傳統士人與術數、氣運之說本來就有密切的關係，是人們「內隱意識」中很重要的層面，卻很少受到學界的關心與研究。黃宗羲不但研究術數，而且也在某些程度上相信術數，然而學界研究黃宗羲的論文雖多，仍很少談到這個層面。讀過黃宗羲《明夷待訪錄》的人很少會不知道〈題辭〉中提到的「十二運」但是迄今學界卻沒有論文深入探討十二運的來源、以及十二運之說對黃宗羲政治立場的影響。本文認為黃宗羲《待訪錄》〈題辭〉中所說二十年後會進入「大壯」的說法如果找不到根據，就很可能是黃氏自己編造出來以合理化自己政治立場的轉變。本文找到黃宗羲十二運是根據元朝人秦曉山所作、流傳數百年的《太乙統宗寶鑑》，證實黃宗羲確是根據前人之說推算而得，並非自己編造。本文同時也關心黃宗羲政治立場的問題。文中認為黃宗羲鑑於復明無望（桂王被殺、鄭成功病死），又深信二十年後會進入「大壯」治世，因此才著手撰寫《待訪錄》。從寫作時機以及對於二十年後局勢的預測來說，黃宗羲的《待訪錄》是在「治平天下」的前提下向清朝提出建言，但是此時的清對他而言是在十二運預言架構下的「清」、是待「後王」意義下的「清」。本文也談到，不管當時人對黃宗羲的政治立場有何非議，黃氏個人的觀感中並未認為自己已經放棄了明遺民的立場。本文更由黃宗羲三十年後所撰《破邪論》〈題辭〉十二運「無乃欺人」一語，指出黃宗羲對十二運之說由始信而終疑，不滿意滿清不能復三代之治，而且也失望自己沒有達成「　子見訪」的願望。秦曉山第三運第一卦的「大壯」卦，除了時間點落在黃宗羲可預期的有生之年以外，並不容易看出就是「復三代之治」的必然時間點，而黃宗羲卻斷言第三運是治世。向來對於術數預言的解釋往往因為解釋者而有很大差異，但是這種差異正可反映解釋者的思想。黃宗羲對於「大壯」的詮釋，正好反映了黃宗羲對三代治世的期望。換言之，黃宗羲這樣的解釋可能是要合理化「復三代之治」的強烈意念，這也反映了十七世紀有一股要求直接跨越到三代之治的思想動向。

Traditional Chinese literati usually immersed themselves in the theories of divination and fortunetelling. This is a critical facet of their ”internal consciousness,” but there has been little research about it. Huang Zongxi not only studied divination, but also believed in it to a certain extent. There has been much research on Huang Zongxi, but little on his relationship with divination. Those who have read the ”Mingyi daifang lu” are familiar with the ”twelve cycles” in the preface to the work, but the source of the notion of the twelve cycles and its influence on Huang's politics have seldom been the subject of research.The preface to the work states that a ”da zhuang” era (an age of greatness) would begin twenty years thereafter. This article assumes that, in the absence of evidence for other explanations, the above statement may represent Huang's creation of a justification to defend his shifting political stance. This article finds that Huang's twelve cycles were drawn from the ”Tauyi tongzong baojian”, a text by Qin Xiaoshan of the Yuan dynasty that had been circulating for several hundred years by then, and thus verifies that Huang's twelve cycles were borrowed from previous texts, and were not then of his own invention.This article also examines Huang's political positions and concludes that his writing of the ”Daifang lu” was motivated by his seeing of no hope for a restored Ming (Prince of Gui had been killed and Zheng Chenggong died of illness) as well as his belief that a ”da zhuang” era was to commence twenty years thereafter. Judging from the timing of his writing of this text and his prediction of an event two decades in the future, this article points out that Huang's ”Daifang lu” was intended to provide the Qing dynasty with his suggestions for the ”achievement of an age of greatness.” But for him, then, the Qing was the ”Qing” as prophesied under the framework of the twelve cycles, that is, the ”Qing” under a sage emperor yet to come.This article also indicates that Huang did not admit he had abandoned his stance as a Ming loyalist when his contemporaries rebuked him for his shifting position. From the phrase ”nothing but a fraud” in the preface to Huang's ”Poxie lun”, a work which postdated the ”Daifang lu” by thirty years, this article ascertains that Huang's opinion about the twelve cycles shifted from believing to doubting. He was not content with the Qing's inability to return to the era of the Three Sagely Reigns, and was disappointed that his desired course of events, ”(like) Jizi's being visited (by King Wu),” did not come to pass.The span of time represented by the hexagram one ”da zhuang” in Qin Xiaoshan's third cycle might have covered Huang's expected lifespan, but it is not immediately evident that it must correspond to the ”return to the era of the Three Sagely Reigns.” Huang, however, declared that the third cycle would be a sagely era. The interpretation of prophesy in divination varies from person to person, but such variation also reflects the ideology of different interpreters. Huang's interpretation of ”da zhuang” reflects his strong desire for an era of the Three Sagely Reigns. In other words, Huang's interpretation is intended to justify his wish for a ”return to the era of the Three Sagely Reigns,” a fact which reflects the seventeenth-century philosophical trend of longing to return immediately to the era of the Three Sagely Reigns.