Study of the Classics after the Wei and Chin dynasties included what has come to be known as the Cheng-Wang Debate, referring to Cheng Hsuan (tzu K'ang-ch'eng, 127-200 A.D.) and Wang Shu (tzu Tz'u-yung, 195-256 A.D). This debate was enjoined by a ku-wen scholar (Wang) and a chin-wen scholar (Cheng), and their divergent annotations of the Classics led to continual disagreements among later scholars. In regard to the divergent views held by Cheng and Wang, many scholars have offered profound insights, but only a few have discussed why Cheng and Wang disagreed in their interpretations of the Classics. In this essay we will explore the meaning of these divergent interpretations and seek the reasons for the contrasting viewpoints held by Cheng and Wang. This essay takes as its topic of discussion the phrase "kan sheng shuo". According to my research, the phrase "kan sheng shuo" stems from the problem of sovereign power. Cheng Hsuan believed in "kan sheng", thought that the ruler's authority (wang ch'uan) came from heaven (t'ien shen), and that the ruler was the earthly embodiment of the heavenly five elements. Wang Shu did not believe in "kan sheng". In his view, rulers were descendants of the Yellow Emperor, and their possession of sage morality (sheng te ) granted them support or legitimacy as rulers. One reason that Cheng and Wang held divergent viewpoints was that their academic backgrounds were different. Although both were familiar with ku-wenand chin-wen, Cheng was more deeply influenced by chin-wen, whereas Wang was more profoundly influenced by ku-wen. Another reason for their differences is that they lived in different times. Cheng lived during a period when order was giving away to disorder; his times were quite turbulent. Therefore he advocated the transferral of political authority through a relatively closed system. Wand, on the other hand, lived in an era tending toward order, with only limited political turbulence. He therefore advocated a more relaxed approach in the transferral of political authority based on wisdom and morality, rather than a strict hereditary system.