風、雅、頌、賦、比、興是《詩經》的「六義」，前三種是詩歌的體裁，後三種是詩歌的作法。根據張松如等教授的研究，〈商頌〉的確是殷商時期的作品，但即使《詩經》的年代如此久遠，並且受到歷代學者極大的關注和研究，今人對於「六義」的定義卻未必有正確的認知。 一般人對於賦、比、興的定義，大多引據宋朝朱子的說法，可是朱子不了解《詩序》的價值，甚至倡言廢《序》，連帶影響他對於整部《詩經》屬性的評估，同時關係到「賦、比、興」的定義。清朝學者對於《詩經》做出巨大的貢獻，計有四大家 ──陳啟源、胡承珙、馬瑞辰、陳奐，他們一致認為朱子「廢《詩序》」是錯誤的，此一學術發現本來足以改正宋朝以來朱子所造成的誤解，然而今人還是不查，竟迷迷糊糊地引據朱子之說以解「興」義。 有關「興」的定義，目前學界以及幾個著名網站所公布的說法，究竟是否符合古人的本意？此一問題有待明確的釐清，故本篇論文擬探討此一老舊的問題，期待得出一個比較可信的答案。

“Feng, Ya, Song, Fu, Bi, Xing”, known as "six- Yis" of the Book of Songs . “Feng, Ya, Song ”are three different genres of poetry, “Fu, Bi, Xing ”are three different writing methods. According to the study made by Professor Zhang Songru , “Shangsong” is indeed produced in the Shang period. Zhang’s theory can prove the source of "Book of Songs" is very old. However, despite many ancient scholars give "Book of Songs" great attention and research, the modern definition of " six- Yis " but not necessarily have been a correct perception. About the definition of "Fu, Bi ,Xing", modern scholars citing Song Dynasty Zhu Xi’s proposition, But Zhu Xi didn’t know the value of Shi Xu , and even claimed that Shi Xu should be destroyed. This is a devastating proposition, not only affect his assessment about the property of the "Book of Songs", but also affected his assessment of the definition of Xing. Qing Dynasty scholar in the "Book of Songs" aspect has a huge contribution, there are four of the most famous scholars ── Chen Qi-Yuan, Hu Cheng-kung, Ma Rui-Chen, Chen Huan, they agreed that Zhu Xi "repeal Shi Xu " was wrong. This conclusion, would be sufficient to correct the misunderstanding caused by Zhu Xi since the Song Dynasty, However, people today still do not check, stumbled citing Zhu Xi's proposition to explain "Xing". About the definition of " Xing " ,in the current academic as well as several well-known websites published statement, whether this already consistent with the original idea of the ancients? This issue needs to be explicitly clarified, so this paper was to explore this old problem, expect to arrive at a more credible answer.