汪琬（1624-1691）與錢謙益（1582-1664）同宗歸有光，然汪對錢屢有批評，學界對此一直是揚錢抑汪，未給予足夠重視。分析汪對錢的批評，當可理解為何二人同宗歸有光，卻又存在矛盾。本文以為，錢強調內在的「性情與學問」與汪琬特重外在的「文法論」，正是矛盾所在，更反映了清初古文發展的複雜面向。本文梳理時人記載及評價，還原論爭面貌，從中分析二人文學觀的衝突，認為錢對「俗學」與「謬學」的解釋引起汪的不滿。錢以「性情學問」的角度否定南宋理學及明代復古派，汪則以「文道與文法」的角度加以肯定，產生矛盾。此外，本文釐清並回應青木正兒所言二人同宗歸有光，取法有別的說法，認為錢謙益以道，汪琬以文，正是二人之別，補其系統未詳之論。

The ＂debate＂ between Wang Wan and Qian Qianyi has been an important issue in the literary arena of the early Qing Dynasty, but it does not receive enough attention from scholars. Thus this paper calls for attention to this issue by arguing that the contradiction of literary conceptions between Wang and Qian, both important writers in the early Qing dynasty, reflects the development of the criticism of ＂classical prose＂(古文) during that period. This paper is comprised of two parts. The first part will be concerned with the differences in literary concepts of Wang Wan and Qian Qianyi. The second part is a response to the article by Aoki Masaru on their approaches to Gui Youguang's ＂Classical Prose.＂ The essence of Wang's ＂ancient prose＂ theories is ＂organization of writing＂ (文法), while that of Qian focuses on ＂temperament and education＂ (性情與學問). The critical difference between two is that Wang's emphasis is on the composition itself, while Qian emphasizes the character of the author. Wang believes that an author with a good temperament and education may still not be able to write a good article, but Qian upholds the opposite. The theories of Qian Qianyi are built upon the critique of Neo-Confucianism in the Southern Song Dynasty, but this very same theoretical system is celebrated by Wang Wan and his ＂ancient prose system＂(古文譜系). In Aoki Masaru's opinion, although Wang and Qian both admire Gui Youguang's ＂Classical Prose,＂ they take different approaches to Gui's 'Ancient Prose'. Based in Aoki Masaru's point of view, I argue that Wang's view inherits Gui's ＂Classical Prose＂ through 'Wen'(文) as Qian inherits it through 'Dao'(道).