 In contrast, Zhu Xi (1130–1200)—a key figure of the Cheng-Zhu School of Neo-Confucianism of late imperial China—argued that the “original meaning” (benyi) of Yijing was divination. On the surface of it, Zhu Xi’s argument seemed redundant. It had been well-known that the first two layers of the classics were oracles originating from the Western Zhou period. But Zhu Xi’s point was that for more than a thousand years since the canonization of the Yijing, the classic had never been read properly as a divination manual. For this reason, Zhu Xi believed that the true meaning of Yijing lay in the imagery of the 64 hexagrams. To distinguish the 64 hexagrams from the “Ten Wings”, Zhu Xi created two separate categories in his commentary, the Zhouyi benyi (The Original Meaning of the Changes of the Zhou Dynasty). One category was the “classic” (jing) which covered the 64 hexagrams; the other the “commentarial materials” (zhuan) which included the “Ten Wings”. With these two categories, Zhu made clear that the “Ten Wings” were at best supplementary materials in understanding the hexagrams.