《杂卦传》真的存在错简吗

Are There Really Hexagram Dislocations in Za gua zhuan?

自东汉以来,多数易学家认为《杂卦传》末尾八个卦存在错简。其主要依据有两点:一是这八个卦不依"二二相耦,非覆即变"方式排列;二是这八个卦的《杂卦传》传文也不叶(协)韵。然而,虞翻、干宝等则以为,此八卦不依"非覆即变"方式而成杂乱排列,体现了某种深义;另有一些通音韵的易学家也考证出相反结论,认为《杂卦传》末尾八个卦是叶韵的。所以,简单地以是否按"非覆即变"排列和是否叶韵来考察《杂卦传》的错简问题,是靠不住的。当代学者对《杂卦传》错简说做出了进一步的证明与推测,但理由同样不能成立。前贤对于《杂卦传》错简问题之所以争论不休,原因在于对《杂卦传》内在的象数结构与规律及其体现的深层思想缺乏认识。《杂卦传》卦序效法的是昼夜变化之道,依其内在的象数结构,可分为上、下、杂三篇,表明《杂卦传》的传承是完整无缺的,"错简"说不能成立。《周易折中》针对《杂卦传》提出的互卦与循环互卦的观点,也明白无误地证明了这一点。

Since the Eastern Hart dynasty （25-220）, most Yi-ologists had been contending that the last eight hexagrams in the Za gua zhuan （ Miscellaneous Notes on the Hexagrams） are dislocated. They mainly based on the following two points： one is that these hexa- grams are not arranged by the regulation of obversion ; the other is that they do not follow patterns of rhythm and rhyme. Yet, Yu Fan （164-233） and Gan Ban hold that the miscellaneous arrangement of these eight hexagrams embodies some kind of in-depth signifi- cance; and some Yi-ologists who are well versed in phonology, conclude that these hexagrams follow some patterns of rhythm and rhyme. Therefore, to determine whether these hexagrams are misarranged or not simply by the rule of obversion or rhyme is untenable. Though modem scholars further provided evidence and deduction to this issue, their reasons similarly can not stand. The reason why the predecessors can not arrive at a consensus is that they are lack of knowledge of the inner image-numerological structure and rules and the deep thought emtxMied by them in Za gua zhuan. In actuality, the sequence of the hexagrams in za gua zhuan is based on the Way of alternation of day and night, which, by its innate image-numerologieal structure, can be divided into three chapters： chapter I, chapter II, and chapter miscellanea. Therefore, the transmission of Zu gua zhuan is consistent, hence the untenablity of the asser- tion of misarrangement. The characteristic of interlocked-ness and cyclical interlocked-ness of the hexagrams in Za gua zhuan set forth in Zhou ）＇i zhe zhong edited by Li Guangdi （1642-1718） can also clearly account for this point.