略论 “讽寓” 和 “比兴”

On Allegory, Metaphor, and Allegorical Interpretation

Research output: Journal Publications and Reviews (RGC: 21, 22, 62)21_Publication in refereed journalpeer-review

View graph of relations

Author(s)

Related Research Unit(s)

Detail(s)

Original languageChinese (Simplified)
Pages (from-to)1-14
Number of pages14
Journal / Publication文艺理论研究
Volume41
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 25 Jan 2021

Abstract

公元前四五世纪, 希腊哲学兴起, 挑战荷马史诗传统的经典地位和权威, 形成所谓哲学与诗之争。柏拉图等哲学家贬低诗和诗人, 但又有斯多葛派的哲学家提出"言在此而意在彼"的"讽寓" (allegory) 概念为荷马辩护, 认为荷马史诗在文本字面意义之外, 有完全符合经典地位要求的精神意义。在犹太教和基督教的《圣经》里有一篇《雅歌》, 语言旖旎香艳, 极具情色(eroticism), 其作为经典的正当性和权威性曾受到质疑和挑战, 有评注者也用讽寓解释来为之辩护, 用完全不同于经文字面的精神意义来替换和取代引起争议的字面意义。在中国儒家经典评注传统中,《诗经》十五国风中有许多诗篇,表面看来似乎为言情之作, 而从毛郑到孔颖达以来的汉唐注疏的传统, 也是通过"言在此而意在彼"的阐释方法, 断定这些作品都另有寄托, 可以起到符合儒家观念之美刺讽谏的作用。"比兴"为作诗之法, "美刺讽谏"则是预设解释这些诗的语境, 并以此规定诗之意义和作用。在经典文本的正当性和权威性受到质疑和挑战时, 讽寓解释为之辩护, 有保存经典的作用, 但不顾文本字面本意而强作解人, 又往往会产生不合理的过度阐释, 甚至产生深文周纳、罗织罪名的文字狱。王国维曾批评中国传统诗人不能忘情于政治、缺乏独立精神,这值得我们深思。从阐释学理论的角度看来, 任何解释都必须以文本字面意义为基础, 必须防止脱离文本本意的强制阐释或过度阐释。
In the 4th and 5th centuries B. C., the rise of philosophy challenged the authority of Homer and many philosophers, notably Plato, dismissed Homer and poetry in the quarrel between poetry and philosophy. Some other philosopher, however, particularly the Stoics, came to the defence of Homer by proposing the idea of allegory and arguing that the Homeric epics contained a spiritual meaning beyond the literal sense of the text. Similarly the Song of Songs in the Bible was also questioned by both Jewish rabbis and Christian interpreters because of its sensual language and eroticism. It was again allegorical interpretation that came to defend its canonicity by reading the text with spiritual meanings totally different from the literal sense. Many poems in the Confucian classic, the Book of Poetry, particularly the “airs” from the various states, also needed commentaries and interpretations that impose moral and political meanings unto those text that look like love poems to establish their propriety and canonicity. Therefore allegorical interpretation resides in the “minor prefaces” and commentaries on the poems in the Book of Poetry to argue for their praising or satirizing functions. Although allegorical interpretation is useful in defending the canonicity of classics, its tendency towards overinterpretation and particularly the politicized overinterpretation in cases of “literary inquisition” are pernicious and dangerous. Mr. Wang Guowei has criticized the Chinese tradition for the lack of independence in literature and arts, and that is a lesson we need to pay attention to and never forget. From the hermeneutic point of view, we must hold that all interpretations must be based on the literal sense of the text and guard against allegorical overinterpretations.

Research Area(s)

  • 经典, 荷马史诗, 雅歌, 诗经, 讽寓, 阐释学, 过度解释, canon, the Homeric epics, the Song of Songs, the Book of Poetry, allegory, hermeneutics, overinterpretation

Citation Format(s)

略论 “讽寓” 和 “比兴”. / 张隆溪.

In: 文艺理论研究, Vol. 41, No. 1, 25.01.2021, p. 1-14.

Research output: Journal Publications and Reviews (RGC: 21, 22, 62)21_Publication in refereed journalpeer-review