熊十力雖非以考據訓詁名，但其《乾坤衍》中，〈辨僞〉部分幾佔一半篇幅，與〈廣義〉相埒，即可見其對考證辨僞之重視。熊氏首先「溯源」，推原孔子《周易》乃根源於伏羲八卦之故，認爲孔子承繼太古以來聖明之緒，集其大成，而開內聖外王一貫之道；其次「宗孔」，推尊孔子《周易》實爲一切學問統宗之故，論定晚周諸子百家以逮宋、明諸師與佛氏之旨歸，必折中於至聖也。此種辨正，主觀成分固重，但非全然無據。其於字句間之餖飣考據，容或有失，但在大根大本上，顯然掌握得住。故研究熊氏之《易》學，應瞭然其苦心孤詣，方能與之相應，以體認其精神之所在。

Although Hsiung Shih-li is not renowned for textual research and explanation of ancient books, his commentanes on apocrypha in Ch'ien K'un Yen takes almost half of the book, which is comparable to Guang-yi. Because of this fact, we can see his particular attention to the study of apocrypha. In Ch'ien K'un Yen, Hsiung first traces the origin, implying that Confucius wrote Chou I based on Fu Xi and Bagua (eight trigrams). He considers that Confucius's thoughts, inheriting the intellectual heritage of those saints from ancient times, represent a generalization of great ideas to develop the theory of inner sublimation and practical theory. Hsiung then regards Confucius as a model and praises Chou I for its integration of all studies. He believes that hundred schools after the late Chou dynasty (including those masters of Song and Ming dynasties and also of Buddhism) must converge on Confucius. Although such a thought is mostly a subjective judgment, it does not come without any proof. Although Hsiung may be blamed for some minor flaws in the textual research, he has a firm hold of the main ideas. Thus, to study Hsiung's Yi-ology, one should acknowledge the efforts the author devotes to studies and to initiate a dialogue with him, so as to grasp the essence of his work.