山本章夫《詩經新註》對朱熹淫詩說之批評

A Criticism of Xi Zhu’s View of the Odes as Illicit Love Poems in Akio Yamamoto’s Shikyō shinchū

山本章夫為日本明治新舊變動時代之學者，其於解經時，有無受當時新舊學術之影響？山本章夫著有《詩經新註》，乃以朱熹《詩集傳》為本而寫成，與朱熹之《詩經》觀有何異同？山本章夫之淫詩說與朱熹有何異同？值得討論。故本文以探究並比較山本章夫與朱熹二者之淫詩說異同為首要目的。首先略述山本章夫其人、其學、其書，再整理並比較兩者之淫詩說，將之分成山本章夫對朱熹淫詩說之贊同及山本章夫對朱熹淫詩說之批判，後者又分：一、朱熹不認為是淫詩而山本章夫認為是者；二、朱熹認為是淫詩而山本章夫不以為然者，依類逐篇討論，每篇先以〈小序〉為言，後辨之以朱熹相關著作中之言論，再以山本章夫之說為論，究其異同等步驟與方法。研究結果顯示：兩者對〈小序〉批判之力道不相上下，但山本章夫批判篇數較多，而山本章夫對朱熹23篇淫詩之批判，更達15篇之多。此結果說明兩者之淫詩觀大為不同，而其最大之差異在山本章夫不認為淫詩皆淫者自作。從山本章夫身上可見對任何學問皆可「疑其所宜疑」，取其可取，捨其可捨，強調自家之見，以發明古人所未及為尚。本文究明此結果，除可以提供學界初步瞭解山本章夫之淫詩觀外，亦可以引起學者開啟山本章夫《詩經》學相關議題之研究，拓展明治時期《詩經》學研究之新領域。

Akio Yamamoto was a scholar during Japan’s turbulent Meiji period. Whether he was influenced by new and old scholarship in his exegesis of the Confucian classics remains unknown. Yamamoto wrote Shikyō shinchū using Xi Zhu’s Shijizhuan as a basis. What similarities and differences does his view of the Odes have with Xi Zhu’s? Are there any differences between Yamamoto’s view that the Odes were illicit love poems and that of Xi Zhu’s? These are all issues worth exploring. Hence, this study primarily explores and compares Yamamoto’s views on the Odes as illicit love poems with Xi Zhu’s views. This is done by first briefly introducing Yamamoto’s life, his learning, and his writings, and then by systematically comparing their two views. There are places where Yamamoto accepts Xi Zhu’s view and places where he rejects Xi Zhu. The latter can be divided into two categories: 1. poems Xi Zhu does not think are illicit but Yamamoto does, and 2. poems Xi Zhu thinks are illicit but Yamamoto does not. Poems in each of these types are discussed individually, looking first at their “small prefaces,” then Xi Zhu’s comments, and finally Yamamoto’s views. This should be adequate to show their differences in steps and methodologies. Results show that both lay heavy criticism against the “small prefaces,” but Yamamoto has more criticism than Xi Zhu. Also, Yamamoto criticizes 15 of the 23 poems Xi Zhu identifies as illicit love poems. These results show that there is a stark difference in their views of this aspect of the Odes, with the greatest difference being that Yamamoto does not think that the illicit poems were all written by lovers. From Yamamoto’s stance, we can see that any scholarship can be viewed skeptically, or adopted, or discarded if it is warranted, and if it strengthens one’s own views. The aim is to uncover what the ancients had not yet discovered. This paper provides the scholarly world with an initial understanding of Yamamoto’s views of illicit love poems in the Odes as well as a path by which other scholars can begin to research Yamamoto’s other views on the Odes, thereby creating a new fi eld in researching the study of the Odes during the Meiji period.