詩經 「關雎」는 ‘變風’인가? - ‘事變’ 혹은 ‘變故’로서의 ‘變’의 관점에서

Abstract

The purpose of this paper consider the ‘變’ of ‘變風 and 變雅’ mentioned in 「毛詩大序」 as the meaning of ‘事變’ or ‘變故’, which means any event or situation, and reexamine the first 『詩經』 work of 「關雎」 in that context. In general, ‘變’ in 『詩經』 has been understood from the perspective of ‘正‧變’ in 「風」‧「雅」正變論, which have been raised since the Han Dynasty. In addition, ‘變’ from the perspective of ‘正‧變’ means ‘right or wrong’ in contrast to ‘正' and, which means ‘wrong’. However, if you look at “毛序風變” where the ‘變’ of ‘變風’ and ‘變雅’ is mentioned for the first time, there is no discussion of ‘正風’ but only discussion of ‘變風’. In addition, the content contains information that prevents accidents or incidents in the country in advance. In this regard, I hypothesized that the ‘變’ of ‘變風’ mentioned in 「毛詩大序」 is the ‘變’ of ‘事變’, which means an accident or event. In the main body, the “關雎” section was reinterpreted from the perspective of “變” in the context of the event, focusing on the initial theory of 三家詩說 which is in the annotation history of 『詩經』. After that, 「毛詩大序」 was reviewed from the perspective of 三家詩說, and as a result, it was found that some of the contents of 「毛詩大序」 were more clearly understood from the perspective of 三家詩說. In addition, it was found that “變風” was a poem that recited ‘情性’, that is, “general affection between people”, and 「關雎」, expressed as love between man and woman, could also be such as ‘情詩’, ‘變詩’, or ‘變風’. After that, through initial interpretations and initial materials in the history of interpretation of 『詩經』, the possibility that the book was written to prevent future accidents or disasters was raised in advance. However, since this poem was dedicated to the king who had absolute power at the time, I expected that the poet had to hide his intention as much as possible. For this reason, the ‘諷詩’ of 『詩經』 suggested the possibility that the background and intention of the work resulted in the work not being well revealed. It was concluded by claiming that the reason for the extreme division of the interpretation of “雎關” was also due to such an internal cause.