經典與教育兩者並非自然而然彼此互助，而是彼此矛盾衝突。經典以超脫自我侷限的方式傳輸其權威，但是這種性質也令經典難免成為特異的章經，自外於活生生的社群。男一方面，教育的目的是為了在社群成員中培養崇高的社群理想，這種理想也就是希臘人所謂的paideia。因此，經典或古典經書在教育中所扮演的角色並不單純﹔一旦沒有典律所賦予的永恆願景，教育頓失所依，而無法承擔發揚社區價值的功能。然而，經典的古典地位也不斷有種隱憂﹔這種地位易使經典託付於過失並與教育的首要任務脫節。每個新世代因此必須根據其教育理想去重新衡量其權威經典的地位。這種矛盾關係有一種解決之道：也就是以釋義的方式作為教學利器、提供溝通管道、跨越經典與教育理想之間的鴻溝，這種解決方式是本文所要研究的。本文首先探討柏拉圖對荷馬的批判，荷馬的作品是一種教育經典，但柏拉圖認為荷馬削弱了社會公民的價值體系，因而加以譴責。柏拉圖提議以他自己的著作取代荷馬的詩作，但柏拉圖的後輩卻把荷馬的作品當作寓言，寧願透過註解荷馬來曉以大義，並調解這位哲學先進和這位詩人之間的衝突。另一方面，公元第一世紀的哲學家朱蒂亞斯（Philo Judaeus）也曾經面對這種挑戰一如何使猶太聖典切合猶太人的教育理想，那些散居各地、講希臘語言的猶太人。為此，朱蒂亞斯設計了三套釋義文集，以解讀寓言的方式發掘典籍的弦外之音：《律法要義》( Expositions of the Law )、《問題與答覆》（Questions and Answers ）、《聖典冒意言詮》 (Allegorical Commentary）。這些文集目的是要引導學習者循序漸進，達到他們的教育目標，最終理當導致他們預視神。《律法要義》解釋猶太聖典的性質;《問題與答覆》提供讀者一個有關猶太宗教典籍的基本資料庫;《聖典旨意言詮》帶引學習者進入最後階段，使其領悟猶太聖典的深層意義。對於義理追求者而言，釋義因此帶有教學指引的功能﹔就詮釋學的意義而言，釋義與經典彼此一直相生相成;對於把文本當作權威經典的人而言，不經過釋義，經典就會被誤解或無法讓人了解。

Scripture and education, far from natural allies, are in paradoxical tension with each other. Scripture projects its authority by its self-transcendence, but the same element also threatens to make it into a composition foreign to the living community. Education, for its part, is designed to cultivate the community's ideals - what the Greeks called paideia-among its members. The role of scripture or classics in education is subsequently far from simple. Without the eternally-present vision embodied in the canon, education loses its mooring and could no longer be counted on to propagate the values held dear by the community. The classical status of the canon, however, always threatens to consign it to the past and render it irrelevant to the central task of education. Each new generation must therefore reevaluate the status of its authoritative canon in relation to its educational ideals. This paper examines one particular solution to the paradoxical relationship: the use of commentary as a pedagogical instrument to bridge the gap between scripture and educational ideals. It begins with an examination of the critique of Homer the educational canon by Plato who accused the poet of attenuating civic values. Plato proposed to replace the Homeric poems with his own writings, but his followers opted for the use of allegorical commentaries to bridge the gap between their master and Homer. The first-century philosopher Philo Judaeus, on the other hand, when faced with the challenge of fitting the Jewish scripture into the educational ideals of Greek-speaking Jews living in the diaspora, devised three series of allegorical commentaries--the Expositions of the Law, Questions and Answers, and the Allegorical Commentary for this purpose. These commentaries were designed to lead students on a gradually ascent towards their education goal, which ultimately should lead to a vision of God. The Expositions explicate the nature of the Jewish scripture; the Questions and Answers provide readers with a storehouse of basic information on the Torah; and the Allegorical Commentary take the students to the final stage of understanding the deeper meaning of the Jewish scripture. Commentary thererfore functions as a pedagogical guide to the seekers. Commentary and scripture always live in a hermeneutical symbiosis: without commentary, scripture would be incomprehensible or "misinterpreted" when judged by those who hold the text as authoritative scripture.