Behold the Sign: Bridging the Doctrine and the Local Practice with Jiao 筊

Jiaobei (筊杯, monoblocks) constitutes a prominent divinatory implement extensively employed across southern China. A standard set of Jiaobei comprises two symmetrical halves: the convex surface, designated as the yin (陰) side, and the planar surface, identified as the yang (陽) side. When conjoined along their planar sides, the Jiaobei assumes a distinctive, ox-horn-like curvature. The divinatory procedure entails the supplicant articulating a query to the deities before casting the Jiaobei onto the ground, whereupon the orientation of the fallen pieces determines the divine response. While interpretative frameworks vary across localized traditions and ritual lineages, a prevalent convention aligns the shengbei (聖杯) configuration—comprising one yin and one yang side—with an affirmative divine pronouncement. Conversely, the yangbei (陽杯), wherein both sides manifest as yang, and the yinbei (陰杯), wherein both sides are yin, are conventionally construed as either negative or ambiguous responses. Jiaobei divination is enacted in diverse settings, encompassing domestic spheres, communal assemblies, temples, and ephemeral ritual spaces. The interlocutors addressed through this practice encompass deities venerated within Confucian, Buddhist, and Daoist traditions, alongside local cultic figures and ancestral spirits. Notwithstanding its ubiquity, Jiaobei divination remains extrinsic to the orthodox liturgical frameworks of institutionalized Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism. Nevertheless, it persists as an integral practice among lay devotees and ritual specialists, functioning as a material conduit for fostering reciprocal engagement in religious observances. In certain localized religious traditions, this practice has even attained a degree of formalized legitimation.

Since the 1980s, scholarly discourse surrounding the dichotomy of orthodoxy and orthopraxy has profoundly shaped inquiries into religious standardization in China. James L. Watson, in his seminal analysis of cultural unification during the imperial epoch, underscored the preeminent role of ritual standardization, positing that the imperial court sought to regulate correct praxis—or orthopraxy—despite the intrinsic heterogeneity of local religious traditions. Watson’s thesis has elicited extensive critique over the ensuing decades from scholars such as Melissa Brown, Paul Katz, Kenneth Pomeranz, Michael Szonyi, Donald Sutton, David Faure, and Liu Zhiwei 劉志偉, who have interrogated the presumptive authority, efficacy, and mechanisms of ritual standardization. These scholars have foregrounded the agency of local actors in contesting and reconfiguring imposed orthopraxic norms. For instance, clandestine religious societies, despite being officially proscribed as heterodox entities, selectively appropriated elements of state-sanctioned ritual practices to construct their own authoritative frameworks. Likewise, local gentry functioned as intermediaries, mediating between state-mandated orthodoxy and vernacular religious traditions, thereby shaping local cultic expressions through discourses of ritual correctness. Some scholars have consequently posited the coexistence of multiple, contextually contingent orthodoxies, emphasizing that the constitution of ritual praxis entails the participation of a diverse array of social actors beyond the local elite stratum.

Building upon this discourse, Mark Meulenbeld and Zhao Yi 趙益 have illuminated the pivotal role of vernacular literary traditions and textual dissemination in cultivating cultural cohesion. For instance, the Ming-dynasty novel Fengshen Yanyi 封神演義, which is structurally informed by Daoist ritual paradigms, furnished a shared mythological framework that resonated with local cultic practices. Meanwhile, Adam Chau and Lin Weipin 林瑋嬪 have interrogated the processes through which ritual actors negotiate communal participation in religious observances, accentuating the affective dimensions of ritual practice. Lin, in particular, has contended that the materiality of religious objects not only serves as a vehicle for the manifestation of miraculous agency but also engenders an immersive ritual atmosphere that facilitates religious cognition and emotional engagement. Collectively, these inquiries underscore the necessity of considering not only state-imposed regulatory schemas but also the dynamic interplay between heterogeneous ritual agents and the material substrates imbued with religious significance within localized contexts.

This study extends these theoretical insights through ethnographic fieldwork conducted in contemporary Meitan County (湄潭縣), Guizhou Province (貴州省). It interrogates the instrumental role of Jiaobei within the ordination rituals of the Sanjiao 三教 tradition, elucidating how the act of divination functions as a mechanism for forging a covenant between the initiate and martial deities. During these rites, the initiate must procure the assent of multiple martial deities to secure their prospective assistance in ritual performances. The deities' acquiescence is anticipated to be visibly affirmed through specific Jiaobei configurations. However, recurrent occurrences of anomalous results, construed as manifestations of divine reluctance or ambivalence, engender a heightened performative tension, transforming the ritual space into a site of dramaturgical interplay involving the initiate, his masters, and the assembled audience before the altar. This performative dynamism imbues the divinatory act with an intensified ritual gravitas and collective engagement.

As a comparative inquiry, this study further examines Jiaobei divination within Daoist ritual contexts in Xinhua County (新化縣) and Anhua County (安化縣) in central Hunan Province (湖南省). By juxtaposing these cases, the research underscores the material and performative dimensions of Jiaobei divination, demonstrating its efficacy as an instrument of ritual mediation. As a material artifact, Jiaobei facilitates intersubjective connections within the ritual milieu, bridging individual religious experiences with collective devotional practices. Furthermore, this study problematizes the conventional notion of orthopraxy as a rigidly imposed paradigm dictated by a monolithic authority, instead contending that ritual legitimacy is dynamically constituted through the iterative negotiations and interactions of diverse ritual agents. In so doing, it contributes to ongoing scholarly dialogues on the fluidity of religious praxis and the intricate interrelations between materiality, ritual performance, and social actors within Chinese religious traditions.