosophy

Viewing the Six-digit Hexagrams by the Excavated Bamboo Slips Manuscripts of Yi

Time：2008年6月3日18:25

This paper was originally published in Chinese in Zhouyi Yanjiu 《周易研究》 (Studies of Zhouyi), no. 4 (2006), pp. 43-48.

(School of Chinese Language and Literature, Yangtze University , Jingzhou 226019, China )

Translated from Chinese by Zhang Wenzhi

(Center for Zhouyi & Ancient Chinese Philosophy, Shandong University , Jinan 250100, China )

“ On the Hexagram Lines in the Unearthed Warring States Period Bamboo Slips Manuscripts of Yi ” ( Lun zhanguo jian de guahua 论战国简的卦画 ) written by Li Xueqin 李学勤 which was published in Chutu wenxian yanjiu 出土文献研究 (Excavated Literature Studies), vol. 6 holds that, the diagrams copied on the bamboo slips unearthed at Jiangling Tianxinguan 江陵天星观 No. 1 tomb in 1978, Jingmen Baoshang 荆门包山 No. 2 tomb in 1987, and Jiangling Wangjiatai 江陵王家台 No. 15 tomb in 1993 which were generally alleged as six-digit hexagrams actually are not made up of numbers, but the symbolic lines. Mr. Li concluded in the end of the article, “Now, the Warring States Period version of the Zhouyi 周易 and Guizang 归藏 are in the presence of us, the conclusion should be clear and convincing.” In spite of this conclusion, I think it still has possibility for us to conduct further research on this problem.

I . About the Six-digit Hexagrams

What allegedly called the six-digit hexagrams were first seen in a group of Western Zhou (1045-771 B.C.) bronze wares, called Anzhou liu qi 安州六器 (Anzhou Six Bronze Wares), unearthed in nowadays called Xiaogan 孝感 , Hubei 湖北 Province in 1118 in the Northern Song dynasty (960-1127). In one of the wares, at the end of the inscription, there are two symbols which were deciphered by the Song scholars as “ 赫赫 ”, or “ 十八大夫 ” and “ 八大夫 ”. Mr. Guo Muoruo 郭沫若 (1892-1978) construed them as emblem of a nation. Similar symbols are available in the Shang 商 (c. 1600-1046 B.C.) oracular bones discovered in Henan Anyang Ximopan 河南安阳西磨盘 in 1950 and Western Zhou oracular bones discovered in Shaan Xi Chang'an Zhangjiapo 陕西长安张家坡 in 1956. Some scholars such as Tang Lan 唐兰 (1901-1979) and Li Xueqin 李学勤 had made attempts to decipher and analyze these marks before Mr. Guan Xiechu 管燮初 (1914-2000) who first pointed out that these strokes might be hexagrams and lines, “I guess they are hexagrams and lines used by the people of remote antiquity to express their ideas.” In 1977, the marks which were suspected as hexagram symbols on oracular bones were also excavated at Village Fengchu 凤雏 , Qishan 岐山 County, Shaan Xi 陕西 Province. In the 1 st Symposium of Chinese Ancient Characters held in 1987, Mr. Zhang Zhenglang 张政烺 (1912-2005) pointed out that the marks on the oracular bones excavated were made up of four digits of five ( 五 ), six ( 六 ), seven ( 七 ), and eight ( 八 ) which represent Senior yin , Junior yin , Senior yang , and Junior yang respectively and constitute hexagrams. This proposition of what called six-digit hexagram was gradually confirmed by most scholars. Thereafter, the alleged six-digit hexagrams were successively found in the inscriptions on oracular bones, bronze wares, and silk, particularly in the bamboo slips excavated at the tomb No. 1 in Jiangling Tianxingguan 江陵天星观 in 1978, the tomb No. 2 in Jingmen Baoshan 荆门包山 in 1987, tomb No. 15 in Jiangling Wangjiatai 江陵王家台 which was identified as a version of Guicang 归藏 , traditionally credited to the invention of the Shang 商 people, inscribed on the bamboo slips buried in the Qin 秦 tomb of the Warring States unearthed in 1993, in the Chu 楚 bamboo slips unearthed at Henan Xincai Geling 河南新蔡葛陵 in 1994, and in the bamboo slips collected by Shanghai Museum in 1994. Despite of the above-mentioned evidence, there are still different opinions on whether these marks are really hexagrams and whether they are really made up of digits or numbers, as Mr. Liu Dajun 刘大钧 stated, if the marks were composed of six or three numbers, in other words, if they were six-phased or three-phased, they would be easily recognized as hexagrams or trigrams; but four-phased and even thirteen-phased and twelve-phased marks, such as the one on the oracular bone No. 108 collected in the Western Zhou relics in Qijia 齐家 Village, Fufeng 扶凤 County, Shaan Xi 陕西 Province, were also available, whether all these marks are hexagrams need further meticulous textual research. Nevertheless, it seems this kind of discrepancy did not arouse enough attention.

In my opinion on the issue of six-digit hexagrams, I maintain that those marks with six phases should be hexagrams and other marks need further explorations. Now that the six-phased marks are considered the hexagrams of the Yi , the phases which make up the hexagram ought to be symbols but not numbers, and therefore they should not be called digit hexagrams. So far as the numbers used in what called six-digit hexagrams are concerned, according to Li Ling's 李零 conclusion in his Zhong guo fang shu kao 中国方术考 (Textual Research on Chinese Divination Methods), they includes one ( 一 ), five ( 五 ), six ( 六 ), seven ( 七 ), eight ( 八 ), and nine ( 九 ). He maintains that the numbers of two ( 二 ), three ( 三 ) and four ( 四 ) were intentionally omitted in the marks to avoid the repetition of the number one ( 一 ), whereas ten ( 十 ) is another one ( 一 ) in the decimal system. So, he holds that earlier divination represents arrayal of decimal numbers. Later, he also found the application of number ten ( 十 ) in the six-digit hexagrams. For the reason of no using the numbers of two ( 二 ), three ( 三 ) and four ( 四 ), Mr. Zhang Zhenglang 张政烺 had pointed out that these three numbers resulted from the accumulation of one ( 一 ) when they were drawn in a vertical way, they would just like repetition of one ( 一 ). I find it untenable for us to be forced to piece these numbers together to form a decimal arrayal, in that they had never appeared in the unearthed documents of one single site, whereas at most four to five numbers appeared in one single site. By the discoveries in the bamboo slips manuscripts, as Mr. Li Xueqin had pointed out, these marks were actually not numbers. According to the assertion of six-digit hexagrams, the odd numbers of one ( 一 ), five ( 五 ), seven ( 七 ), and nine ( 九 ) were used to represent yang 阳 (solid) lines, whereas the even numbers of six ( 六 ), eight ( 八 ), and ten ( 十 ) represent yin 阴 (broken) lines. The question is: whether are there any different implications between one, five, seven, and nine while representing yang lines? In the same way, are there any different designations between six, eight, and ten when designating yin lines? If the answer is affirmative, they should be regarded as different symbols but not pure numbers; If the answer is negative, isn't it necessary for us to use different numbers to represent the same attribute? Li Ling 李零 also recognized this problem:

We can not simply claim that in the ten decimal numbers there is no difference between one, five, seven and nine, between six and eight, otherwise, why should all of them be used repeatedly? Moreover, according to the Da yan zhi shu 大衍之数 (great expansion number) generally understood, we can not obtain decimal six-digit hexagrams. Therefore, so far as the materials we have mastered are concerned, we had better classify them into two by their apparent characteristics: one is “decimal six-digit hexagram” (whether they can be called the Yi need more evidence); the other is “binary hexagram” (the Three Yi s of Lianshan 连山 , Guizang 归藏 , and Zhouyi 周易 ).

So, by his view, whether the “decimal six-digit hexagram” can be attributed to the Yi need more testimonies. Now that what he called the “binary hexagram” possesses two phases, i.e., two symbols, how can we call it six-digit hexagram? All these show that the assertion of six-digit hexagram is problematic. As Mr. Zhang Zhenglang said, this assertion “wins here but loses there, without a flawless conclusion.”

Basing on the Qin 秦 bamboo slips manuscript of Guicang 归藏 and Chu bamboo slips manuscript of the Zhouyi collected by Shanghai Museum, Mr. Li Xueqin found that the former only contains three numbers of what called one ( 一 ), six ( 六 ), and eight ( 八 ), whereas the hexagrams of the latter are only made up of one ( 一 ) and eight ( 八 ), and “the Ancient Text (of the Zhouyi ) evidently marks yang lines with nine ( 九 ) and yin lines with six ( 六 ) ， we therefore should not associate these symbols with the numbers of one, six, and eight” and “what called the numbers of one, six, and eight are but symbols of hexagram lines.” In addition, Mr. Li also mentioned two points: one is that, “the strokes of what called the divination numbers except one ( 一 ) differ from the strokes of the corresponding numbers of Chu characters, such as ‘five ( 五 )' by Chu characters should be ‘ ' , but not ‘X'; ‘six ( 六 ) should be ‘ ' , but not ‘ ∧ '; ‘eight ( 八 )' should be ‘ ' , but not ‘ ハ '.” All these are cogent in testifying that these symbols are not numbers. The other point is the imbalance between the divination numbers. There are overall ten groups of symbols in the Chu bamboo slips unearthed in Xincai Geling 新蔡葛陵 , of which eight groups are intelligible. Each group contains two hexagrams and there are over all sixteen hexagrams composed of ninety-six line symbols, the majority of which are “ 一 ” and “ 六 ”, whereas there are only four “ 八 ” and two “ 五 ”. In Baoshan 包山 bamboo slips of Chu, there are overall six groups, each group containing two hexagrams, and thus are there twelve hexagrams including seventy-two line symbols. Similarly, the majority of the symbols are “ 一 ” and “ 六 ”, with only six “ 八 ” and two “ 五 ”. Basing on this statistics, Mr. Li argues, “If there are divination numbers resulting from some kind of divination technique, it is impossible to result in such an imbalance.” In my view, the divination numbers are really of imbalance, for the probability of the Senior yang (corresponding to nine) and Senior yin 's (corresponding to six) appearance in actuality is far less than that of Junior yang (corresponding to seven) and Junior yin (corresponding to eight). For this problem, Dong Guangbi 董光璧 concludes on the basis of calculation that, the appearance of the Senior yang (corresponding to nine) occupies 3/16, Senior yin (six) 1/16, Junior yin (eight) 7/16, and Junior yang (seven) 5/16. It is noteworthy that, generally speaking, the sum of the appearing probabilities of Senior yang and Senior yin is as three times less as that of Junior yang and Junior yin . As this is only a theoretic result, the gap in actual divinations may be much broader. This probabilities are based on the “Great Expansion” divination method mentioned in Xi ci 系辞 . In later dynasties, another divination method by casting coins was invented. By this method, the probabilities for the four images are still not equal, in which the Senior yang and Senior yin occupy 1/8 respectively, the sum of them being 2/8, the Junior yang and Junior yin occupy 3/8 respectively, the sum of them being 6/8. The former two is also as three times less as the latter two images. In this regard, the imbalance of the divination numbers can not be taken as the reason to deny the existence of six-digit hexagrams. So far as how to deal with these much imbalanced symbols, I will discuss it in the next section of the article.

There is an assertion of concentration in six-digit hexagrams discussions. As Zhang Zhenglang 张政烺 concluded after he had observed the hexagrams on the Chu bamboo slips excavated at Jiangling Tianxinguan 江陵天星观 , “two ( 二 ), three ( 三 ), four ( 四 ), five ( 五 ), and seven ( 七 ) had been cancelled, (with the marks) concentrating on the two items of one ( 一 ) and six ( 六 ).” Ji Xusheng 季旭升 maintains that “for the six-digit hexagrams which had come into being since the Neolithic Age, we can see that, for the Shang, Zhou, and Qin to the Han dynasties, the numbers used were by and large towards simplification. Therefore, in the two Neolithic Age six-digit hexagrams available including twelve numbers, six numbers of one ( 一 ), two ( 二 ), three ( 三 ), four ( 四 ), five ( 五 ), and six ( 六 ) were used, whereas till the Shang dynasty, the numbers of six ( 六 ), seven ( 七 ), and eight ( 八 ) played a major role, and till the Spring and Autumn period (770-476 B.C.) as well as the Warring States period (475-221 B.C.), one ( 一 ), six ( 六 ), and eight ( 八 ) were concentrated on, and finally in the Mawangdui 马王堆 silk manuscript and Fuyang 阜阳 bamboo slips manuscript of the Western Han dynasty, the hexagrams were illustrated utterly by one ( 一 ) and eight ( 八 ).” These arguments arouse two problems. One is that it did not differentiate the hexagrams in the Ancient Text from those resulted from actual divination. They found that the Qin 秦 bamboo slips manuscript Guizang 归藏 took use of what called one ( 一 ), six ( 六 ), and eight ( 八 ), while the Chu 楚 bamboo slips manuscript, Mawangdui 马王堆 silk manuscript, as well as Fuyang 阜阳 Han bamboo slips manuscript Zhouyi used only what called one ( 一 ) and eight ( 八 ), thus did they conclude that there was a tendency of concentration. As a matter of fact, all these hexagrams are used in the Ancient Text of the Zhouyi. As the Ancient Text only consists of yin and yang lines, two symbols are enough to illustrate the hexagrams. Yet, both the Xincai Geling 新蔡葛陵 and Baoshan 包山 bamboo slips which also were sealed in the Warring States period used four symbols of one ( 一 ), five ( 五 ), six ( 六 ), and eight ( 八 ), for they were obtained from actual divinations. Therefore, the assertion of concentration can not stand. The other problem is that, as Guan Xiechu pointed out, “at most only four of the six symbols appeared in the oracular bones excavated at the same area or in the same epigraph on bronze wares. Therefore, in the earlier discovered what called ten symbols, no more than four symbols were used in the same site, which does not differ from the case in Xincai Geling and Baoshan bamboo slips of the Warring States period, except that the case illustrated in Ji Xusheng's article used six symbols. This also proves there was not a tendency of concentration.

There is another obvious problem in the assertion of six-digit hexagram, in that in many materials “ 六 ” is difficult to be differentiated from “ 八 ”. As mentioned above, in what they called the tendency of concentration, Zhang Zhenglang 张政烺 holds the symbols finally “were concentrated on the two items of ‘ 一 ' and ‘ 六 '”, whereas Ji Xusheng 季旭升 maintains that “finally in the Mawangdui 马王堆 silk manuscript and Fuyang 阜阳 bamboo slips manuscript of the Western Han dynasty, the hexagrams were illustrated utterly by one ( 一 ) and eight ( 八 ).” Zhang Zhenglang 张政烺 had also taken “ 八 ” in the Fuyang 阜阳 Han bamboo slips manuscript Zhouyi as “ 六 ”. Another example is that, for the Qin bamboo slips manuscript Guicang 归藏 excavated from the tomb No. 15 at Jiangling Wangjiatai 江陵王家台 , the collators claim that three symbols of “ 一 ”, “ 六 ” and “ 八 ” were used: “For the hexagram lines, ‘ 一 ' is used to represent yang lines, ‘ 六 ' or ‘ 八 ' yin lines.” Later, all scholars are inclined to hold that the hexagram lines are composed of “ 一 ” and “ 六 ”, as Lin Zhongjun 林忠军 stated, “each hexagram is composed of ‘ 一 ' and ‘ ∧ ' (i.e. ‘ 六 ').” The difficulty in differentiating “ 六 ” from “ 八 ” manifests they are not numbers, because it is unimaginably confusing if “ 六 ” and “ 八 ” as numbers of six and eight are difficult to be distinctively differentiated from each other.

On the basis of the above-mentioned evidence, I agree that, after the Qin bamboo slips manuscript Guicang and the Chu bamboo slips manuscript Zhouyi collected by Shanghai Museum had brought to light, the assertion of six-digit hexagram in general should be denied.

II. My View on the Symbols of the Yi Hexagrams in the Bamboo Slips

In determining the attributes of the symbols of the Yi hexagrams in the bamboo slips unearthed, I think we should differentiate the symbols in the Text from those obtained in actual divination. In the former, there are only two basic symbols, i.e., yin and yang lines, of which a hexagram is composed, whereas in the latter case, there are many symbols, each of which should possesses distinctive meanings and can not be simply regarded as a yin or yang line.

In the Qin bamboo slips manuscript of Guicang 归藏 , there are three basic symbols of 一 , 六 , 八 . 六 and 八 in fact are one symbol due to their similarity, which represents yin line, while 一 represents yang line. For this reason, they undoubtedly should be regarded as hexagram basic units.

It is not the case in what called the “six-digit hexagrams” resulted from actual divination, of which as many as seven symbols of 一 , 五 , 六 , 七 , 八 , 九 , and 十 have been found. Therefore, it is difficult to simply confine them to yin and yang lines as basic elements of a hexagram. In the hexagrams on Jinling Tianxinguan 金陵天星观 bamboo slips, five symbols of 一 , 六 , 七 , 八 , and 九 , alleged as numbers of one, six, seven, eight, and nine respectively, were obtained. In Xincai Geling 新蔡葛陵 and Baoshan 包山 bamboo slips of Chu, four symbols of 一 , 五 , 六 , and 八 , alleged as numbers of one, five, six, and eight respectively, were obtained. It can be seen that it was accidental to use multiple symbols in actual divination. Therefore, to Mr. Li Xueqin's 李学勤 argument that “the symbol represent yin ( ) (in the six-digit hexagrams) were drawn by two slanting strokes, which sometimes intersected and sometimes separated” , I insist that, under this circumstance, “ 六 ” and “ 八 ” sometimes are really difficult to be differentiated, but the crossed character 五 is obviously distinctive from 六 and 八 , thus ought we not to treat them all as yin or yang symbols.

Another apparent difference between the hexagrams affiliated with the Text and those resulted from actual divination is that in the former case, the hexagrams appear separately, whereas in the latter case, the hexagrams appear in pairs of two hexagrams. The reason is that, in the former case, there is not transformational line, hence the separate hexagrams, while in actual divination, the transformational line(s) may occur, i.e., the senior yang line transforms into yin and the senior yin transforms into yang , hence the transformed hexagram (in contrast to the original hexagram, thus leading to a pair of hexagrams). In general, scholars tend to regard the relationship between a pair of hexagrams as that between the original and transformed hexagrams. But this view will cause another problem: if this relationship really exists, for the hexagrams resulted from actual divination on the bamboo slips unearthed available, at Jiangling Tianxingguan 江陵天星观 , there are eight pairs including sixteen hexagrams, at Xincai Geling 新蔡葛陵 , there are ten pairs, of which eight pairs including sixteen hexagrams are intelligible, at Baoshan 包山 , there are six pairs composed of twelve hexagrams. There are overall twenty-two hexagrams, with two as a pair, a case not conforming to the result from the “Great Expansion” divination method we have known, by which whether there will be a transformed hexagram is uncertain. According to the “Great Expansion” divination method, there occur overall seven cases for an original hexagram which may include: one transformational line, two transformational lines, three transformational lines, four transformational lines, five transformational lines, six transformational lines, and no transformational line (in the case of which the hexagram is called static hexagram). When there is no transformational line (i.e., Senior yin or Senior yang line), there will be no transformed hexagram. On this account, even in actual divination, there will be a case in which there is no transformational line, in other words, there is not transformed hexagram. For this case, according to Zhang Xiaoming's 张晓明 statistics to najia 纳甲 (correlating the ten stems and twelve earthly branches to the hexagrams, credited to Jing Fang 京房 [77-37 B.C]) divination method , the probability of no-transformed-hexagram is 0.17797, close to 1/6. This status is also referential to the “Great Expansion” divination method. There are only twenty-two pairs of hexagrams on bamboo slips excavated available, which might be not enough to be taken as samples for statistics, yet, there is not any static hexagram is still not normal. According to the received literature, in the twenty-two divination cases recorded in Zuo zhuan 左传 (Zuo's Commentaries on the Spring and Autumn Annals) and Guo yu 国语 (Remarks of the Monarchs), there were two static hexagrams in the former. Hence there may be two possibilities for the hexagrams on the bamboo slips excavated. One, the relationship between two hexagrams in a pair is not that between original and transformed hexagrams; two, if the relationship between them is indeed that between original and transformed hexagrams, the divination method used must, such as the meihua yishu 梅花易数 (plum blossom divination number) divination method, differ from the “Great Expansion” divination method mentioned in the Xi ci zhuan 系辞传 . In meihua yishu divination method, each original hexagram must have and only has one transformational line, which leads to a transformed hexagram. Did the hexagrams on the bamboo slips also result from similar divination methods to meihua yishu ? Certainly, if the two hexagrams in a pair in the bamboo slips manuscript are regarded as original and transformed hexagrams, there should exist more than one transformational line in the original hexagram. It seems it should not be more of the second case. As there were at that time what called three different versions of the Yi , i.e., Liangshan 连山 , Guicang 归藏 , and Zhouyi 周易 , they might differ from each other not only in the orderly sequence of the hexagrams, the statements affiliated to the hexagrams and lines, but also in the method to obtain a hexagram. In later dynasties, different divination systems possess different approaches to establish a hexagram. For instance, the pre-Qin period witnessed the hexagrams in Zuo zhuan 左传 and Guo yu 国语 from the “Great Expansion” method, the hexagrams in najia 纳甲 popular since the Han dynasty result from six times of tossing of three same-sized coins, whereas in meihua yishu popular from the Song dynasty, the hexagrams are established by the time, direction, number, color, or sound, and so on. Accordingly, different systems also differ in interpreting and analyzing the hexagrams.

Yet, no matter how to result in a hexagram, for one line, there exist four possibilities: it may be a senior yang , junior yang , senior yin , or junior yin line. (In other words, it must belong to one of the four images.) In the Text of the Yi in the bamboo slips manuscripts, there are only two symbols, whereas there are multiple symbols in actual divination on the bamboo slips unearthed. Where did occur this difference? The difference lies in that in the former case, there was no transformational line while there are transformational lines in the latter case. Thereby, I guess that the multiple symbols occurring in actual divination might be symbols marking the four images (of senior yang , junior yang , senior yin , and junior yin ). Thus can we account for the “imbalance of the divination numbers” raised by Mr. Li Xueqin 李学勤 . As a matter of fact, when he first proposed the name of “six-digit hexagram”, Mr. Zhang Zhenglang 张政烺 had asserted that the four numbers of five ( 五 ), six ( 六 ), seven ( 七 ), and eight ( 八 ) represent the four lines of senior yin , junior yin , senior yang , and junior yang . It is regretful that he based his assertion on “six-digit hexagrams” and would certainly encounter difficult problems, as the divination numbers used in the Zhouyi are six, seven, eight, and nine (which represent senior yin , junior yang , junior yin , and senior yang respectively) but not five, six, seven, and eight. Later, (for the numbers in the bamboo slips manuscripts,) Guan Xiechu 管燮初 argued in his two articles of “ Discrimination of the Hexagrams and Lines on Bones and Bronze Wares of the Shang and Zhou Dynasties” and “Two Items Discussing on the Six-digit Hexagrams of the Yi ” that one ( 一 ) represents junior yang , six ( 六 ) junior yin , eight ( 八 ) senior yin , five ( 五 ) senior yang . For numbers one ( 一 ) and nine ( 九 ), he held that one （一） and seven ( 七 ) were mutually complementary, as nine ( 九 ) had not been discovered at that time. Later, he made a correction in the latter article and held that six ( 六 ), seven ( 七 ), and nine ( 九 ) conform to the numbers of the Yi recorded in Shuo wen 说文 (Explanation of Script and Elucidation of Characters), whereas the one ( 一 ) and five ( 五 ) might be different symbols used by different Yi systems. All these puzzles testify the untenable-ness of the assertion of six-digit hexagrams and prove that these symbols were not numbers at all.

One may doubt that, there are only four images (of senior yang , junior yang , senior yin , and junior yin ), whereas in actual divinations in the bamboo slips manuscripts, as many as six symbols of 一 , 五 , 六 , 七 , 八 , and 九 were found, and additionally the symbol of 十 was also found in what called the six-digit hexagrams of the Shang and Zhou dynasties, as “ 十六五 ” was found in the divination bone unearthed at Henan Anyang Xiaotunnandi 河南安阳小屯南地 in 1973 and “ 六六十 ” was present in the oracular bone unearthed at Shaanxi Qishan Fengchu 陕西岐山凤雏 in 1977, though there were three-phased figures and whether they are trigrams of the Yi still need to be further studied. Then, how to account for so many different symbols resulted from actual divinations? At first, as Guan Xiechu had pointed out, “among the six symbols, at most four of them were found in the inscriptions on the bones unearthed in the same area or in the same epigraph.” Second, the symbols marking the four images were not established and different people might take different symbols to represent the four images. In regard to the symbols by which the ancient people marked the four images in actual divinations, they were not available in extant literature. According to Zhu Xi 朱熹 (1130-1200), □ represents senior yang, junior yin, junior yang, and × senior yin; Yehe laoren 野鹤老人 (Old Man of Wild Crane) takes use of “ 、 ”to mark junior yang , “ 、、 ” junior yin , “ ○ ”senior yang , and “ × ” senior yin ; Mr. Liu Dajun holds that, traditionally, “ 、 ”represents junior yang , “ 、、 ” junior yin , “ △ ” or “ ○ ” senior yang , “ × ” senior yin , while he himself uses “ △ ” to represent senior yang . The author in actual divination uses “ ” to mark junior yang , “ ” junior yin , “ × ” senior yang , “ × ” senior yin . It therefore can be seen that, in spite of the fact that there are only four images, different people may take different symbols to designate them and it is understandable there appear multiple different symbols in actual divination in the bamboo slips manuscripts of the Yi . Evidently, in the bamboo slips manuscripts, 一 was used to mark junior yang , 六 or 八 junior yin , while in actual divination they three appear most frequently, conforming to the issue of probability mentioned above, whereas the other symbols, which should be used to designate senior yin and senior yang , appear much less frequently. In the bamboo slips manuscript of the Zhouyi collected by Shanghai Museum, only 一 and 八 were used; in Qin bamboo slips manuscript of Guicang 归藏 , 一 , 六 , and 八 were used; in Xincai Geling 新蔡葛陵 and Baoshan 包山 bamboo slips, 一 , 五 , 六 , and 八 were used. This just conforms to my judgment on the difference between the Text and actual divination in marking the four images. In addition, it is noteworthy that, in actual divination, if we only take down the original hexagram, we must need the symbols to mark the four images, but if we take down both the original hexagram and the transformed hexagram, the transformational line will be very easy to be found, in the case of which we may not use the symbols to mark the four images, but only use hexagram lines. This in actuality leads to a less probability of the application of the symbols of senior yin and senior yang .

If we regard the symbols in the bamboo slips manuscripts as symbols to mark the four images, there will arouse another problem. That is, if the relationship between the two hexagrams of a pair is that between original and transformed hexagrams, there should only need symbols to mark the four images in the original hexagram, it would be unnecessary to use them in the transformed hexagram, as the transformed hexagram reflects the case which had been transformed, under which only the yin and yang lines need to be marked. By Xincai Geling 新蔡葛陵 and Baoshan 包山 bamboo slips, if we regard the most frequently appeared 一 and 六 as yang line and yin line respectively, and the much less frequently appeared 五 and 八 as senior yang and senior yin respectively, in the Xincai Geling bamboo slips manuscript, two symbols of 五 appeared in right-hexagram (i.e., presumed transformed hexagram) of the pair, whereas in Baoshan bamboo slips manuscript, two symbols of 五 appeared in left-hexagram (i.e., presumed original hexagram). For 八 in the bamboo slips manuscripts of the two areas, it sometimes appears in the left side, sometimes in the right, it is difficult to simply ascertain whether it represents senior yang or senior yin . Thus do we have to raise questions as follows: whether the relationship between the two juxtaposed hexagrams is that between original and transformed hexagrams? If it is, how do you relate these symbols to yin and yang lines or four images? Whether they conform to the divination method and the Text of the Zhouyi ? Whether they took different methods to obtain a hexagram and or whether they belong to different divination systems? If the relationship between the two juxtaposed hexagrams is not that between the original and transformed hexagrams, what should be the relationship between them? These questions need further research.

For other non-six-phased figures found in the bamboo slips manuscript, such as three-phased figures, some scholars also regard them as what called “digit trigram.” Whether they are trigrams of the Yi need further probing and discussion. As we mentioned above, in the bamboo slips manuscript with the Text, the hexagrams are composed by yin and yang lines, whereas in actual divination, the hexagrams might be composed by the symbols by which the four images were marked. For the three-phased figures, they of course do not belong to the system of Text. Were the three-phased figures applied to actual divination? The evidence is not available in extant literature. If the three-phased figures had once been used in actual divination in remote antiquity, they can accordingly be regarded as symbols marking the four images. Therefore, whether three-phased figures were the trigrams of the Yi depends on whether the three-phased figures had been applied to actual divination. For other phased figures, such as four-phased figures, Mr. Zhang Zhenglang had explained them by huti 互体 (interlocked trigrams, i.e., in a hexagram, from the second to the fourth lines forms a new trigram, and from the third line to the fifth line forms another trigram) theory popular since the Han dynasty, “ huti theory only stresses the middle four lines by disregarding the bottom and top lines (of a hexagram) and treat these four lines as a (new) hexagram. By this theory, three four-phased figures found in the inscriptions on the bronze wares can be transformed into six-phased hexagrams: ‘ 六七七六 ' into , ‘ 八七六五 ' into , and ‘ 八八六八 ' into .” In Zhang's opinion, what called the four-digit quadrugram was transformed from a hexagram by omitting its bottom and top lines and then constituted a new hexagram. Ji Xusheng had doubted about this. In my opinion, huti theory is but an auxiliary approach, the main approach was by the upper and lower trigrams, the original and transformed hexagrams to interpret hexagrams. Only when these approaches can not work, could the huti theory be taken. Therefore, Mr. Zhang's view is controversial. As the huti approach is not convincing here, how to deal with these four-phased figures need more explorations.

Studies of the symbols of the Yi in the bamboo slips manuscripts also relate to one problem: what is the relationship between these symbols on the bamboo slips of the Warring States period (including Wangjiatai 王家台 bamboo slips sealed in the Qin 秦 dynasty) and the hexagrams in the received literature of the Spring and Autumn as well as the Warring States periods. By the divination cases mentioned in Zuozhuan 左传 and Guoyu 国语 , it can be seen that expressions for hexagrams of the Yi are as follows: 1) (The subject) encountered × ( × represents the name of a hexagram, hereafter the same), which means this is a static hexagram without a transformed hexagram; 2) (The subject) encountered × zhi 之 ( to ) × , the former being original hexagram, the latter being the transformed hexagram; 3) zhen 贞 × hui 悔 × , in which zhen represents the original hexagram, hui the transformed hexagram. This in actuality is the same as the second type, only with different styles to express them; 4) (The subject) obtained the 八 of × or encountered the 八 of × , in which the meaning of 八 so far have not been thoroughly and convincingly interpreted. In addition, some hexagrams referred to were not resulted from actual divinations, but were cited to explicate some viewpoints according to the meaning explicated in the Zhouyi . This case also possesses different expressing styles, such as: 1) × zhi 之 ( to ) × , or zai 在 (on) × zhi 之 ( to ) × , as it states in Zuo zhuan zhaogong ershi jiu nian 左传·昭公二十九年 (The Twenty-ninth Year of Duke Zhao) (513 B.C.), “in the Zhouyi , on Qian ( , hexagram 1 in the received version of the Zhouyi, hereafter only the number of the hexagram will be referred to) to Gou ( , 44), it says, ‘submersed dragon; do not use'; Its Tongren ( , 13 ) designates, ‘appearing dragon in the fields; beneficial to see the great man'; Its Dayou ( , 14 ) indicates, ‘flying dragon in the heavens; beneficial to see the great man'; Its Guai ( , 43 ) indicates, ‘Resisting dragon; there is regret'; Its Kun ( , 2 ) says, ‘see the flock of dragons without heads; auspicious'.” Here represent the cases when Qian transforms into Gou, Tongren, Dayou, Guai, and Kun respectively. 2) × (the image of the upper trigram) cheng 乘 (mounting) × (the name of the lower trigram) (e.g. “Thunder [the image of trigram ] mounting Qian [ ] is called Dazhuang [ , 34]). By these cases, it can be seen that none of them is identical to the expressing style of a pair of hexagrams in the bamboo slips manuscripts. Why the differences between them are so obvious? As both Zuo zhuan and Guo yu were compiled by official historians, their divination cases should represent the orthodox divination formulae, whereas the expressing styles in the divination cases in the bamboo slips seem to be comparatively simple and at random. Does this also manifest the tendency that the divination was falling from the official to nonofficial state or the relationship between the two hexagrams of a pair in the bamboo slips manuscripts is not the relationship between original and transformed hexagrams? All these doubts need further studies and I expect answers from more intelligent scholars.

Li Xueqin 李学勤 , “On the Hexagram Lines in the Unearthed Warring States Period Bamboo Slips Manuscripts” ( Lun zhanguo jian de gua hua 论战国简的卦画 ), in Chutu Wenxian Yanjiu 出土文献研究 (Excavated Literature Studies) (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2004), vol. 6, p. 467.

Zhang Xiaoming 张晓明 , Zhouyi shifa tong jie 周易筮法通解 (Thorough Interpretations of the Divination Methods of the Zhouyi) (Jinan: Shandong renmin chubanshe, 1994), p. 267.

Zhang Zhenglang 张政烺 , Gudai shifa yu wenwang yan zhouyi 古代筮法与文王演周易 (Ancient Divination Methods and King Wen's Expansion of the Zhouyi), in Guwenzi yanjiu 古文字研究 (Ancient Characters Studies) (Beijing: Zhonghua shujiu, 1979), vol. 1, p. 3.

Guan Xiechu 管燮初 , “Two Items Discussing on the Six-digit Hexagrams of the Yi ” (Shuzi yigua tantao liang ze 数字易卦探讨两则 ), Kaogu 考古 (Archaeology), no. 2 (1981).

Xiao Hanming 萧汉明 , Zhouyi benyi daodu 周易本义导读 (A Guide Book to the Original Meanings of the Zhouyi) (Jinan: Qilushushi, 2003), p. 286.

Yehe laoren 野鹤老人 , Zengsan bu yi 增删卜易 (Additions and Deletions to the Najia Divination Technique) (Bejing: Haiyang chubanshe, 1992), p. 6.

Liu Dajun 刘大钧 , Najia shifa jianzuo 纳甲筮法讲座 (Lectures on Najia Divination Techniques) (Guilin: Guangxi shifang daxue chubanshe, 2006), p. 25.

Zhang Zhenglang 张政烺 , “On a Kind of Divination Gram in the Inscriptions on the Oracular Bones of the Yin Relics” ( Lun yin xue jiaguwen suo jian de yizhong shi gua 论殷虚甲骨文中所见的一种筮卦 ), in Wenshi 文史 (Literature and History), vol. 24, (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1985), p. 5.

Ji Xusheng 季旭升 , “Materials Related to the Yi Hexagrams in Ancient Chinese Characters” ( Gu wenzhi zhong de yigua cailiao 古文字中的易卦材料 ), in Liu Dajun 刘大钧 (ed.), Xiangxiu yixue yanjiu 象数易学研究 (Studies of Image-numerology) (Chengdu: Bashu shushe, 2003) vol. 3, pp. 22.

Wu Yong 吴勇 , Associate Professor, School of Chinese Language and Literature, Yangtze River University, Ph. D. candidate concentrating on Chinese Classical Philology of Central China Normal University. Specialties: Chinese language and literature.

Li Xueqin 李学勤 , “On the Hexagram Lines in the Unearthed Warring States Period Bamboo Slips Manuscripts of Yi ” ( Lun zhanguo jian de gua hua 论战国简的卦画 ), in Chutu Wenxian Yanjiu 出土文献研究 (Excavated Literature Studies) (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2004), vol. 6, p. 463.

Ibid., p. 468.

Guo Moruo 郭沫若 , Liang zhou jinwenci daxi tulu kaoshi 两周金文辞大系图录考释 (Textual Research on the Collected Bronze Inscriptions of the Zhou Dynasty) (Beijing: Kexue chubanshe, 1957), p. 16.

Guan Xiechu 管燮初 , Xizhou jinwen yufa yanjiu 西周金文语法研究 (Grammatical Studies of the Inscriptions on the Western Zhou Bronze Wares) (Beijing: Shangwu yinshuguan, 1981), p. 22.

Zhang Zhenglang 张政烺 , “Ancient Divination Methods and King Wen's Expansion of the Zhouyi ” ( Gudai shifa yu wenwang yan zhouyi 古代筮法与文王演周易 ), in Guwenzi yanjiu 古文字研究 (Ancient Characters Studies) (Beijing: Zhonghua shujiu, 1979), vol. 1, p. 3.

Zhang Zhenglang 张政烺 , “A Tentative Interpretation on the Yi Hexagrams in the Inscriptions on the Western Zhou Bronze Wares” ( Shi shi zhou chu qingtongqi mingwen zhong de yi gua 试释周初青铜器铭文中的易卦 ), in Kaogu xuebao 考古学报 (Journal of Archeology), vol. 4 (1980).

Jingzhou Museum team, “Report of Jiangling Wangjiatai Qin Tomb No. 15” ( Jianglin Wanjiatai 15 hao Qinmu 江陵王家台 15 号秦墓 ), in Wenwu 文物 (Cultural Relics), 1995:1.

Xincai Geling Chumu 新蔡葛陵楚墓 (Report on the Chu Tomb in Xincai Geling) (Zhengzhou: Daxiang chubanshe, 2003).

Liu Dajun 刘大钧 , “Preface”, in Da yi ji cheng 大易集成 (Symposium of the 1 st International Conference on the Yi Studies) (Beijing: Wenhua chubanshe, 1991), p. 1.

Li Ling 李零 , Zhongguo fangshu kao 中国方术考 (Textual Research on Chinese Divination Methods) (Beijing: Dongfang chubanshe, 2001), p. 258.

Li Ling 李零 , Zhongguo fangshu xu kao 中国方术续考 (A Sequel of the Textual Research on Chinese Divination Methods) (Beijing: Dongfang chubanshe, 2001), pp. 309-311.

Zhang Zhenglang 张政烺 , “Debates on the Yi ” ( Yi bian 易辨 ) in Zhouyi zongheng lu 周易纵横录 (Discussions on the Zhouyi with Great Ease) (Wuhan: Hubei renmin chubanshe, 1986), p. 182. It is noteworthy that, in the “Supplementary Note” to his article “A Tentative Interpretation on the Yi Hexagrams in the Inscriptions on the Western Zhou Bronze Wares”, Mr. Zhang mentioned: “There are eight six-digit hexagrams such as 三五三三六四 (which can be deciphered as ), 六二三五三一 (which can be deciphered as ) on the oracular bones unearthed at Qingdun 青墩 relic in Haian 海安 County, Jiangsu 江苏 Province, in which the numbers of two ( 二 ), three ( 三 ) and four ( 四 ) were used and unavailable in the previously mentioned thirty-two archeological items, manifesting its primitive quality.” I don't know why Mr. Zhang did not mention this here, nor did Li Ling 李零 mention this in his Zhongguo fangshu kao 中国方术考 .

Li Ling 李零 , Zhongguo fangshu xu kao 中国方术续考 (A Sequel of the Textual Research on Chinese Divination Methods) (Beijing: Dongfang chubanshe, 2001), p. 319.

Ibid., p. 468.

Ibid., p. 467.

Ibid., p. 465.

Dong Guangbi 董光璧 , Yixue kexueshi gang 易学科学史纲 (An Outline of the History of Scientific Yi -ology) (Wuhan: Wuhan chubanshe, 1993), pp. 57-66.

Zhang Xiaoming 张晓明 , Zhouyi shifa tong jie 周易筮法通解 (Thorough Interpretations of the Divination Methods of the Zhouyi) (Jinan: Shandong renmin chubanshe, 1994), p. 266.

Ji Xusheng 季旭升 , “Materials Related to the Yi Hexagrams in Ancient Chinese Charaters” ( Gu wenzhi zhong de yigua cailiao 古文字中的易卦材料 ), in Liu Dajun 刘大钧 (ed.), Xiangxiu yixue yanjiu 象数易学研究 (Chengdu: Bashu shushe, 2003) vol. 3, p. 16.

Guan Xiechu 管燮初 , “Discrimination of the Hexagrams and Lines on Bones and Bronze Wares of the Shang and Zhou Dynasties” ( Shang zhou jiagu he qingtongqi shang de gua yao bian shi 商周甲骨和青铜器上的卦爻辨识 ), in Guwenzi yanjiu 古文字研究 (Ancient Characters Studies) (Beijing: Zhonghua shujiu, 1981), vol. 3, p. 143. Note that when Guan's article was published, he only saw the symbols of 一 , 五 , 六 , 七 , and 八 , of which 五 possesses two kinds of inscription, thus did he say there were overall six symbols. 九 and 十 were also found later. Five kinds of symbols might simultaneously appear in some materials, such as the millstone discovered at Henan Anyang Miaopu Beidi on which the symbols of 一 , 五 , 六 , 七 , 八 were carved and the Jiangling Tianxingguan bamboo slips on which the symbols of 一 , 六 , 七 , 八 , 九 were inscribed. But configurations of 六 and 八 are similar and had been regarded as one symbol. Please see Shi Shangang's 史善刚 “Six-digit Hexagrams and the Bamboo Slips and Silk Manuscripts of the Yi ” ( Shuzi gua yu jianbo yi 数字卦与简帛易 ) published in Zhongzhou xue kan 中州学刊 , no. 11 (2005). For “ 九 ”, Mr. Li Xueqin 李学勤 holds: “If we scrutinize the character in the Tianxingguan 天星观 bamboo slips, it likes ‘ 一 ', other than “ 九 ”, for it differs from other ‘ 九 '.” in his “A Study of the Unearthed Divination Numbers and the Three Yi” ( Chutu shishu yu san yi yanjiu 出土筮数与三易研究 ), collected in his Chong xie xueshu shi 重写学术史 (Rewrite the Academic History) (Shijiazhuang: Hebei jiaoyu chubanshe, 2002).

Ibid., p. 14.

Lin Zhongjun 林忠军 , “Value of the Qin Bamboo Slips Manuscript Guizang Unearthed at Wangjiatai” ( Wangjiatai qin jian guizang chutu de yixue jiazhi 王家台秦简《归藏》出土的易学价值 ), in Zhouyi yanjiu 周易研究 , vol. 2 (2001).

(Originally published in Chinese in the STUDIES OF ZHOUYI/No. 5, 2007-2008)

From：Center for Zhouyi & Ancient Chinese Philosophy

Author：Wu Yong