Interpreting and Investigating the Chapter: 'The Sage Perceived the Profundities of the World' — The Primordial Code of *Xiang* and *Yao*

Chapter 9: Deeper Inquiry — What Question is This Passage Answering$1

I. The Intent of the Xici Zhuan

To understand the deeper meaning of a passage, we must know the question that motivated its writing.

The Xici Zhuan (Upper and Lower Chapters) is the most philosophically profound text of the Yi Zhuan (The Ten Wings). Unlike the Tuan Zhuan or Xiang Zhuan, which explain hexagrams and lines sequentially, the Xici Zhuan discusses the fundamental principles of the Zhou Yi from a higher perspective. It can be said that the Xici Zhuan answers these fundamental questions: "What is the Yi$2 Why is it effective$3 How did it originate$4"

The discussion of "Xiang" and "Yao" in this chapter provides the core answer to the question, "What is the essence of the Yi$5" The author of the Xici Zhuan (whether Confucius himself or his later disciples) tells us here:

The essence of the Yi is two complementary symbolic systems—the "Xiang" system and the "Yao" system. The "Xiang" system is used to express the deep structure of the world’s myriad things; the "Yao" system is used to express the world’s process of change. Together, they constitute a complete tool for cognition and decision-making.

II. Why Are Two Systems Needed$6

This returns to the distinction between zé and dòng.

We can imagine: If the world contained only zé but no dòng—that is, if myriad things had deep structures but did not change—then only the Xiang would be necessary. A fixed structural diagram would suffice to describe the entire world.

But the world has dòng—myriad things are constantly changing. A single, fixed Xiang cannot capture the richness and directionality of change. Thus, the Yao is needed—a dimension of time and change must be introduced upon the basis of the Xiang.

Conversely, if the world contained only dòng but no zé—if things constantly changed but had no deep structure—then change would be chaotic and disordered, impossible to grasp or predict. But the reality is that while change is complex, it possesses an internal order (huì tōng), which is the manifestation of zé.

Therefore, zé and dòng, Xiang and Yao, are mutually prerequisite and inseparable pairs. The Xiang provides the structural framework for understanding change; the Yao displays the specific path of change within that framework.

This is an exquisitely subtle theoretical design, whose philosophical depth is in no way inferior to any later cognitive system in any civilization.

III. Comparative Reflection with Ancient Greek Philosophy

If we broaden our perspective to comparative philosophy, we find astonishing parallels between the "Xiang-Yao" dual framework established in the Xici Zhuan and certain core propositions in Ancient Greek philosophy.

Heraclitus said, "All things flow" (panta rhei). This corresponds to the "movements of the world" (dòng). Parmenides said, "Being is one, unchanging." This corresponds to the "profundities of the world" (zé).

In Greek philosophy, the opposition between Heraclitus and Parmenides was seen as the fundamental tension in Western metaphysics—flux versus eternity, the many versus the one, becoming versus being. Plato attempted to reconcile this tension through "Ideas" (eidos): the Ideas are eternal and unchanging (zé), while the phenomenal world is in constant flux (dòng), and the Ideas manifest in the phenomena through "participation."

But Pre-Qin Chinese thought adopted a completely different method of reconciliation—it did not use abstract "Ideas" to govern change. Instead, it used "Xiang" to capture zé and "Yao" to model dòng, allowing both to coexist within the structure of the same hexagram. This method of reconciliation does not require presupposing an "Idea world" independent of phenomena, but rather grasps the unity of structure and change directly within the phenomena.

In this sense, the "Zé-Xiang / Dòng-Yao" framework established in this chapter constitutes an epistemological construction that is more pragmatic, closer to experience, yet equally profound as Plato’s theory of Forms.