20世紀中期以降，日本學者圍繞著一個重要問題討論：《易》之經典化、儒教化的歷史過程為何？這問題首先由內藤湖南提出，其後武內義雄、金谷治、本田濟、內山俊彥等著名學者都有所討論。對此問題，日本學者大致抱持相近的看法：《易》之經典化是在秦漢之際進行，因焚書坑儒使得儒家開始重視《易》。當時的儒家又整理或添附了《易》傳、建立起易學體系，而後《易》才轉變為真正的《易》經。繼馬王堆漢墓帛書《周易》之後，相關新資料陸續披露。如1993年郭店楚簡《六德》中的「易」字被認為意指作為經書的「易」；2003年上海博物館公開了館藏戰國楚竹書《周易》（參閱《上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書（三）》，上海：上海古籍出版社，2003）等等。新資料的發現也使得日本學者改變了對「《易》之經典化」的看法，以及引起了學說之間的對立。例如池田知久與淺野裕一對此議題就有不同的見解。

Since the middle of the twentieth century, “formation of Chou-I (周易) as confucian canon” has become a major topic among Japanese scholars. This topic was firstly discussed by Naito Konan (內藤湖南), followed by Takeuchi Yoshio (武內義雄), Kanaya Osamu (金谷治), Honda Wataru (本田濟), Uchiyama Toshihiko (內山俊彥) other famous scholars. On this issue, the Japanese scholars tends to hold similar views: Formation of Chou-I (周易) as confucian canon was proceeded in Qin (秦) and Han (漢) dynasties, and its formation was subserved by “to burn books and bury scholars (焚書坑儒)”. Since the discovery of the Mawangdui Silk Books (馬王堆漢墓帛書) in 1973, new historical materials were made public in succession, and gave rise to a new perspective on the “formation of Chou-I (周易) as confucian canon”, that caused confrontation, for example, between Japanese two famous scholar Ikeda Tomohisa and AsanoYuichi.