本文論述了日本江戶時代學者渡邊蒙菴，以《詩經》是一部詩選、詩道人情、鄭詩非淫詩、詩無定義不為典要、古註完備等觀點，批評朱熹的「勸懲」說、「詩淫」說、疑經改經態度、以理學解《詩》的方法，而主張《詩集傳》不該稱「傳」應自謙稱「注」。本文除了究明蒙菴批判朱熹的立場之外，同時也論及荻生徂徠及太宰春臺等古文辭學派學者對朱熹《詩集傳》多所質疑與批判等相關看法，而歸結出古文辭學派學者大多有挾漢儒去古未遠之勢，以制朱熹新註之說的傾向，及古文辭學派學者雖欲將詩去經化，使之文學化，但卻更凸顯出其對詩的功能政治化的期待。透過本文的分析有助於深入理解蒙菴反朱熹《詩集傳》立場及古文辭學派《詩經》學發展。

Watanabe Moan’s views on the Book of Odes are that it is an anthology of poems expressing human emotions, with no fixed meanings; that the odes of Zheng 鄭 are not immoral; that the ancient commentaries are complete. Such views pose direct challenges to Zhu Xi 朱熹, who believes that while some of the odes are didactic, others are immoral; who doubts and even emends some of the odes; and who interprets them his own way. According to Watanabe, Zhu Xi’s commentary should not be classified as a zhuan “傳 tradition,” but more modestly as a zhu “注 commentary.” This study also discusses Kobunzi Gakuha 古文辭學派scholars’ views on the Odes and criticisms of Zhu Xi, concluding that they use Han dynasty scholars’ closeness to antiquity as an argument for containing Zhu’s novel theories. Though they try to de-canonize the odes and understand them as literary works, they reveal a desire for them to also serve a political function.