本文藉由何楷(明天啟五年〔1625〕進士，約 1600－1646 前後在世) 《詩經世本古義》引錄和運用《化書》與《文昌化書》的實況，以分析傳統詮解經害的著作引錄資料的相關問題，以及觀察「文昌信仰」傳播的問題。《詩經世本古義》具有資料蒐錄雜多；去〈風〉、〈雅〉、〈頌〉原列次序，而重新訂定詩作時代、作者典詩旨的特色。出版後即受到相當大的注意，自明末至清末，毀譽參半的批評不斷，引用其書之說者亦不少，這顯示其在詩經學史上具有不可忽視的影響力，因此應該是相當值得研究探討的對象，但現代相關學術的研究者，卻加以忽視， 直到一九九四年繞有林慶彰與李家樹的研究專文出現，填補了以往詩經學史上的空白。《詩經世本古義》引用《化書》是因為援引他人資料而帶入，並非何楷首先引入，在書中具有增廣博物知識與加深詩旨意涵瞭解的作用；引入 《文昌化書》則是何楷的創舉，主要是駁斥其中與何楷所定詩作時代、作者與詩旨不同的說法。綜合分析《詩經世本古義》引錄資料的方式， 可以得知傳統經學著作在引錄資料上承襲、累積與增益等三種特色；以及在運用資料上：融入解 說的整比方式、輯錄批評的蒐集方式、輯錄排比的累積方式等三種方式。何楷引錄駁斥《文昌化書》之舉，顯示當時「文昌信仰」和《文昌化書》 在一般讀書人之間流行普遍的現家。上述的結論，對於經學史與宗教傳播史的研究，具有提供相關研究者進一步瞭解與作為論證依據的價值。

　　　　　 He Kai's (ca. 1640-1646?) Shijing shiben guyi did away with the traditional groupings of the classic into feng, song, and ya, and instead ordered them according to a supposed sequence of their production, authors, and meanings. Upon publication this work continuously received a substantial amount of attention from the late Ming to the late Qing, with an even mixture of support and criticism; his book was quoted extensively, indicating the undeniable influence it exerted in the history of study of the Classic of Poetry. It was, however, ignored by contemporary scholars until 1994 when publications by Lin Ching-chang and Lee Kar Shui filled in this blank area in our research of the history of scholarship on the Shijing. This essay aims at explicating the relationship between Shijing shiben guyi and Huashu. First, this author has identified what and how He Kai had quoted from Huashu and Wenchang huashu. As the evidence helps disclose, He Kai incorporated materials from Huashu indirectly via his transcription of others' writings and from Wenchang huashu directly; he used material from the latter in order to justify his assertions where disparities occurred between his proposed sequence of production, authors, and poetic meanings and evidence from other sources. Second, this author explores the meaning of He Kai's approach to Huashu and Wenchang huashu in the tradition of studying shishuo. In short, the way He Kai adopted from these two books in his text can be characterized in terms of inheritance, accumulation, as well as improvement. The way He Kai utilized these two books in his notes can be classified into interpretation, criticism, and accumulation of relevant materials. Furthermore, the fact that He Kai used Wenchang huashu with critical eyes indicates the popularity of Wenchang huashu and the faith in Wenchang at his time. In sum, this inquiry into He Kai's Shijing shiben guyi and Huashu will be of much use to the study of the history of Chinese classics and the transmission of religions.