The Ming and Qing dynasties were once regarded by some scholars as the second stage of the “Contention of a Hundred Schools of Thought” in the developmental history of Chinese academia. During this time, intellectual confrontations among Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism were accompanied by the introduction of European science and theology, bringing new theoretical perspectives to China. This was reflected in Book of Changes studies (Yi 易學) of the period, which featured three distinct approaches: the “naturalistic Yi”emphasizing the heavenly way, the “humanistic Yi” emphasizing the human way, and the “theological Yi” introduced by missionaries, which centered on the way of God. Given that previous scholars often put their focus on the former two interpretations while neglecting the formation, evolution, and influence of the“theological Yi.” This paper, through presenting how missionaries understand and interpret the Book of Changes, argues a theological superiority orientation in their works.
By analyzing the interpretations of Matteo Ricci, Alvaro Semedo, Martino Martini, Alfonso Vagnoni, Joachim Bouvet, and Joseph de Prémare, it becomes evident that missionary perspectives on the Book of Changes underwent a transition from initial rejection to eventual acceptance. The missionaries of the late Ming period rejected the Book of Changes primarily because the cosmological concept of“Taiji 太極 generating the Two Modes” contradicted the Christian doctrine of divine creation by God. Consequently, they reinterpreted Taiji as a “secondary”or “dependent” entity, distorting the original meaning of the phrase “Di emerged from Zhen 帝出乎震” to align with their theological stance of divine primacy. This theological interpretation was met with strong resistance from late Ming domestic scholars, leading to intense debates between the two sides regarding the competing cosmological models of God and Taiji. By the early Qing period, the Figarist missionaries sought to reconcile Book of Changes cosmology with Christian theology by redefining the text as the “Eastern Bible,” and hence recognized the model of “Taiji creates the cosmos.” In other words, while maintaining the primacy of God the Jesuits acknowledged that God created the Book of Changes, which in turn described the creation of the cosmos.
The God-centered interpretative model that emerged during the late Ming and early Qing periods had a profound impact on the development of Yi studies abroad. For instance, the so-called the Old Testament and the New Testament of English translations of the Book of Changes both have religious orientation and characteristics. Even today, some English versions of this book retain this translation habits, continuing to render Di as God. Therefore, the “theological Yi” model, as the origin of the overseas school of Yi studies, merits further scholarly attention.
By analyzing the interpretations of Matteo Ricci, Alvaro Semedo, Martino Martini, Alfonso Vagnoni, Joachim Bouvet, and Joseph de Prémare, it becomes evident that missionary perspectives on the Book of Changes underwent a transition from initial rejection to eventual acceptance. The missionaries of the late Ming period rejected the Book of Changes primarily because the cosmological concept of“Taiji 太極 generating the Two Modes” contradicted the Christian doctrine of divine creation by God. Consequently, they reinterpreted Taiji as a “secondary”or “dependent” entity, distorting the original meaning of the phrase “Di emerged from Zhen 帝出乎震” to align with their theological stance of divine primacy. This theological interpretation was met with strong resistance from late Ming domestic scholars, leading to intense debates between the two sides regarding the competing cosmological models of God and Taiji. By the early Qing period, the Figarist missionaries sought to reconcile Book of Changes cosmology with Christian theology by redefining the text as the “Eastern Bible,” and hence recognized the model of “Taiji creates the cosmos.” In other words, while maintaining the primacy of God the Jesuits acknowledged that God created the Book of Changes, which in turn described the creation of the cosmos.
The God-centered interpretative model that emerged during the late Ming and early Qing periods had a profound impact on the development of Yi studies abroad. For instance, the so-called the Old Testament and the New Testament of English translations of the Book of Changes both have religious orientation and characteristics. Even today, some English versions of this book retain this translation habits, continuing to render Di as God. Therefore, the “theological Yi” model, as the origin of the overseas school of Yi studies, merits further scholarly attention.
Page：
93-124
Keywords：
the Book of Changes, Missionary, Taiji, Theology
BULLETIN OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CHINESE LITERATURE NATIONAL CHENGCHI UNIVERSITY NO.43
