本論文旨在藉由日本江戶時期懷德堂中井履軒的《大學雜議》，觀察履軒採取何種視角來評議朱子的經學。雖然履軒的《大學雜議》是以朱子的《大學章句》作為底本，但由於履軒堅信《大學》與其他三書的經典地位不能等同而語，因而極力貶抑《大學》的價值，使得朱子所構築的四書體系受到履軒的質疑。再者，履軒與朱子對於《大學》經解的歧異也不少，藉由本文的分析，最主要的根本原因來自於兩個層面：第一個層面是對《大學》所扮演的型態與功能上的認知有異；第二個層面則是對《大學》文本中幾個重要觀念理解上的歧異。文末則試圖藉由上述的梳理與分析，再重新針對履軒《大學雜議》的經學史意義予以衡定。

This paper investigates Nakai Riken’s appraisal of Zhu Xi’s Daxue zhangju (Interpretation of the Great Learning) by reference to the former’s Daigaku zaggi (Commentary on the Great Learning). Nakai Riken was a Japanese scholar from the Kaitokudō Academy in the Edo period. Although Nakai’s Daigaku zaggi was based on Zhu’s Daxue zhangju, their interpretations of the Great Learning diverged sharply. According to the analysis of this paper, the root cause of their differences was twofold. First, the two scholars differed widely in their assessments of the Great Learning’s form and function. Second, they understood several key concepts found in the Great Learning differently. This paper concludes by organizing and analyzing these results to reposition Nakai’s Daigaku zaggi in intellectual history.