Yang

← Encyclopedia

Yang is one of the two basic principles of classical Chinese cosmology, the active and luminous aspect of things, named always alongside its partner yin, the receptive and shaded. The words began as ordinary terms for the sunlit and shadowed sides of a hill — yang the slope facing the sun, yin the one in shade — and the physical image never quite leaves them. Whatever later weight the pair carried, it grew out of that plain observation: that a single hillside is bright on one face and dark on the other at the same hour. The same sun makes both faces; move the hour and the bright slope dims while the dark one warms. The oldest meaning is already the whole doctrine in miniature — not two hills but one, lit unequally, and the lighting always shifting.

From this the classifying scheme spread outward. Heaven, the sun, fire, warmth, movement, the masculine, the firm, the rising and the outward came to be ranged under yang; earth, the moon, water, cold, stillness, the feminine, the yielding, the descending and the inward under yin. These are not lists of separate things so much as a single grammar of pairing applied wherever a difference can be felt — day and night, summer and winter, the exhalation and the inhalation, the open hand and the closed. To name a thing yang is to locate it on the bright, ascending, expanding side of whatever pair it belongs to; the term is relational before it is substantial. A man is yang to his wife and yin to the emperor; noon is yang to midnight and yin to nothing, because nothing is more yang than noon. The same item slides up and down the scale depending on what it is set beside, and this slippage is not a defect of the scheme but its working principle.

For the two are not in the first place opposites at war but phases of one alternation, each carrying the seed of the other and turning into it at its extreme — noon already tilting toward evening, deep winter already bending toward spring. The hot grows from the cold and returns to it; the bright is what the dark is becoming and what it will become again. At the height of yang, yin is already stirring; the longest day is the first day that shortens. This is the logic the famous diagram is built to hold: not a line drawn down the middle of a circle, dividing light from dark, but two curved fields chasing each other’s tails, each swelling exactly where the other thins, and a dot of the one set in the broad heart of the other — the reminder that nothing is so wholly bright that the dark is not already present in it as a kernel. The figure is a picture of turning, not of balance held still. Equilibrium, in this cosmology, is never a truce between two stationary forces; it is the evenness of a wheel that keeps rolling.

Heaven, the firm line, and the working-out of the way

The pairing took on philosophical shape in the commentarial tradition around the I Ching, the Book of Changes, whose broken and unbroken lines were read as yin and yang. Each of the sixty-four hexagrams is a stack of six lines, every line either solid — the firm, undivided stroke counted as yang — or open at the center, the divided stroke counted as yin; the figures exhaust the sixty-four ways six such lines can fall. The Great Treatise among the appended commentaries, the so-called Ten Wings that turned a Western Zhou diviner’s manual into a cosmological classic, supplies the generative formula the later schools would quote without end: the Changes has its Supreme Polarity, which gives birth to the two modes, the two modes to the four images, the four images to the eight trigrams. The two modes are yin and yang; the whole field of the diagram is read as their doubling and redoubling, and the world is read as the same. The cosmos is taken to unfold by bifurcation, splitting once into the bright and the dark and then splitting again at every level beneath, so that the hexagram is not a symbol of the world placed beside it but a small working model of how the world is made.

That model did not stay inside the book. The same logic ordered medicine, calendar, statecraft, and divination — a correlative cosmology in which the rhythm of yang and yin keyed the seasons, the points of the body, the notes of the scale, the conduct of a reign, the right and wrong hour for any act. In the Han, the image-and-number cosmologists fitted the hexagrams to the turning year so that the waxing of yang from the winter solstice and its waning from the summer one could be read off a calendar of figures, the solstices marking the moments where one principle reaches its full and the other begins its return. Heaven was the great yang, earth the great yin, and the human order was held to prosper when it kept time with their alternation and to fail when it set itself against the season — a ruler who punished in spring, the yang season of growth, or rewarded in autumn, the yin season of withdrawal, was thought to be working athwart the grain of things. The polarity was never only a metaphysics; it was a practical art of timing, a doctrine about when to act and when to wait, carried into the running of an empire and the treating of a body alike.

Daoist and later Confucian thinkers alike treated this rhythm of yin and yang as the working-out of dao, the way things go; in much Chinese thought both arise as modulations of qi, the vital breath or energy whose gathering and dispersing constitutes the world. Qi is the single stuff; yang and yin are not two substances added to it but its two tendencies — qi in its rising, warming, scattering motion and qi in its settling, cooling, condensing one. Cold is not the absence of heat but heat’s contrary phase; stillness is not the cessation of movement but its trough. To say a thing is more yang than another is to say its qi is the more active, expansive, ascendant — a difference of phase and degree along one continuum, not a difference of kind across a gap. The Song thinkers who built the later metaphysics gave this its sharpest form. Zhou Dunyi’s brief diagram-text derived yin and yang, and through them the five phases and the ten thousand things, from the Supreme Polarity itself; and that term, taiji, is best read not as a supreme thing standing above the pair but as the supreme polarity — the unity the pair already is, the single hill of which bright slope and dark slope are the two faces.

The pair is named only once in the Daodejing, where chapter forty-two has the ten thousand things carry yin on their backs and embrace yang — Legge renders the line as leaving the Obscurity behind and embracing the Brightness — and plays almost no role beyond that; the text speaks instead of the way and its turnings. Yet the same preference runs through it — for the soft over the hard, the low over the high, the yielding that outlasts the rigid. The Laozi’s water, which takes the lowest place and wears down what is hardest, is yin praised as the stronger course; its valley, its uncarved block, its female that overcomes the male by stillness, all tilt the classic toward the receptive pole. So the two terms enter the foundational text almost in passing, and weighted the opposite way from common sense — the soft, the dark, the low set above the firm and the bright. The fuller architecture, in which yang and yin stand as named, balanced, mutually generating principles, is the achievement of the commentators on the Changes and the cosmologists who followed them, not of the Daodejing itself.

Yang beside Western polarities — and the textual record

Western readers have often reached for yin and yang to gloss other polarities: the active and passive of alchemy, sulphur and mercury, the solar and lunar of the esoteric traditions, even the dualisms of light and dark inherited from Persia. The hermetic axiom that the below answers the above — the formula of as above, so below — and Paracelsus’ reading of the cosmos as a play of active and receptive agents have struck many comparativists as near cousins of the Chinese scheme, and the temptation to fold them all into one perennial polarity is old. The comparison has been drawn for centuries, but the schemes are not interchangeable. The alchemical sulphur and mercury are a fixed pair of opposed materials whose marriage yields a third; the solar and lunar of astrology are two distinct lights with distinct rulerships. The Chinese pair is pointedly not a war of good against evil, nor spirit against matter; it is closer to a dualism dissolved from within, since neither term is the fall of the other, neither is meant to triumph, and each is forever turning into its partner. It is less like the two armies of Persian thought than like the inhale and the exhale of one breath. Where the Western pairs tend to set two stable principles against each other and ask which shall rule, the Chinese pair asks only when each holds the field — and answers: in turn, always in turn. The figure who came nearest the Chinese intuition in the European tradition may be Nicholas of Cusa, whose coincidence of opposites lets contraries meet in an infinite that is neither — though even there the opposites are reconciled in a third term above them, where the Chinese opposites simply pass into each other with no third required.

The classical formulation of yang and yin within the Yijing and its correlative cosmology has been reconstructed in detail by modern sinology. A. C. Graham’s Disputers of the Tao (Open Court, 1989) traces the rise of correlative thinking through the Warring States schools and shows how the yin-yang and five-phases vocabularies fused into the systematic cosmology inherited by the Han; Graham’s earlier study Yin-Yang and the Nature of Correlative Thinking (Institute of East Asian Philosophies, Singapore, 1986) treats the pair as the engine of that whole mode of thought. Joseph Needham’s Science and Civilisation in China, volume two, History of Scientific Thought (Cambridge University Press, 1956), gave the correlative cosmology its most influential Western analysis, reading yin-yang and the five phases as a coherent “philosophy of organism” rather than a failed proto-science. The two interpretive lineages around the Changes — the image-and-number school that worked the hexagrams as a numerical cosmology and the meaning-and-principle school that read them for ethical and metaphysical sense — are surveyed by Tze-ki Hon in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy’s “Chinese Philosophy of Change (Yijing)”, and the conceptual history of the pair itself by Robin R. Wang in the same encyclopedia’s “Yinyang (Yin-yang)”. The primary texts stand behind all of this: James Legge’s renderings of the Tao Teh King and the texts of Daoism, published in 1891 and long in the public domain, remain the most widely read English window onto the classic that names the pair once and lives by it throughout.

What yang describes, in the end, is closer to a single breathing — the world inhaling and exhaling, bright then dark then bright, with neither half able to exist alone.

→ In the library: The Tao Teh King (Legge — 1891) · The Texts of Tâoism (Legge — 1891)

→ Related: I Ching · Taoism · Confucianism · Divination · Metaphysics · Dualism · Alchemy · Astrology · As Above So Below · Paracelsus · Nicholas Of Cusa · Corpus Hermeticum