诗无达诂 – Chinese philosophy and culture

0
176
Listen to this article

shī wú dá ɡǔ 诗无达诂

Poetry Defies Fixed Interpretation.

原指《诗经》没有恒定不变的训诂或解释,后用为文学鉴赏与批评术语,泛指由于时代变化与鉴赏者的思想、阅历、修养等个性差异,对同一作品往往有不同的解释或解读。由汉代大儒董仲舒(前179—前104)提出。“诗无达诂”源于春秋时代的“赋诗言志”,当时的为政者从实际的政治和外交需要出发常常引用《诗经》诗句,不一定符合诗句本意,甚至有时断章取义;汉儒诠释《诗经》,也因不同学术取向而分为数家。董仲舒提出这一命题,其意在为汉儒的不同解释提供依据。作为一种文学理论,“诗无达诂”属于鉴赏论,侧重于读者感受,体现出不同读者在文本解读与艺术审美上的差异性;同时,诗歌语言具有暗示、含蓄、曲折的特点,言不尽意,所以不能仅照字面意思直解,读者须按照自己的理解、想象与学识,以心会心,体悟诗中的寄托和寓意。“诗无达诂”的价值在于揭示了作品自身语义的模糊性与解释者个人的差异性,但不等于可以随意解释作品的意义。

This term originally referred to the absence of a universally accepted interpretation or explanation of The Book of Songs. It was first put forward by the great Han Dynasty Confucian scholar Dong Zhongshu (179-104 BC). Later, it came to be used as a general term in literary criticism, which suggests that as the result of the changing historical conditions and different life experiences of readers there bound to be varied interpretations or explanations of the same literary work. The idea that poetry defies any attempt at fixed interpretation derived from the traditions of the Spring and Autumn Period, when poetic lines were recited to express one’s view, stance, or emotion. To justify themselves politically or diplomatically, politicians at the time would quote from The Book of Songs, yet without bothering to find out the exact meaning of the quotes, sometimes even distorting their meaning. Confucian scholars of the Han Dynasty interpreted The Book of Songs in several different ways due to different academic orientations. Dong Zhongshu raised this idea to provide theoretical support for such divergence. As a view of literary theory, it is concerned with different readers’ divergent interpretations of a text and its aesthetic values. This view argues that as poetic terms are suggestive, ambiguous, and intricate, readers should not settle for a superficial understanding of a poem. Instead, they should delve into the poet’s heart and develop their own understanding, interpretation, and insight of his poem. The argument that there is no fixed interpretation of poems is valid, because it shows that poetic language can be ambiguous in meaning and that interpretations can therefore vary. However, this does not mean that one should interpret a poem too freely.

引例 Citations:

◎所闻《诗》无达诂,《易》无达占,《春秋》无达辞。从变从义,而一以奉人[天]。(董仲舒《春秋繁露·精华》)

(我听说《诗经》没有恒定不变的解释,《周易》没有恒定不变的占卜,《春秋》没有恒定不变的词句。遵从变通的原则,遵从经典的本来意义,将两者合一即可不违背天道或圣人的思想。)

I hear that there is no fixed interpretation of The Book of Songs, no fixed divination in The Book of Changes, and no unchangeable wording in The Spring and Autumn Annals. We should obey principles flexibly and capture the underlying messages of classics. Then, we should merge these two aspects into one without violating the way of heaven or sages’ moral instructions. (Dong Zhongshu: Luxuriant Gems of the Spring and Autumn Annals)

◎余尝谓《诗经》与诸经不同。故读《诗》者亦当与读诸经不同。盖诗人托物引喻,其辞微,其旨远。故有言在于此而意属于彼者,不可以文句泥也。(何良俊《四友斋丛说》卷一)

(我曾经说《诗经》与别的儒家经典不一样。所以读《诗经》也应当与读其他经典不同。大概是诗人借某些事物引申比喻,其用词精微,其意旨深远。所以有字面意思说的是这个而实际意旨说的是那个,不可以拘泥于《诗经》的文句。)

I once said that The Book of Songs was different from other Confucian classics. So it should be read in a different way. Poets in the book probably used certain things in life to make allusions about things. Their wording was nuanced and their message was profound. Yet, they often said something but meant quite another. Therefore, we should not be too strict in interpreting the lines of the book. (He Liangjun: Academic Notes from the Four Buddies Studio)

Rate this post

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here