University Press, 1979), 113–116. For Zenshō’s admiration of Cheng Yi as well as his departures from him, cf. Chen’s “Itō Tōgai Shūeki kyōyoku tsukai di zhengzhi yiyi.”

23. Mark Setton, “Chŏng Tasan and the ‘Kogaku,’” Oriens Extremus 33, no. 2 (1990): 57–68, esp. 58, where Setton points out that the number of quotations that this famous Korean scholar (to be discussed later in this chapter) attributed to Japanese scholars appears to be “inversely proportional” to the amount of sympathy Tasan had for their views—presumably because he used them as foils for his own opinions.

24. John Allen Tucker, “From Nativism to Numerology: Yamaga Sokō’s Final Excursion into the Metaphysics of Change,” Philosophy East and West 54, no. 2 (April 2004): 194–217.

25. Benjamin Wai-ming Ng, “The China Factor in Tokugawa Culture: Beyond Model and the Other,” Sino-Japanese Studies 22 (2015): 13–28.

26. Cited in Ng, The I Ching in Tokugawa Thought and Culture, 107.

27. Ng, The I Ching in Tokugawa Thought and Culture, 107. I have modified Ng’s translation somewhat and patched two disconnected but related passages together.

28. Ng, The I Ching in Tokugawa Thought and Culture, 45 and 109–110.

29. See Ng, Dong Ya Yixue shilun, 97–136; and Smith, “The Transnational Travels of Geomancy.”

30. See, for example, Huang Junjie 黃俊傑, ed., Chaoxian ru zhe dui ru jia chuan tong de jie shi 朝鮮儒者對儒家傳統的解釋 (Korean Confucian interpretations of the Confucian tradition) (Taibei: Tada chuban zhongxin, 2012). Cf. Haechang Choung and Han Hyong-jo, eds., Confucian Philosophy in Korea (Songnam: The Academy of Korean Studies, 1996).

31. See Lai Guisan 賴貴三, “Hanguo Chaoxian Lishi wangchao (1392–1910) Yixue yanjiu” 韓國朝鮮李氏王朝 (1392–1910) 易學研究 (Research on Changes scholarship in Yi dynasty Korea [1392–1910]), Donghai zhongwen xuebao (June 2013): 1–25. See also Wai-ming Ng, “The I Ching in Late Chosŏn Thought,” Korean Studies 24 (2000): 53–68.

32. See Ng, “The I Ching in Late Chosŏn Thought,” esp. 54–55; cf. Min-hong Choi, A Modern History of Korean Philosophy (Seoul: Seong Moon Sa, 1980), 50–64.

33. For a convenient summary, see Philip J. Ivanhoe, “The Historical Significance and Contemporary Relevance of the Four-Seven Debate,” Philosophy East and West 65, no. 4 (October 2015): 401–429.

34. See the summary in Choi, A Modern History, 67–81.