，脾若不能磨食，则消化之具，何以脾列其内，非彼之所自为者乎。德贞氏悯中国之无良医
，而欲中国立剖验之馆，用心良浓。不知中国古昔未尝不行此术。太素有云∶若夫八尺之土
，皮肉在此外，生可度量切循而得，死可解剖而视。下文即继之以人之所以参天地而应阴阳
，不可不察。古圣惟不专讲解剖，是以医学得诣于至极。西医之短，即在其守旧不变，吾知
西医居
人身阴阳，无判然各具之理，阴阳虽分左右，而左亦有阴，右亦有阳，故经言左右者阴
阳之道路，不言左者阳之道路，右者阴之道路。大抵肝木自左生心火而上升，心火克右之肺
金协胃而下降，胃亦金也。管子左者出者也，右者入者也，正与此合。水生其木，而肾之真
阴偏位乎左，以坎为阴中之阳也。火生其土，而肾之真阳偏位乎右，以离为阳中之阴也。盖
生土者命火，而克土以腐熟水谷者，少阳之木火。肝与胆皆木也，故弦为肝胆两经之脉，而
皆见于寸口左关。近世西医有肝右之说，而中医亦从而和之，于义实无所取。且肝亦何尝居
右也，肝居脊之正中，而胆藏其右叶，则左叶自当为肝之正体。天地之道，左阳而右阴，肝
得少阳生气，亦必左出而右入。诊肝脉于右关则谬矣。周慎斋主肝右者也，云一人病左胁痛
，后传之右当不起，痛传于右，邪入脏矣。噫，岂其然乎！？胁痛在右者比比，未闻一痛即
死。此必其人肝病已深，移右而并戕其胆，生机全灭，故即不起。伤寒论循衣摸床、微喘、
直视，云脉弦者生，涩者死。非以弦为有生机乎。又有以右胁痛为肺病者，肺居膈上，胁非
其部，亦未闻小柴胡汤不治右胁痞硬也。郑氏康成驳说文云∶今医病之法，以肝为木，心为
火，脾为土，肺为金，肾为水，则有瘳。若反其术，不死为剧。郑氏以儒而知医，此可为医
者当头
民非水火不生活，人身五行亦惟水火尤贵。经云∶一水不胜二火。所谓一水者，先天肾
脏之水也，坎中一画为阳，火即生于其中，与后天木火为二。水阴也，火阳也，阴静而阳动
。人之动作云为，全赖乎火，经所以有君火相火之名也。自来医家，于此二义，各执一说，
纷纭莫定。或以君火属命门，或以相火属心包络，或以君火专属肝肾，或以相火专属三焦，
或谓君火生右尺相火，或谓相火为元气之贼，不知其于经旨实悖也。经云∶君火以明，相火
以位。王注谓∶君火在相火之右，不主岁运。相火守位以禀命。君相二字本不费解，盖犹人
君端拱而无为，相臣协赞以宣力，故一主岁运，一不主岁运。然则君火果何指也。经云∶圣
人南面而立，前曰广明，后曰太冲，太冲之地，名曰少阴。以南面与太冲之义揆之，少阴自
当谓足经。相火果何指也。经云∶少阳之上，相火主之。少阳亦当谓足经。虽然，肾为坎水
，而其所藏之火，实与心之离火相应。心以肾为体，肾以心为用。君火实兼手少阴心，视守
位禀命之相火，则大有不同。故少阴之上，热气主之，不言火气主之。火气以少阳主之者，
明乎其为臣也，非火与热有二也。夫君火兼有两经，未尝专属心。相火亦兼有两经，自以三
焦配胆。或疑六经惟三焦不言何火，心包络不言何火。心包络非君火，三焦安得为相火。曰
∶三焦主出纳，主腐熟水谷，皆火之所为。其火即少阳木火也。心包络乃心之宫城，专于卫
心，主权不属，然其托体甚高，亦不下济相火，故君火相火两无所与也。前人惟张戴人识此
意，曰∶人之心肾为君火，三焦胆为相火。王宇泰采入证治准绳消瘅门，不知戴人尚有论否
。赵养葵偏见之重，与戴人同，其识高之处，亦有可节取者。赵以命门火为水中之火，君主
之火。谓应事接物者心，栖真养息者肾。肾尤重于心。赵虽未知手足少阴皆为君主之义，论
亦前后不符，而此数语，却暗与经合。试更为引伸以足之∶先天之火，有南面之尊，安得不
为君火，惟恃有应务接物之心，故得以栖真养息。火则同出一源，故同为君火。至赵用八味
丸治多病，不可为训。而八味丸补水中之火，则是正方。盖水中之火，不宜偏用阳药，有桂
附必得有萸地。若肾中中有寒邪，则宜以姜附驱邪，如四逆汤之类。恐水中之火出而相拒，
则加胆汁人尿以靖之，不加壮水药。此仲圣本经立方之旨也。后人用其方，而并得其旨者盖
寡。证治准绳发热门，肾虚火不归经，用十全大补汤吞八味丸一段，王氏谓水中之火不可以
水折，故巴蜀有火井焉，得水则炽，得火则熄。桂附固治相火之正药也，以桂附为正药而譬
之巴蜀火井，则其于水中之火之治法，犹未深知。岂忘乎十全大补之有归地，八味之有萸地
乎。相火关乎人身之重，犹国之重赖乎相，盖其秉东方甲木之气，人身得之，则四时皆春，
生机不息，经之言少火即此火。肝则非其比也，肝为厥阴，厥阴之尽，主疏泄而下降。人或
以相火属之，由其视相火为肾火也。夫阴阳之道诚难言耳，以心与肾较，则肾火主静，而心
火主动；以心肾与胆三焦较，则君火主静，而相火主动。君火所以属少阴者，照四方而神蕴
乎内也；相火所以属少阳者，生万物而功普于外也。经之所已言者，吾以文绎之；经之所未
言者，吾以意逆之。庶乎其不至逞臆说而失真理也。
素问以工不知标本为妄行，而标本之属不一，自启元子注天元纪大论，以三阴三阳为标
，寒暑燥湿风火为本，而后世奉为金科玉律，实乃大误，不容不辨也。夫阴阳者，无形之六
气，六气者有形之阴阳，绝无分于上下，安得别之为标本。经之言曰∶寒暑燥湿风火，天之
阴阳也，三阴三阳上奉之。明明以寒暑燥湿风火，指为三阴三阳，对下下应而言，故曰上奉
。又曰∶积阳为天，积阴为地。天地且阴阳之所积。若论标本，阴阳不更为本乎。窃尝统览
全经，凡言标本，皆判若两物，敢以经文一言蔽之曰不同。肾与肺，病与工，先病与后病，
其不同之显著者不具论。少阳之右，阳明治之云云，此申明左右有纪，以不同之间气为标也
。少阳之右，火气治之云云，此申明上下有位，以不同之六承气为标也。按此两言气之标，
皆不同于本。故下结以本标不同，气应异象两语。若空说本不同标，标不同本，何至有此骈
枝。不同二字，自须着眼。其次一气之标，词句佶屈，罕得其旨。高士宗素问直解，以六气
为上一位，中见为中一位，三阴三阳为下一位。阴阳六气，本属一家，乃擘分两下，杂入中
气于中，可发一噱。亦足征王注之误人，其弊必至于此。玩所谓本也一句，不着于中见阳明
之上，而着于其下，尚得撇中气于本外乎。着气之标一句于见之下，尚得谓标气不在中见之
下乎。中见与本，因互为表里，故俱得为本。不能无表里之分，故中见为本之下。本之下，
中之见两句，义盖如是。在见之下者，则舍六承气而奚属。观新校正以此与六承气一节，均
引六元正纪大论为证，亦隐然见及之矣。或曰∶厥阴之上，风气主之，风气在厥阴之上，故
厥阴为标。不知此上字，犹蔡邕独断所谓上者尊位所在也，与上下之上有别。不然，子午之
岁，上见少阴，何以不云下见少阴。子午之上，少阴主之，何以不云热气主之。观所谓本也
是谓六元，两句连下，厥阴之上风气主之等句，亦两句连下，本字兼顶三阴三阳，玩味之即
见。王氏惟误认标本，故其注至真要大论也，强名其标本之同异，以阴为寒，阳为热，有本
末同，本末异之说。天地造化之机，其阴阳错综，难以迹求。少阳太阴，看似本末同矣，而
甲木与乙木同气，厥阴非阳，己土与戊土同气，阳明非阴，同之中暗藏有异。少阴太阳，看
似本末异矣，而肾水亦阴，小肠火亦阳，异之中兼寓有同。况经有六而以寒热概之，标本多
寡相悬，且绝无界画可守，恐无此颟顸之经文。历考医集以表里先后之类分标本者，皆灿若
列眉，不稍淆混。依王说列六经标本，则皆意为分隶，按之各家，互有出入，信乎王说之不
可为典要也。然则六气标本所从不同者何谓也？曰∶此一语是冒下总纲，下即申明不同之故
与所从之何气，又继之以从本者化生于本云云，明乎其从之为化生，非病之化生。下文百病
之起一节，乃是说到病生，经文何等明显。盖本犹主也，中犹宾也，标则亦本亦主而未有定
分者也。是故从本则中气从本，从中则本气从中。推之从标亦然。犹主宾之相为酬酢，而他
人不与焉者也。自专以人身之病言，而论者偶触一事，遂诩心得，并不统会全文。如刘潜江
以葛根起阴气为从太阴行化，合阳明从中气之义。是葛根之从，非本文之所谓从。陆九芝以
湿温为阳明生于中气之病，治以苍术白虎。不特仲圣湿温无此说，即许叔微之论贼邪亦不然
。至他病之从生，律以此而不合，与厥阴亦当有中气病，则两家皆置不议矣。素问言从言化
生，不可胜数，而此一节论者咸以病求，总缘未明标义。余盖于此又得一标本相反之旨焉。
相反者不同之极，亦不同也。何以言之？六气中从本从标者，止少阴太阳。少阴一脏，兼具
水火，自反者也。而中气太阳之水，又与少阴之火反。太阳水也，而中气少阴兼具水火，自
反者也，其火与太阳之水又反。其余四气，则皆木火相生，土金相生，欲不以反为标义得乎
。且此义经又明告之矣。曰∶病反其本，中标之病；治反其本，中标之方。按所从以化生言
，故从标者止少阴太阳。此以病言，统乎六气，故反乎本即为标，如间气六承气皆是。乃王
注言少阴太阴二气，余四气标本同。既以二气为反，独不思二气之反，是水火本具之反，非
恍惚无凭之反。王氏意中，惟横一悬拟之标本，故既不知反之概乎六气，而将四气除去，又
并二气之本相反者而故昧之。处处欲伸其说，实处处自贡其瑕。顾余则因而参考前后，得以
四通六辟，亦王氏之启余也。其木火相生，土金相生，而一则从母，一则从子者奈何？陈修
园谓木从火化，燥从水化，是矣。但天气不加君火，而相火禀君之命以守位，不能为木所化
。土位中央，有面南之尊，不能为金所化。要之皆相从而后生者也。其从标而有取于相反者
奈何？水与火势均力敌而不容偏废。壮水之主，则阳光以镇。益火之原，则阴翳以消。相反
之中，实有相济之妙。故进则为主，亦退则为宾。不能专从标，而或则从本，或则从标。经
文又煞有斟酌如是。或曰∶王氏训标为末，本诸说文，不当创为别解。曰∶末者名也，不同
则征以实，反又不同之所推而极之，皆末之一义所引伸也，岂戾古哉。抑王氏尤有误者，本
标不同，气应异象之下，王注标者病之始。本标不同，所以气应异象，下句方以病言，标有
何病，本又何以不病。况先病为本，后病为标，经之明训。何反以病始为标。阮氏经籍 诂
引之，亦未之深考矣。素问之有训诂，权舆于全元起，而今不复见，学人多宗王氏。王氏释
经之功，自不可没；而其 驳，则亦往往而有。自宋而后，注家每有是正，独标本无疵之者
。不揆 昧，窃拟斯篇，愿与学人共商之。（此余旧作素问标本王注辨，今复加研核，似尚
无漏义，故录存之。）
徐洄溪、陈修园，皆尊信本经与仲圣之至者。徐谓神农为开天之圣人，实能探造化之精，
万
自谓探本溯源，发其所以然之义。所着伤寒论类方，自谓于方之精思妙用，一一注明，发其
所以然之故。陈谓药性始于神农，不读本草经，如作制艺不知题在四书。仲圣集群圣之大成
，即儒门之孔子。又其所着本草经读，自谓透发其所以然之妙，求与仲圣书字字吻合。今按
二家之书，于本经皆止顺文敷衍，于仲圣方皆止知大意。徐虽较胜于陈，而不能实践其言则
一也。试姑举人参一物以明之。小柴胡汤，胸中烦而不呕者，去半夏人参，加栝萎实一枚。
徐注云∶不呕不必用半夏，烦不可用人参，栝蒌实除胸痹，此小陷胸之法。按心烦喜呕为少
阳本证，或烦而不呕，则方有加减。观心烦喜呕之用参，即可知参之去，为烦而不呕。不呕
自无需半夏，故以去半夏人参并言之。盖呕则胸中之邪，不至于窒，若不呕而用参，则更闭
其邪，故去参而加以荡胸之栝蒌实。徐以不呕与烦拆讲，又但知别录栝蒌实主胸痹，而不知
证之何以胸痹，故其注语全不中肯。况柴胡加龙骨牡蛎汤，烦而有参，柴胡桂枝干姜汤，烦
而不呕无参，不可参观而得之邪。陈谓桂枝加生姜芍药新加汤，特提出沉迟二字，以辨身痛
不是余邪，乃营血凝滞作痛，故以人参借姜桂之力，增芍药领入营分以通之。不知仲圣云∶
沉者营气微也。又云∶迟者营气不足，血少故也。人参入营生脉有专能，故以脉沉迟，明加
人参之故，岂以为营血凝滞之故。又谓四逆汤，通脉四逆汤俱不加参，虑阴柔之品，反减姜
附之力。而论中有四逆加人参汤者，以其利止亡血而加之也。茯苓四逆少佐以人参者，以烦
如果脾脏不能磨碎食物，那么消化的器官，为什么脾脏列在其中呢？这难道不是它们自身的作用吗？德贞氏怜悯中国没有良医，想要在中国建立解剖验证的馆舍，用心确实深厚。但他不知道中国古代并非没有实行过这种技术。《太素》中说：对于八尺高的躯体，皮肉在外表，活着时可以度量、切按、循摸而获得知识，死后可以解剖而观察。下文紧接着就说人之所以能参赞天地并顺应阴阳，是不可不考察的。古代圣人只是不专门讲解剖，所以医学得以达到极高的境界。西医的短处，就在于墨守成规不知变通。我知道西医看待人身上的阴阳，没有明白各自具有独立的道理。虽然阴阳左右分开，但左边也有阴，右边也有阳，所以《内经》说“左右者，阴阳之道路也”，而不说“左者，阳之道路；右者，阴之道路”。大抵肝木从左边生发，心火上升，心火克制右边的肺金，协同胃气下降，胃也属金。《管子》说左边是出，右边是入，正与此相合。水生木，而肾中的真阴偏居于左侧，因为坎卦是阴中之阳。火生土，而肾中的真阳偏居于右侧，因为离卦是阳中之阴。大概生成土的是命门之火，而克制土以腐熟水谷的，是少阳的木火。肝与胆都属木，所以弦脉是肝胆两经的脉象，且都出现在寸口脉的左关部。近代西医有肝脏在右边的说法，中医也有人附和它，这在义理上其实没有什么可取的。况且肝脏又何尝居住在右边呢？肝脏位于脊柱的正中，而胆囊藏于其右叶，那么左叶自然应当是肝脏的正体。天地的规律，左边属阳，右边属阴，肝脏得到少阳的生发之气，也必然向左生出并向右进入。如果在右关诊察肝脉，那就是错误的了。周慎斋主张肝脏在右边，他说一个人左边胁肋痛，后来传到右边就不能痊愈了，疼痛传到右边，邪气就进入脏腑了。唉，难道真是这样吗？！右边胁肋痛的比比皆是，没听说一痛就死的。这一定是那人的肝病已经很深，病邪传至右边并伤害了胆，生机完全灭绝，所以才不能痊愈。《伤寒论》中提到循衣摸床、微喘、直视的症状，说脉弦的能活，脉涩的死。这不是认为弦脉代表有生机吗？又有把右边胁肋痛当作肺病的，肺脏位于膈肌之上，胁肋不是它的部位，也没听说过小柴胡汤不治疗右边胁肋痞硬的情况。郑康成驳斥《说文解字》说：现在的医生治病，如果把肝当作木，心当作火，脾当作土，肺当作金，肾当作水，病就能好。如果反过来这样做，不死也会病情加重。郑氏以儒家的身份来了解医学，这话可以作为医生的当头棒喝。
百姓如果没有水火就无法生活，人身上的五行也只有水火最为珍贵。《内经》说：一水不胜二火。所谓的一水，是指先天的肾脏之水，坎卦中间的一画为阳，火就生于其中，这与后天的木火成为二种。水是阴，火是阳，阴静而阳动。人的动作行为，全赖乎火，所以《内经》才有君火、相火的名目。自古以来的医家，对于这两种含义，各执一词，纷乱不定。有的人把君火归属于命门，有的人把相火归属于心包络，有的人把君火专属归属于肝肾，有的人把相火专属归属于三焦，有的人说君火生于右尺，相火生于左尺，有的人说相火是元气的贼寇，不知道这些观点实际上都违背了《内经》的宗旨。《内经》说：君火以明，相火以位。王冰注解说：君火在相火的右边，不主司岁运。相火坚守本位以禀受命令。君、相两个字本来不难理解，大概就像君主端坐拱手而无为而治，宰相大臣协助赞助以宣达效力，所以一个主司岁运，一个不主司岁运。既然这样，那么君火究竟指什么呢？《内经》说：圣人面南而立，前面叫广明，后面叫太冲，太冲的地方，名叫少阴。以南面和太冲的意义来推究，少阴自然应当指足经。相火究竟指什么呢？《内经》说：少阳之上，相火主之。少阳也应当指足经。虽然如此，肾为坎水，而它所藏的火，实在与心的离火相应。心以肾为体，肾以心为用。君火实际上兼管手少阴心经，与那些坚守本位禀受命令的相火，大有不同。所以在少阴之上，说是热气主之，不说火气主之。火气是由少阳主司的，明确表明它是臣属，并不是火与热有两种。既然君火兼有两经，未曾专属心经。相火也兼有两经，自然以三焦配胆。有人怀疑六经中唯独三焦不言是何火，心包络不言是何火。心包络不是君火，三焦怎么能为相火呢？回答说：三焦主出纳，主腐熟水谷，都是火的作用。这火就是少阳的木火。心包络是心的宫城，专门保卫心脏，主权不属于它，然而它托身的位置很高，也不向下济助相火，所以君火和相火都与它无关。前人只有张戴人认识到这个意思，说：人的心肾为君火，三焦胆为相火。王宇泰将其采录入《证治准绳》消瘅门，不知道戴人还有论述否。赵养葵偏见很重，与戴人相同，他见识高明的地方，也有可取之处。赵氏认为命门之火是水中之火，是君主之火。认为应对事物接触万物的是心，栖息真气保养气息的是肾。肾尤其重于心。赵氏虽然不知道手足少阴皆为君主的意思，论述前后也不相符，但这几句话，却暗合于经文。试再加以引申来补足它：先天的火，有面南的尊贵地位，怎么能不是君火，只依靠那应事接物的心，才得以栖息真气保养气息。火则同出一源，所以同为君火。至于赵氏用八味丸治疗多种疾病，不可以作为典范。而八味丸补补水中之火，则是正确的方剂。大概水中之火，不宜偏用阳药，有了桂枝、附子必须有山茱萸、地黄。如果肾中有寒邪，则适宜用干姜、附子驱除邪气，如四逆汤之类。恐怕水中之火出来而相互排斥，则加入胆汁、人尿来安抚它，不加壮水药。这是张仲圣根据经文立方的宗旨。后人使用他的方子，而同时得到他宗旨的人大概很少。《证治准绳》发热门，肾虚火不归经，用十全大补汤吞服八味丸一段，王氏说水中之火不可以用水折服，所以巴蜀有火井，得水则燃烧更旺，得火则熄灭。桂枝、附子固然是治疗相火的正药，拿桂枝、附子作为正药来比喻巴蜀火井，那么对于水中之火的治疗方法，还是没有深入知晓。难道是忘记了十全大补汤中有当归、地黄，八味丸中有山茱萸、地黄吗？相火关乎人身的重要，如同国家重要依赖于宰相，大概因为它秉受东方甲木之气，人身得到它，则四季都是春天，生机不息，《内经》所说的少火就是此火。肝则不是这样的，肝为厥阴，厥阴的尽头，主疏泄而下降。有人把相火归属于它，是因为他把相火看作肾火。阴阳的道理确实难以言说啊，用心与肾比较，则肾火主静，而心火主动；用心肾与胆、三焦比较，则君火主静，而相火主动。君火所以归属于少阴，是因为照耀四方而神机蕴藏在内部；相火所以归属于少阳，是因为生养万物而功效普及于外部。经文已经说过的，我用文义来解释它；经文没有说过的，我用心意去推测它。差不多就不会逞强发表主观臆断的说法而失去真理了。
《素问》认为工匠不知道标本就是妄行，而标本的种类不一，自从启元子（王冰）注解《天元纪大论》，把三阴三阳作为标，寒暑燥湿风火作为本，而后世奉为金科玉律，实在是大大的错误，不容不辨明。阴阳，是无形的六气；六气，是有形的阴阳，绝无分别上下，怎么能把它们分别称为标本呢？经文说：寒暑燥湿风火，是天的阴阳，三阴三阳在上面承奉它。明明是把寒暑燥湿风火，指为三阴三阳，对着下面相对应来说，所以说上面承奉。又说：积阳为天，积阴为地。天地尚且是阴阳所积聚的。如果论标本，阴阳不更是根本吗？我私下曾统览全经，凡是言及标本，都像判若两样东西，敢用经文一句话概括说：不同。肾与肺，病与工，先病与后病，它们不同的显著情况不必具论。少阳的右边，由阳明治理等等，这是申明左右有纲纪，以不同的间气作为标。少阳的右边，由火气治理等等，这是申明上下有位次，以不同的六承气作为标。按照这两句话讲气的标，都与本不同。所以下面总结为本标不同，气应异象两句话。如果空谈本不同标，标不同本，何至于有这样的赘余。不同二字，自然必须着眼。其次一气之标，词句曲折难懂，很少能得到旨意。高士宗《素问直解》，把六气作为上一位，中见为中一位，三阴三阳为下一位。阴阳六气，本来属于一家，竟然劈开分作两下，杂入中气于中间，足以让人发笑。这也足以证明王注误导人，弊端必定到了这种地步。玩味所谓本也一句，不着在于中见阳明之上，而着在于其下，还能撇开中气在本之外吗？着气之标一句于见之下，还能说标气不在中见之下吗？中见与本，因为互为表里，所以都得为本。不能没有表里的区分，所以中见在本之下。本之下，中之见两句，大意就是这样。在见之下的，除了六承气还归属什么呢？看新校正以此与六承气一节，都引用《六元正纪大论》为证据，也隐约见到了这一点。有人说：厥阴之上，风气主之，风气在厥阴之上，所以厥阴为标。不知道这个上字，就像蔡邕《独断》所说上者尊位所在也，与上下之上有区别。不然的话，子午之年，上见少阴，为什么不云下见少阴。子午之上，少阴主之，为什么不云热气主之。看所谓本也，是谓六元，两句连下，厥阴之上风气主之等句，也是两句连下，本字兼顶三阴三阳，玩味它就能看见。王氏只是误认标本，所以他在注解《至真要大论》时，强行命名其标本的同异，以阴为寒，阳为热，有本末同，本末异的说法。天地造化的机理，其阴阳错综复杂，难以用痕迹求索。少阳太阴，看似本末同了，而甲木与乙木同气，厥阴非阳，己土与戊土同气，阳明非阴，同之中暗藏有异。少阴太阳，看似本末异了，而肾水亦阴，小肠火亦阳，异之中兼寓有同。何况经文有六而以寒热一概而论，标本多寡相差悬殊，而且绝无界限可以遵守，恐怕没有这样糊涂的经文。历考医集以表里先后之类分标本的，都清晰得像陈列在眉毛前一样，毫不混淆。依照王说排列六经标本，则都是随意分隶，参照各家，互有出入，信乎王说的不可作为典要啊。既然这样，那么六气标本所从不同的是什么意思呢？回答说：这一句话是冒下总纲，下面即申明不同的缘故与所从的是什么气，又继之以从本者化生于本等等，明确那是从之为化生，不是病的化生。下文百病之起一节，乃是说到病生，经文何等明显。大概本犹如主，中犹如宾，标则亦本亦主而未有定分。所以从本则中气从本，从中则本气从中。推之从标亦然。犹如主宾互相酬酢，而他人不参与。自专以人身之病言，而论者偶然触动一事，便夸耀心得，并不统会全文。如刘潜江以葛根起阴气为从太阴行化，合阳明从中气之义。是葛根的从，不是本文所说的从。陆九芝以湿温为阳明生于中气之病，治疗用苍术白虎。不仅仲圣湿温没有这种说法，就是许叔微论贼邪也不是这样。至于其他病的从生，用这个标准衡量就不符合，与厥阴也应当有中气病，则两家都置之不议了。《素问》言从言化生，不可胜数，而这一节论者都以病求，总缘未明标义。我在此又得到一个标本相反的宗旨：相反是不同的极致，也是不同。为什么呢？六气中从本从标的，只有少阴太阳。少阴一脏，兼具水火，是自反的。而中气太阳的水，又与少阴的火相反。太阳是水，而中气少阴兼具水火，是自反的，它的火与太阳的水又相反。其余四气，则是木火相生，土金相生，不想以反为标义能行吗？况且这个意义经文又明确告知了。说：病反其本，中标之病；治反其本，中标之方。按所从以化生言，所以从标的只有少阴太阳。这是以病言，统乎六气，所以反乎本即为标，如间气六承气皆是。乃王注言少阴太阴二气，其余四气标本同。既以二气为反，独不思二气的反，是水火本具的反，不是恍惚无凭的反。王氏意中，惟横一悬拟的标本，所以既不知反的概乎六气，又将四气除去，又并二气之本相反者而故意忽视。处处想伸张其说，实处处自己暴露瑕疵。而我则因此参考前后，得以四通六辟，这也是王氏启发我的。那木火相生，土金相生，而一则从母，一则从子的原因是什么呢？陈修园说木从火化，燥从水化，是对的。但天气不加君火，而相火禀受君之命以守位，不能为木所化。土位中央，有面南的尊贵，不能为金所化。总之都是相从而后生的。那从标而有取于相反的原因是什么呢？水与火势均力敌而不容偏废。壮水之主，则阳光以镇。益火之原，则阴翳以消。相反之中，实有相济的妙处。所以进则为主，退则为宾。不能专从标，或者从本，或者从标。经文又煞有斟酌如此。有人说：王氏训标为末，依据《说文》，不应当创为别解。回答说：末者是名，不同则征以实，反又是不相同的推演到极致，都是末之一义的引申，难道违背古义吗？另外王氏更有错误的，本标不同，气应异象之下，王注标者病之始。本标不同，所以气应异象，下句才以病言，标有什么病，本又为什么不病。况且先病为本，后病为标，经文的明确教导。为何反以病始为标。阮氏《经籍诂》引用它，也没有深入考证。《素问》的训诂，起始于全元起，而今不复见到，学人多宗法王氏。王氏解释经文的功劳，自然不可埋没；而其谬误，也往往有。自宋以后，注家每有纠正，唯独标本没有批评的。不顾愚昧，私下拟定这篇，愿与学人共同商讨。（这是我旧作《素问标本王注辨》，现在重新加研核，似乎还没有遗漏义理，所以录存它。）
徐洄溪、陈修园，都是尊信《本经》与仲圣至极的人。徐谓神农是开天的圣人，确实能探求造化的精微，自称探本溯源，发挥其所以然的义理。所著《伤寒论类方》，自称对方剂的精思妙用，一一注明，发挥其所以然的原因。陈谓药性始于神农，不读《本草经》，就像作制艺不知道题目在四书中。仲圣集群圣之大成，就是儒门的孔子。又他所著《本草经读》，自称透发其所以然的妙处，求与仲圣书字字吻合。现在考察二家的书，对于《本经》都只是顺文敷衍，对于仲圣方都只是知大意。徐虽然较胜于陈，但不能实践其言论则是一样的。试姑举人参一物来阐明。小柴胡汤，胸中烦而不呕的，去掉半夏、人参，加栝萎实一枚。徐注说：不呕不必用半夏，烦不可用人参，栝蒌实除胸痹，这是小陷胸的方法。按心烦喜呕为少阳本证，或烦而不呕，则方有加减。观心烦喜呕的用参，即可知参的去，是为烦而不呕。不呕自然无需半夏，所以以去半夏人参并言之。大概呕则胸中之邪，不至于窒塞，若不呕而用参，则更加闭塞其邪，所以去参而加上荡涤胸膈的栝蒌实。徐以不呕与烦拆讲，又只知道《别录》栝蒌实主胸痹，而不知道证何以胸痹，所以他的注语全不中肯。况且柴胡加龙骨牡蛎汤，烦而有参，柴胡桂枝干姜汤，烦而不呕无参，不可参观而得知吗？陈谓桂枝加生姜芍药新加汤，特提出沉迟二字，以辨身痛不是余邪，乃营血凝滞作痛，所以以人参借姜桂之力，增芍药领入营分以通之。不知道仲圣说：沉者营气微也。又说：迟者营气不足，血少故也。人参入营生脉有专长，所以以脉沉迟，明加人参的缘故，岂认为是营血凝滞的缘故。又谓四逆汤，通脉四逆汤都不加参，担心阴柔之品，反而减少姜附之力。而论中有四逆加人参汤的，以其利止亡血而加之也。茯苓四逆少佐以人参的，以烦
If the Spleen cannot grind food, then regarding the organs of digestion, why is the Spleen listed among them? Is this not their own function? De Zhen pitied China for lacking good physicians and wished to establish anatomical verification halls in China; his intention was indeed profound. However, he did not know that ancient China had practiced this technique. *Tai Su* states: "For an eight-chi tall body, skin and flesh are on the outside; when alive, one can measure, palpate, and trace to obtain knowledge; when dead, one can dissect and observe." The following text immediately continues by stating that humans, who can assist Heaven and Earth and respond to Yin and Yang, must not fail to investigate. Ancient sages merely did not specialize in explaining anatomy, thus allowing medicine to reach its utmost perfection. The shortcoming of Western medicine lies in its adherence to old ways without change. I know that Western medicine fails to understand the principle that Yin and Yang in the human body possess distinct independence. Although Yin and Yang are divided left and right, there is Yin on the left and Yang on the right; therefore, the Classics state, "The left and right are the pathways of Yin and Yang," and do not say, "The left is the pathway of Yang, the right is the pathway of Yin." Generally speaking, Liver Wood generates from the left, Heart Fire rises, Heart Fire controls Lung Metal on the right, assisting Stomach Qi to descend, and the Stomach also belongs to Metal. *Guanzi* states that the left is exit and the right is entry, which aligns perfectly with this. Water generates Wood, but the True Yin of the Kidney resides偏 (predominantly) on the left, because Kan represents Yang within Yin. Fire generates Earth, but the True Yang of the Kidney resides偏 (predominantly) on the right, because Li represents Yin within Yang. Essentially, the Fire of the Mingmen generates Earth, while the Wood-Fire of Shaoyang controls Earth to rot and cook water and grain. Both Liver and Gallbladder belong to Wood; thus, the Wiry pulse is the pulse of both the Liver and Gallbladder meridians, appearing at the Left Guan position of the Cun Kou pulse. In modern times, some Western doctors have claimed the Liver is on the right, and some Chinese doctors have echoed them, which has no real theoretical basis. Moreover, how could the Liver reside on the right? The Liver is located at the center of the spine, while the Gallbladder stores its right lobe; thus, the left lobe should naturally be the true form of the Liver. The way of Heaven and Earth is Yang on the left and Yin on the right. The Liver receives the generating Qi of Shaoyang and must necessarily emerge to the left and enter to the right. Diagnosing the Liver pulse at the Right Guan would be erroneous. Zhou Shenzhou advocated that the Liver is on the right, saying, "If a person suffers pain in the left hypochondrium, which later spreads to the right, they will not recover. Pain spreading to the right means the pathogen has entered the Zang organs." Alas, is this really so? Hypochondriac pain on the right is common, yet no one dies immediately upon feeling it. This must be because the person's Liver disease was already deep, the pathogen transmitted to the right and damaged the Gallbladder, extinguishing all vitality, hence death ensued. In *Shanghan Lun*, regarding symptoms like grasping at clothes and beds, slight panting, and fixed gaze, it says those with a Wiry pulse survive, while those with a Choppy pulse die. Does this not imply that the Wiry pulse signifies vitality? Some consider right-sided hypochondriac pain as Lung disease. The Lung resides above the diaphragm, and the hypochondrium is not its region; furthermore, it is unheard of that Xiao Chai Hu Tang does not treat right-sided hypochondriac fullness and hardness. Zheng Kangcheng refuted *Shuowen Jiezi*, stating: "Current medical practice treats Liver as Wood, Heart as Fire, Spleen as Earth, Lung as Metal, and Kidney as Water, and the illness will heal. If one reverses this method, death or severe illness will result." Zheng, a Confucian scholar who understood medicine, offered these words as a wake-up call for physicians.
People cannot live without Water and Fire; among the Five Elements in the human body, Water and Fire are the most precious. The Classics state: "One Water cannot overcome Two Fires." The so-called "One Water" refers to the Water of the congenital Kidneys; the single Yang line in the middle of Kan indicates that Fire is born within it, forming two distinct entities alongside postnatal Wood and Fire. Water is Yin, Fire is Yang; Yin is still, Yang is active. Human movement and action rely entirely on Fire, hence the terms Jun Fire (Monarch Fire) and Xiang Fire (Minister Fire) in the Classics. Physicians throughout history have held divergent views on these two concepts, leading to confusion. Some attribute Jun Fire to the Mingmen, others to the Pericardium; some restrict Jun Fire to the Liver and Kidney, others to the Sanjiao; some claim Jun Fire generates from the Right Chi position while Xiang Fire generates from the Left Chi; others argue Xiang Fire is the thief of Yuan Qi. All these views contradict the intent of the Classics. The Classics state: "Jun Fire illuminates, Xiang Fire maintains its position." Wang Bing's commentary notes: "Jun Fire is to the right of Xiang Fire and does not govern the annual climate. Xiang Fire guards its position to receive orders." The characters Jun and Xiang are not difficult to understand; they are akin to a monarch sitting upright and acting through non-action, while ministers assist and exert effort. Thus, one governs the annual climate, and the other does not. So, what exactly does Jun Fire refer to? The Classics state: "The sage stands facing south; the front is called Guangming, the back is called Taichong. The place of Taichong is named Shaoyin." Based on the meaning of facing south and Taichong, Shaoyin should refer to the Foot Meridians. What exactly does Xiang Fire refer to? The Classics state: "Above Shaoyang, Xiang Fire governs." Shaoyang should also refer to the Foot Meridians. Nevertheless, the Kidney is Kan Water, yet the Fire it stores corresponds to the Li Fire of the Heart. The Heart takes the Kidney as its substance, and the Kidney takes the Heart as its function. Jun Fire actually encompasses the Hand Shaoyin Heart Meridian, which is vastly different from the Xiang Fire that guards its position and receives orders. Therefore, above Shaoyin, it is stated that Heat Qi governs, not Fire Qi. Fire Qi is governed by Shaoyang, clearly indicating its ministerial status; this does not mean there are two types of Fire and Heat. Since Jun Fire encompasses two meridians and is not exclusive to the Heart, Xiang Fire also encompasses two meridians, naturally pairing the Sanjiao with the Gallbladder. Some doubt that among the Six Meridians, only the Sanjiao does not specify which Fire, and the Pericardium does not specify which Fire. If the Pericardium is not Jun Fire, how can the Sanjiao be Xiang Fire? The answer is: The Sanjiao governs intake and output, and rots and cooks water and grain, all functions of Fire. This fire is the Wood-Fire of Shaoyang. The Pericardium is the palace city of the Heart, specifically guarding the Heart; it does not hold sovereign power, but since its position is high, it does not descend to assist Xiang Fire, so neither Jun nor Xiang Fire involves it. Only Zhang Dairen among predecessors understood this, stating: "The Heart and Kidney of humans are Jun Fire; the Sanjiao and Gallbladder are Xiang Fire." Wang Yutai included this in the *Zhengzhi Zhunsheng* under the section on Diabetes, though it is unknown if Dairen had further discussions. Zhao Yangkui shared similar prejudices with Dairen, but his insights were high and worth extracting. Zhao considered the Fire of the Mingmen as Fire within Water, the Fire of the Monarch. He believed the Heart responds to affairs and contacts things, while the Kidney houses truth and nurtures breath. The Kidney is especially important compared to the Heart. Although Zhao did not fully understand that both Hand and Foot Shaoyin represent the Monarch, and his arguments were inconsistent, these few phrases secretly align with the Classics. Let us extend this further: Congenital Fire, having the dignity of facing south, cannot but be Jun Fire; relying on the Heart that handles worldly affairs, it can house truth and nurture breath. Fire originates from the same source, so both are Jun Fire. As for Zhao using Ba Wei Wan to treat various diseases, this cannot serve as a model. However, Ba Wei Wan replenishing Fire within Water is indeed a correct formula. Fire within Water should not be treated exclusively with Yang herbs; if Guizhi and Fuzi are used, Roushu and Dihuang must accompany them. If Cold Evil exists in the Kidney, Ganjiang and Fuzi should be used to expel the evil, such as in Si Ni Tang. To prevent the Fire within Water from emerging and resisting, Danzhi and Renao may be added to pacify it, without adding herbs that tonify Water. This is the original intent of Zhang Zhongjing in formulating prescriptions. Few later practitioners who used his formulas also grasped his intent. In *Zhengzhi Zhunsheng*, Fever Section, regarding Kidney Deficiency with Fire not returning to its origin, using Shi Quan Da Bu Tang swallowed with Ba Wei Wan, Wang stated that Fire within Water cannot be subdued by Water, hence in Bashu there are Fire Wells; getting water makes them burn brighter, getting fire extinguishes them. Guizhi and Fuzi are indeed the correct medicines for treating Xiang Fire, but comparing them to Bashu Fire Wells shows a lack of deep understanding of treating Fire within Water. Did one forget that Shi Quan Da Bu Tang contains Danggui and Dihuang, and Ba Wei Wan contains Roushu and Dihuang? Xiang Fire is crucial to the human body, just as a nation relies heavily on its Chancellor. It inherits the Qi of Jia Wood in the East; when the human body possesses it, all four seasons are like spring, and vitality never ceases. The "Lesser Fire" mentioned in the Classics refers to this Fire. The Liver is not comparable; the Liver is Jueyin, at the end of Jueyin, governing dispersion and descent. Some attribute Xiang Fire to the Liver because they view Xiang Fire as Kidney Fire. The Way of Yin and Yang is indeed hard to explain. Comparing Heart and Kidney, Kidney Fire is still, while Heart Fire is active; comparing Heart/Kidney with Gallbladder/Sanjiao, Jun Fire is still, while Xiang Fire is active. Jun Fire belongs to Shaoyin because it illuminates the four directions while its spirit is contained internally; Xiang Fire belongs to Shaoyang because it generates all things and its merit is widespread externally. For what the Classics have said, I interpret it through textual analysis; for what the Classics have not said, I infer it through mental reasoning. This way, I hope not to indulge in subjective speculation and lose the truth.
*Susu Wen* states that a physician who does not understand Root and Branch acts recklessly. The categories of Root and Branch are diverse. Since Qiyuanzi (Wang Bing) annotated *Tianyuanji Dalun*, taking Three Yin and Three Yang as Branch and Cold, Heat, Dryness, Dampness, Wind, and Fire as Root, subsequent generations have revered this as golden rules. This is a major error and must be辨析 (analyzed). Yin and Yang are the formless Six Qi; Six Qi are the有形 (formative) Yin and Yang. There is absolutely no division between upper and lower; how can they be separately designated as Root and Branch? The Classics say: "Cold, Heat, Dryness, Dampness, Wind, and Fire are the Yin and Yang of Heaven; Three Yin and Three Yang receive them from above." Clearly, Cold, Heat, Dryness, Dampness, Wind, and Fire are identified as Three Yin and Three Yang, responding to the lower from the upper, hence "receiving from above." It also says: "Accumulated Yang becomes Heaven, accumulated Yin becomes Earth." Even Heaven and Earth are accumulations of Yin and Yang. If discussing Root and Branch, are not Yin and Yang even more fundamental? I have reviewed the entire Classic; whenever Root and Branch are mentioned, they appear as two distinct things. I dare to summarize with one sentence from the Classics: "Different." The differences between Kidney and Lung, Disease and Physician, First Disease and Later Disease are obvious and need not be detailed. "To the right of Shaoyang, Yangming governs..." clarifies that left and right have order, using different inter-acting Qi as Branch. "To the right of Shaoyang, Fire Qi governs..." clarifies that upper and lower have positions, using different Liu Cheng Qi as Branch. According to these two statements regarding the Branch of Qi, both differ from the Root. Hence, it concludes with "Root and Branch differ, Qi responses present different phenomena." If one merely spoke of Root differing from Branch and Branch differing from Root, why would there be such redundancy? The word "Different" must be emphasized. Secondly, the Branch of a single Qi has convoluted wording, rarely yielding its intent. Gao Shizong's *Susu Wen Zhijie* places Six Qi in the upper position, Zhongjian (Intermediate Manifestation) in the middle, and Three Yin and Three Yang in the lower position. Yin-Yang and Six Qi originally belong to one family, yet splitting them into upper and lower and inserting Zhongqi in the middle is laughable. This proves Wang Bing's commentary misleads people, leading to such absurdity. Examining the phrase "Root is...", it does not attach to "Above Zhongjian Yangming," but below it. Can one discard Zhongqi outside the Root? Attaching "Qi Branch" below "Manifestation," can one say the Branch Qi is not below Zhongjian? Zhongjian and Root are exterior-interior pairs, so both can be considered Root. Due to the distinction of exterior-interior, Zhongjian is below Root. The meanings of "Below Root" and "Intermediate Manifestation" are likely as follows. That which is below Manifestation belongs to whom other than Liu Cheng Qi? Observing that Xinzhengjiao cites *Liuyuan Zhengji Dalun* to prove this section along with Liu Cheng Qi, it implicitly acknowledges this. Some say: "Above Jueyin, Wind Qi governs. Wind Qi is above Jueyin, therefore Jueyin is Branch." They do not realize this "Above" character, like Cai Yong's *Duduan* stating "Above refers to the position of honor," differs from "above" in spatial terms. Otherwise, in Zi-Wu years, "Upper sees Shaoyin," why not say "Lower sees Shaoyin"? "Above Zi-Wu, Shaoyin governs," why not say "Heat Qi governs"? Observing "Root is... refers to Liuyuan," two sentences connected downwards, and "Above Jueyin, Wind Qi governs," etc., also two sentences connected downwards, the character Root covers Three Yin and Three Yang; pondering this reveals the truth. Wang Shi merely mistook Root and Branch, so in annotating *Zhiyao Dalun*, he forced names for the similarity and difference of Root and Branch, equating Yin with Cold and Yang with Heat, proposing theories of Root/Branch same and Root/Branch different. The mechanism of Heaven and Earth's creation, with its intricate Yin and Yang, is hard to trace. Shaoyang and Taiyin seem to have same Root and Branch, yet Jia Wood and Yi Wood share Qi, Jueyin is not Yang; Ji Earth and Wu Earth share Qi, Yangming is not Yin. Within similarity, difference hides. Shaoyin and Taiyang seem to have different Root and Branch, yet Kidney Water is Yin, Small Intestine Fire is Yang. Within difference, similarity resides. Moreover, the Classics mention six, yet generalizing with Cold and Heat creates a huge discrepancy in Root and Branch counts, with no clear boundaries to follow. It is unlikely there is such a muddled Classic text. Examining medical collections that divide Root and Branch by exterior-interior and sequence, all are clear as eyebrows, without confusion. Following Wang's theory to list Six Meridian Root and Branch results in arbitrary classification, varying among schools, proving Wang's theory cannot be a standard. Then, what does "Root and Branch of Six Qi differ in origin" mean? Answer: This phrase introduces the general outline below, explaining the reasons for difference and the Qi followed, continuing with "Those following Root transform from Root..." clarifying that "following" refers to transformation/generation, not disease generation. The section "Origin of Hundred Diseases" discusses disease generation, which is explicit in the Classics. Root is like Master, Intermediate is like Guest, Branch is both Root and Master but undefined. Thus, following Root means Intermediate Qi follows Root; following Intermediate means Root Qi follows Intermediate. The same applies to following Branch. Like Master and Guest exchanging hospitality, others are excluded. Speaking solely of human disease, theorists occasionally touch upon one matter and boast of insight, failing to integrate the whole text. For example, Liu Qianjiang considers Gegen raising Yin Qi as transforming from Taiyin, combining with Yangming following Intermediate Qi. But Gegen's "following" is not the "following" in this text. Lu Jiuzhi considers Wet-Warmth as Yangming disease born from Intermediate Qi, treating with Cangzhu Baihu. Not only does Zhongjing have no such theory for Wet-Warmth, nor does Xu Shumi's discussion on Robbing Pathogens support it. Regarding the generation of other diseases, applying this standard yields mismatches, and Jueyin should also have Intermediate Qi diseases, which both schools ignore. *Susu Wen* mentions "following" and "transforming/generating" countless times, yet theorists in this section seek disease origins, primarily due to misunderstanding Branch. I have derived another principle here: Root and Branch are opposite. Opposite is the extreme of difference, yet still difference. Why? Among Six Qi, only Shaoyin and Taiyang follow Root or Branch. Shaoyin is one Zang, possessing both Water and Fire, self-reversing. The Intermediate Qi Taiyang Water opposes Shaoyin Fire. Taiyang is Water, while Intermediate Qi Shaoyin possesses both Water and Fire, self-reversing; its Fire opposes Taiyang Water. The remaining four Qi are Wood generating Fire, Earth generating Metal. How could one avoid using opposition as the meaning of Branch? Moreover, the Classics explicitly state this: "Disease reverses its Root, showing Branch disease; Treatment reverses its Root, using Branch prescription." Speaking of transformation/generation, only Shaoyin and Taiyang follow Branch. Speaking of disease, covering all Six Qi, reversing Root constitutes Branch, such as Inter-acting Qi and Liu Cheng Qi. Wang Bing noted Shaoyin and Taiyin as reversed, while the other four have same Root and Branch. Having identified two Qi as reversed, did he not consider that the reversal of these two is the inherent reversal of Water and Fire, not vague reversal? In Wang's mind, there is only a hypothetical Root and Branch; thus, he ignores the universality of reversal across Six Qi, excludes the four Qi, and deliberately overlooks the inherent root reversal of the two Qi. Everywhere trying to uphold his theory, he exposes flaws everywhere. I, however, reference前後 (preceding and following), achieving comprehensive understanding, thanks to Wang's prompting. How does Wood generate Fire and Earth generate Metal, with one following Mother and one following Child? Chen Xiuyuan said Wood transforms from Fire, Dryness transforms from Water, which is correct. But Heavenly Qi does not add Jun Fire, and Xiang Fire receives orders from Jun to guard position, unable to be transformed by Wood. Earth occupies the Center, with southern-facing dignity, unable to be transformed by Metal. Ultimately, they are generated after mutual following. Why take advantage of opposition in following Branch? Water and Fire have equal strength and cannot be neglected. Strengthening the Master of Water, Sunlight is suppressed. Benefiting the Source of Fire, Shadows dissipate. Within opposition lies the wonder of mutual assistance. Thus, advancing makes one Master, retreating makes one Guest. One cannot exclusively follow Branch; sometimes follow Root, sometimes follow Branch. The Classic text is carefully斟酌 (deliberated) thus. Some say: Wang Shi defines Branch as End, based on *Shuowen*,不应 (should not) create new interpretations. Answer: End is Name. Difference is verified by reality; Reversal is the extension of difference to the extreme, all extending the meaning of End. How does this violate antiquity? Furthermore, Wang Shi errs further: Below "Root and Branch differ, Qi responses present different phenomena," Wang Bing comments "Branch is the beginning of disease." If Root and Branch differ, causing different Qi responses, the next sentence speaks of disease. What disease does Branch have? Why does Root not have disease? Moreover, "First disease is Root, later disease is Branch" is explicit teaching. Why reverse "beginning of disease" as Branch? Ruan's *Jingji Gu* cites this without deep examination. Exegesis of *Susu Wen* began with Quan Yuanqi, now lost; scholars mostly follow Wang. Wang's merit in interpreting Classics cannot be denied; yet his errors are frequent. Since Song Dynasty, commentators have corrected many, except for Root and Branch. Ignoring my ignorance, I propose this essay, hoping to discuss with learners. (This is my old work *Susu Wen Root and Branch Wang Commentary Analysis*, now re-examined, seemingly without missing meaning, so recorded.)
Xu Huixi and Chen Xiuyuan both revered *Ben Jing* and Zhongjing to the utmost. Xu stated Shennong was the saintly founder of heaven, truly exploring the essence of creation, claiming to trace roots and sources, revealing the rationale. His *Shanghan Lun Leifang* claims to annotate the subtle uses of formulas, revealing their causes. Chen stated drug properties began with Shennong; not reading *Ben Cao Jing* is like writing essays without knowing the topic in *Four Books*. Zhongjing gathered the greatness of all sages, being the Confucius of the Confucian school. His *Ben Cao Jing Du* claims to reveal the subtleties of rationale, seeking to match Zhongjing's words letter for letter. Now examining their books, both merely elaborate on *Ben Jing* textually and grasp only the general idea of Zhongjing's formulas. Xu is slightly better than Chen, but neither practices what they preach. Take Ginseng as an example. In Xiao Chai Hu Tang, if there is vexation in the chest but no vomiting, remove Banxia and Renshen, add one Gualou Fruit. Xu annotates: No vomiting means Banxia is unnecessary; vexation means Renshen is inadvisable; Gualou removes chest bi, this is the method of Xiao Xian Xiong Tang. Vexation and frequent vomiting are root symptoms of Shaoyang. If vexation without vomiting occurs, the formula requires modification. Observing the use of Renshen for vexation and frequent vomiting, we know Renshen is removed for vexation without vomiting. No vomiting naturally requires no Banxia, hence removing Banxia and Renshen together. Vomiting prevents stagnation of pathogen in the chest; without vomiting, using Renshen would further close the pathogen, hence removing Renshen and adding Gualou to cleanse the chest. Xu separates "no vomiting" and "vexation," knowing only from *Bielu* that Gualou treats chest bi, but not understanding why the syndrome presents as chest bi, making his annotation irrelevant. Moreover, Chaihu Jia Longgu Muli Tang has Renshen with vexation; Chaihu Guizhi Ganjiang Tang has no Renshen with vexation and no vomiting. Cannot one deduce this by comparison? Chen states Guizhi Jia Shengjiang Shaoyao Xinjia Tang highlights "Chen" and "Chi" pulses to distinguish body pain not as residual pathogen but as Ying-Blood stasis causing pain, thus using Renshen borrowing Jiang-Gui power, increasing Shaoyao to lead into Ying meridian to unblock. He ignores Zhongjing stating: "Chen indicates weak Ying Qi." And: "Chi indicates insufficient Ying Qi, due to blood deficiency." Renshen entering Ying to generate Mai has specific efficacy; thus, Chen-Chi pulses clarify the reason for adding Renshen, not attributing it to Ying-Blood stasis. He also states Si Ni Tang and Tongmai Si Ni Tang do not add Renshen, fearing Yin-Nourishing herbs might reduce the power of Jiang-Fu. Yet *Lun* has Si Ni Jia Renshen Tang, adding Renshen because diarrhea stopped and blood was lost. Fuling Si Ni Tang adds a little Renshen because of vexation...