Library

Neither the *Ling Shu* (Spiritual Pivot) nor the *Su Wen* (Basic Questions) contains the term "Nei Feng" (Internal Wind). This term first appears in Volume 105 of the *Shi Ji* (Records of the Grand Historian), specifically in the "Biography of Cang Gong," with the phrase: "A slippery pulse indicates Nei Feng." Here, it refers to external wind pathogens invading the interior, not wind generated from within. The *Qian Jin Fang* (Essential Prescriptions Worth a Thousand Gold) also discusses Nei Feng extensively; upon careful analysis, its meaning aligns with that of Cang Gong. Only Wang Bing (Wang Taipu), in his commentary on the *Su Wen · Da Qi Lun*, stated, "Laborious qi accumulates internally and transforms into wind," thereby interpreting the character "wind" in the classic texts as originating from within. However, he ultimately did not suggest that this type of wind should be treated with tonification methods. Moreover, the original text in the *Su Wen · Shui Re Xue Lun* explicitly states that Shen Feng (Kidney Wind) occurs when one sweats and is exposed to wind. Thus, Shen Feng is undoubtedly an externally acquired pathogen, contrary to Wang Bing's interpretation. In recent times, the theory of Internal Wind has become prevalent in the southeastern regions. I have attempted to differentiate these conditions, finding that what is called Internal Wind actually comprises symptoms such as Zhong Feng (Wind Stroke), Bi Syndrome (Obstruction Syndrome), Fei Disease (Flaccidity Disorder), and disorders of Gan Qi (Liver Qi) and Shen Qi (Kidney Qi). Since these conditions already have specific names, why replace them with confusing general terms? Furthermore, ancient physicians only regarded Zhong Feng syndromes as external wind invading the interior, formulating various modified versions of Xu Ming Tang (Continuing Life Decoction) to treat them. They regarded Gan Qi disorders as Jue Ni (Rebellious Qi of Zang Organs), formulating various modified versions of Qi Qi Tang (Seven Qi Decoction) for treatment. If all are broadly categorized as Internal Wind and treated exclusively with tonification, would Xu Ming Tang not be considered too dispersing, and Qi Qi Tang too draining? Ancient physicians established treatments for each syndrome based on eternal principles. Why do the categories of Wind and Jue Ni differ so drastically from later theories? Alas, how strange!

The *Ling Shu* and *Su Wen* frequently discuss Ren Ying (Human Welcome Pulse) and Qi Kou (Qi Gate Pulse) in contrast. In the *Zhong Shi* chapter, special emphasis is placed on the character "Tai Yin" (Hand Tai Yin Lung Meridian) above the Mai Kou (Pulse Gate, which is synonymous with Qi Kou). It states: "When both Ren Ying and the Hand Tai Yin Mai Kou are four times or more than normal, it is termed Guan Ge (Closed and Blocked)." This statement serves precisely to distinguish Ren Ying from Qi Kou. Wang Bing noted that Ren Ying does not belong to the Tai Yin meridian, thus identifying it with the artery beside the larynx. This likely stems from the theory in the *Su Wen · Yin Yang Bie Lun*: "Three Yang meridians are at the head, Three Yin meridians are at the hands," which is highly accurate. Later scholars, unaware of its origin, hastily read the ancient classics and erroneously rejected Wang Bing’s commentary, creating the theory of "Left Ren Ying, Right Qi Kou," claiming it originated from the *Mai Jing* (Pulse Classic). However, they failed to realize that the four sentences in the *Mai Jing*—"One fen before the cun guan is the master of life; the left is Ren Ying, the right is Qi Kou"—flow continuously and correspond to the "two points opposite behind the guan" in the Shen Men formula. This specifically refers to the Ren Ying point on the left side of the one fen anterior to the guan, discussed alongside the Shen Men point posterior to the guan, rather than referring collectively to the three positions of the left hand. The Ping Ren Ying section of the *Mai Jing* states: "If the pulse anterior to Ren Ying at the Cun Kou position of the left hand is excess, it indicates Yang Excess." This differs significantly from the descriptions in the *Ling Shu* and *Su Wen*; careful examination of the word "anterior" clarifies this. The *Mai Jing* itself is correct; the error lies in later misinterpretations. Many predecessors have debated this issue, but I will not cite them all here. Ultimately, Yang Shangshan’s commentary in the *Tai Su* (Grand Simplicity) stands out as superior.