上内经评文。凡素问篇八十一卷二十四。唐王启玄所分卷也。灵枢篇八十一卷十二。相传亦启玄分卷。或曰宋史崧
所分也。失古九九之义矣。其遗篇传于宋之刘温舒。世遂谓温舒伪作。非也盖温舒以前为启玄学人之所作也。始未必敢
僭以补经。而指为遗篇是温舒之过。然圣经日湮旧文所存无分真伪。皆可珍惜则附经以传固未可浓非也。大论诸篇古本
内经所无启玄。并内经篇数而取此以益之后人。因张仲景有阴阳大论之语谓即此是也。当不谬矣。又有斥为伪作者。夫
大论既见称于仲景。虽非内经本文要自古圣之精旨也。相附以传得至不没启玄之功。何可诬哉。故居今之日。犹获见大
论遗篇之文者。非二公之力殆不及此。灵枢缺脱弥甚史崧取皇甫士安针灸甲乙经文补之亦犹是爱古之深情。利世之盛意
也。且夫古籍之散佚也。每览历代艺文之志考之于世百不存一二。彼以一生心血之所聚。既已见称当时得列名于史官矣。
犹尚不能永其传其他又何论焉。后之人宜有不胜惋惜之情者矣。乃反肆口诋 不遗余力。若必欲使世不存其书而后快。
此其用心何在也。兹者取两经全文而评之。极知浅陋无可观第。其用心世或有能谅之者。虽然生斯世也。不能扬风振烈
抗迹于古之大丈夫。而区区于寻行数墨之间。犹且俯首胁肩折腰。瞠目求谅于不知谁何之人。其亦委琐之至矣。抚躬自
念能无 然惭恧也乎。
诰授通议大夫。赐进士出身。三品衔在任。候补知府。江南扬州府。粮捕河务水利。同知皖南建德周学海 之。识
于秦邮工次。
《内经评文》。其中《素问》共八十一篇，分为二十四卷，这是唐代王冰（号启玄子）所划分的卷数。《灵枢》共八十一篇，分为十二卷，相传也是由王冰划分卷数。也有人说这是宋代史崧所划分。但这已经失去了古代“九九”之数的义理了。那些散佚的篇章流传到宋代时，被刘温舒所得，世人于是说这些是刘温舒伪造的，这并不正确。大概是因为在刘温舒之前，这些篇章是由学习王冰学说的人所作，起初未必敢僭越地用来补充经典，而将其指称为散佚的篇章确实是刘温舒的过错。然而，圣人的经典日益湮没，旧有的文章留存下来的无论真伪，都值得珍惜，因此附在经文之后一同流传，本来也不应过分非议。
《大论》等篇章，古本《内经》中并没有，王冰将《内经》原有的篇数合并，取这些篇章来增益其中，后人因为张仲景有提到“阴阳大论”的话，认为就是这些篇章，应当不会错。又有斥责它们为伪作的人。既然《大论》已经被张仲景所称道，虽然它不是《内经》的原文，但也要从古圣先贤的精微旨意来看待。依附经文一同流传，使得王冰的功劳不被埋没，怎么可以诬蔑呢？所以生活在当今时代，还能看到《大论》和散佚篇章的文章，如果不是这两位先生（王冰、刘温舒/史崧）的努力，几乎不可能达到这个地步。《灵枢》缺失脱漏更为严重，史崧选取皇甫谧（字士安）《针灸甲乙经》中的经文来补入，也同样是出于爱护古籍的深情和利于世人的盛意。
况且古籍的散失，常常查阅历代艺文志，考察于世间的书籍，百不存一二。那些用一生心血汇聚而成的著作，既然已经在当时受到称颂并列入史官的记录，尚且不能永远流传，其他的又何必多论呢？后的人应该会有不胜惋惜之情才对。反而肆意诋毁，不遗余力，似乎一定要让世间不再存有这些书才感到痛快，这他们的用心究竟在哪里呢？
如今我选取这两部经典的全文进行评注，极知自己学识浅陋，没有什么可看的，只是我的用心，世上或许有人能谅解吧。虽然如此，生活在这个时代，不能发扬风教、振奋功烈，做出超越古代大丈夫的业绩，却局限于寻行数墨之间，还要低头哈腰、曲意逢迎，瞪大眼睛向不知是谁的人寻求谅解，这也太琐碎卑微到了极点。反省自身，能不感到惭愧羞耻吗？
诰授通议大夫，赐进士出身，三品衔，在任候补知府，江南扬州府粮捕河务水利同知，皖南建德周学海识于秦邮工次。
*Pingwen Neijing* (Commentary on the Inner Canon). The *Suwen* (Basic Questions) consists of eighty-one chapters divided into twenty-four volumes, a division made by Wang Bing (courtesy name Qixuan) of the Tang Dynasty. The *Lingshu* (Spiritual Pivot) also consists of eighty-one chapters but is divided into twelve volumes; it is traditionally believed that this division was also made by Wang Bing. Some say it was divided by Shi Song of the Song Dynasty. This has lost the ancient meaning of the "nine-nine" numerical principle. The lost chapters were transmitted to Liu Wenshu in the Song Dynasty, and the world subsequently claimed that Liu Wenshu forged them, which is incorrect. It is likely that before Liu Wenshu, these chapters were composed by scholars studying Wang Bing's teachings; initially, they might not have dared to arrogantly supplement the classics, but claiming them as lost chapters was indeed Liu Wenshu's fault. However, since the sacred scriptures are gradually being obliterated, old texts that remain, regardless of their authenticity, are all worthy of cherishing. Therefore, attaching them to the canon for transmission should not be severely criticized.
The chapters such as the *Dalun* (Great Treatise) do not exist in the ancient versions of the *Neijing*. Wang Bing merged the chapter counts of the *Neijing* and took these chapters to enrich the text. Later generations, citing Zhang Zhongjing's mention of the "Yin-Yang Great Treatise," believe these are the same, which should not be wrong. There are those who denounce them as forgeries. Since the *Dalun* was praised by Zhang Zhongjing, although it is not the original text of the *Neijing*, it must be viewed from the perspective of the profound essence of the ancient sages. Attached to the scripture for transmission, it ensures that Wang Bing's merit is not forgotten; how can it be slandered? Thus, in the present day, still being able to see the texts of the *Dalun* and lost chapters is largely due to the efforts of these two gentlemen. The *Lingshu* suffers from even more severe omissions and losses. Shi Song took the text from Huangfu Mi's (courtesy name Shian) *Zhenjiu Jiayi Jing* (Systematic Classic of Acupuncture and Moxibustion) to supplement it, which is also out of deep affection for ancient texts and a lofty intention to benefit the world.
Moreover, regarding the loss of ancient books, one often consults the bibliographies of various dynasties and finds that less than one or two percent survive in the world. Works that gathered a lifetime of mental effort, having been praised in their time and listed in the records of historians, still cannot be transmitted forever; what need is there to discuss others? People of later generations ought to feel an overwhelming sense of regret. Instead, they slander without restraint, sparing no effort, as if they would only be satisfied if these books ceased to exist in the world. What is the purpose of such thinking?
Now, I have selected the full texts of these two classics for commentary. I fully realize my scholarship is shallow and unworthy of attention, but perhaps people in the world will understand my intentions. Nevertheless, living in this era, failing to promote moral influence and heroic deeds, and failing to surpass the great men of antiquity, yet limiting oneself to counting lines and ink [pedantic study], while bowing one's head and shoulders, bending one's waist, and staring blankly seeking understanding from unknown persons—is this not extremely trivial and petty? Reflecting on myself, can I not feel ashamed and embarrassed?
Gao Shou Tongyi Daifu (Grand Master of Enlightenment and Disciplinary Official), Jinshi degree granted, Third Rank, Acting Prefect awaiting appointment, Tongzhi (Assistant Prefect) of Grain, Police, River Affairs, and Water Conservancy in Yangzhou Prefecture, Jiangnan; Zhou Xuehai of Jiande, Wannan, recorded at the official station in Qin You.