丹溪书呕吐门曰∶有声有物谓之呕吐,是混呕吐为一,张景岳亦不以为然,而
未尝深辨。及观李东垣则以呕为有声有物,孙真人则以吐为有物无声。详呕吐字意,当以孙、李
为是。《字汇》呕亦同讴。夫呕必有声,而 谓∶气逆则呕。盖气一逆必作声,随拥所食之物
而俱出矣。吐则较呕所出更易,开口便漾出,又岂有声哉?至于哕之一症,经中杂病篇直作呃逆,
而河间、海藏则以哕为干呕。张景岳谓呃逆古无是名。其在《内经》即谓之哕,是特古今之称名
不同。而哕与呃逆断不可混为一症也。哕虽以河间、海藏说为是。而《东垣十书·溯洄集》中则
谓哕之声浊恶长而有力,直至气尽而后止,非如干呕之轻而不甚也,是较之刘、王所说则更明白
晓畅矣。至于呃逆,即东垣所谓吃忒者,是此症称名不一,随其方言而呼之。有曰格得者,有曰
打呃者,有曰打歌得者,总与哕为二症,明系今之所谓打呃是也。《灵枢》则谓之KT ,(音噎。)
所谓KT 不得息者是也。观《金鉴》中以为格格连声,气从脐下来,自冲脉退场门作声,岂非善于
形容者乎?至于咳逆与呃逆则又不可相混,有以咳逆为呃逆者,有以咳逆为哕者,是皆未详味经
文耳。经本以咳嗽气逆为言,如气交变大论曰∶岁金太过,甚则喘咳逆气。又曰∶咳逆甚而血溢。
盖以咳嗽不止而血随
气上耳,未闻打呃而见血者也,此咳逆之非呃逆亦甚明矣。而咳逆之非哕又何待辨乎?至噫气之
说,《灵枢》云∶寒气客于胃,厥逆从下上散,复出于胃,故为噫。仲景谓∶上焦受中焦气未和,
不能消,是故能噫。据此则噫者即嗳气也,即俗之所谓拔气也,此理甚明,人所易晓。总之,有
声有物曰呕。有物无声曰吐,有声无物曰哕。呃逆者,即打呃之谓。咳逆者,咳嗽之甚,以致气
逆上冲也。噫者,《字汇》解作饱食气满而有声,岂非所谓拔气者乎?症各不同,断难相混。至
于得病之由与其治法,各有虚实寒热之异,散见诸门,兹不赘。
Zhu Danxi, in the section on Vomiting, stated: "That which has sound and substance is called vomiting," thereby conflating vomiting and spitting. Zhang Jingyue also did not agree with this view but did not analyze it deeply. Upon reviewing Li Dongyuan's perspective, he defined "ou" (vomiting with sound) as having both sound and substance, whereas Sun Simiao defined "tu" (spitting) as having substance without sound. A detailed examination of the characters "ou" and "tu" suggests that the views of Sun and Li are correct. The *Zihui* states that "ou" is synonymous with "ou" (to sing). Indeed, "ou" must involve sound; thus it is said that "rebellious qi causes ou." Generally, when qi rebels, it inevitably produces sound, carrying the ingested food along with it to exit. In contrast, "tu" involves material that is expelled more easily than in "ou"; it flows out upon opening the mouth, so how could there be sound?
Regarding the symptom of "yue" (hiccups/dry heaving), the *Jingmai Zabi Pian* (Chapter on Miscellaneous Diseases in the Classic) directly equates it with "e ni" (hiccup), while Liu Hejian and Wang Haoxu interpreted "yue" as dry heaving. Zhang Jingyue noted that the term "e ni" did not exist in ancient times. It was referred to as "yue" in the *Neijing*; this merely reflects differences in nomenclature between ancient and modern times. However, "yue" and "e ni" must absolutely not be confused as a single syndrome. Although the interpretations of Liu Hejian and Wang Haoxu regarding "yue" have merit, the *Suhui Ji* within the *Dongyuan Shishi* (Ten Works of Dongyuan) states that the sound of "yue" is turbid, harsh, long, and forceful, continuing until the qi is exhausted, unlike the mild nature of dry heaving. This explanation is clearer and more lucid than those of Liu and Wang. As for "e ni," it corresponds to what Dongyuan called "chi te" (hiccup). The names for this syndrome vary according to dialects: some call it "ge de," others "da e," or "da ge de." In all cases, it is distinct from "yue" and clearly refers to what is currently known as hiccup. The *Lingshu* refers to it as "KT" (pronounced 'ye'), as mentioned in the phrase "KT bu de xi" (inability to breathe due to KT). The *Yizong Jinjian* describes it vividly as a continuous "ge ge" sound, where qi rises from below the umbilicus and makes noise exiting through the Chong Mai (Penetrating Vessel) at the Tuidao point. Is this not an excellent description?
Furthermore, "ke ni" (cough with rebellious qi) and "e ni" (hiccup) must not be confused. Some mistake "ke ni" for "e ni," and others for "yue"; these errors stem from a failure to carefully interpret the canonical texts. The classics originally used cough and rebellious qi to explain such phenomena. For instance, the *Qi Jiao Bian Da Lun* (Treatise on Changes in Qi Interactions) states: "When Metal Qi is excessive, severe cases manifest as panting, coughing, and rebellious qi." It also says: "Severe coughing and rebellious qi can lead to hemorrhage." This implies that blood follows the upward-rebelling qi due to persistent coughing; one has never heard of hiccups causing hemorrhage. Thus, it is evident that "ke ni" is not "e ni." Consequently, why would "ke ni" need further differentiation from "yue"?
Regarding "yi qi" (belching), the *Lingshu* states: "Cold pathogen lodges in the Stomach, causing jue-ni (rebellious qi) to scatter upwards from below and re-emerge from the Stomach, thus producing yi." Zhang Zhongjing stated: "The Upper Jiao receives Qi from the Middle Jiao but they are not harmonized, leading to indigestion, hence yi occurs." Based on this, "yi" is equivalent to belching, commonly known in vernacular as "ba qi" (pulling qi). This logic is clear and easily understood by people.
In summary: That which has sound and substance is "ou" (vomiting); that which has substance but no sound is "tu" (spitting); that which has sound but no substance is "yue" (dry heaving/hiccup-like sound). "E ni" refers to hiccupping. "Ke ni" refers to severe coughing resulting in rebellious qi rushing upward. "Yi," as explained in the *Zihui*, refers to sound produced by fullness and excess qi after a meal, which is indeed what is called "ba qi." Since each syndrome is distinct, they cannot be confused. As for the etiology and treatment methods, they differ according to deficiency/excess and cold/heat patterns, and are discussed separately in other sections; thus, they are not repeated here.