刘禹锡云∶《神农本经》以朱书，《名医别录》以墨书，传写既久，朱墨错乱，遂令后人
以
为非神农书，以此故也。至于《素问》本经，议者以为战国时书，加以“补亡”数篇，则显
然非《太素》中语，宜其以为非轩岐书也。陈无择云∶王叔和《脉诀》即高阳生剽窃。是亦
后人增益者杂之也。何以知其然？予观刘元宾注本，杂病生死歌后，比之他本即少八句。观
此八句，不甚滑溜，与上文书意重叠，后人安得不疑？与《本草经》朱书杂乱，《素问》之
补亡混淆，何以异哉！宜乎，识者非之，继而纷纭不已也。吾不知他时谁为是正。如元宾
与洁古详究而明，称其中凡有所疑而不古者削去之，或不复注而直书本文。吾不知为意易晓
不
之耶？二者必居一于此。又启玄子注《素问》，恐有未尽，以朱书，
待明者改删增益。传录者皆以墨书，其中不无差误。如《刺热论》注，五十九刺，首云“王
注”，岂启玄子之自谓乎？此一篇又可疑也。兼与《灵枢》不同，以此经比之《素问》八十
九刺，何者为的？以此观之，若是差别，劳而无益，学人安所适从哉？莫若以《金匮》考之，
仲景所不言者，皆所不取，则正知真见定矣。卢君论血枯，举《太素》云∶此得之年少时大
脱血而成。又
秽物不消。又举犯月水入房，精与积血相射，入于任脉，留于胞中，古人谓之
精积。元丰中，雄州陈邦济收一方，治积精及恶血淹留，胞冷绝娠，验者甚多，其意与《内
经》相近。乌贼鱼骨本治漏下与经汁不断， 茹去淹留恶血，古人用此，皆《本草》法。予
观方注条云∶古人用此，皆本草法一句，何其知本哉。以是知轩岐之学，实出于神农也。又
知伊芳尹汤液不出于轩岐，亦出于神农也。“皆”之一字，至甚深广也，岂独乌贼断汁之一法
哉。故知张伯祖之学，皆出于汤液，仲景师而广之，迄今汤液不绝矣。晋唐宋以来，号明医
者皆出于此，至今大定间，洁古老人张元素及子云岐于张璧、东垣李杲明之三老者出，想千
百载之下无复有之也。何以知其然？盖当时学人虽多，莫若三老之实绝也。
刘禹锡说：《神农本草经》用朱砂红字书写，《名医别录》用墨笔书写，由于传抄年代久远，朱墨字迹错乱，于是导致后人误以为那些是《名医别录》的内容而非《神农本草经》，原因就在这里。至于《黄帝内经·素问》的原典，议论者认为它是战国时期的著作，加上所谓的“补亡”几篇，那么显然不是《太素》中的语言，人们理所当然地认为它不是黄帝与岐伯的著作。陈无择说：王叔和的《脉诀》就是高阳生剽窃而成的。这也是后人增补掺杂其中的缘故。怎么知道是这样的呢？我观察刘元宾的注本，在杂病生死歌之后，与其他版本相比少了八句。看这八句，读起来不够流畅，且与前面的文字意思重叠，后人怎能不产生怀疑？这与《神农本草经》中朱书混杂、《素问》中补亡内容混淆，有什么区别呢！难怪有见识的人对此非议，继而纷纭争论不止。我不知道将来谁能为此订正。如果像刘元宾和张洁古那样详细考究并阐明，凡是有疑问且不符合古意的地方就删去，或者不再加注而直接书写原文。我不知道这样做是否容易让人明白？二者必居其一。另外，王冰（启玄子）注释《素问》，恐怕有所未尽，用朱笔书写，等待高明之人修改删除或增补。传抄记录的人都用墨笔书写，其中难免有差错。如《刺热论》的注释，五十九刺，开头说“王注”，难道是王冰自称吗？这一篇又令人可疑。再加上与《灵枢》不同，拿这部经典与《素问》中的八十九刺相比，哪一个是准确的？由此看来，如果是这样差别，徒劳而无益，学习者该听从谁呢？不如以《金匮要略》来考证，张仲景没有提到的，都不采纳，那么正确的知识和真知灼见就能确定了。卢君论述血枯病，引用《太素》说：这是人在年少时大失血造成的。又有秽物不能消除。又提到经期行房，精液与瘀血相搏，进入任脉，停留在胞宫中，古人称之为精积。元丰年间，雄州人陈邦济收集了一个方子，治疗积精及恶血滞留，胞宫寒冷导致不孕，验证有效的很多，其用意与《内经》相近。乌贼骨本来治疗漏下和经血淋漓不断，茜草去除滞留的恶血，古人使用这些药物，都是遵循《本草经》的方法。我观察方剂注释条目中说：“古人使用这些药物，都是遵循《本草经》的方法”，这句话多么懂得根本啊。由此可知，黄帝与岐伯的学问，确实出自于神农氏。又可知伊尹的汤液之学不出自黄帝与岐伯，也是出自于神农氏。“皆”这个字，含义非常深广，难道仅仅指乌贼骨止血的这种方法吗。因此知道张伯祖的学问，都出自于汤液之学，张仲景师法并推广了它，直到今天汤液之学依然流传不绝。晋朝、唐朝、宋朝以来，号称名医的人都出自于此，直到金朝大定年间，洁古老人张元素及其子张云岐、以及张璧、东垣李杲明这三位老前辈出现，想必千百载之下不会再有这样的人了。怎么知道是这样的呢？因为当时的学者虽然多，但没有谁能比得上这三位老前辈的实在绝学。
Liu Yuxi stated: The *Shennong Bencao Jing* (Divine Farmer's Materia Medica) was written in cinnabar red, while the *Mingyi Bielu* (Record of Famous Physicians) was written in ink. Due to long-standing copying errors, the red and black texts became confused, leading later generations to mistakenly attribute certain passages to the *Mingyi Bielu* rather than the *Shennong Bencao Jing*. This is the reason for such confusion. Regarding the original text of the *Suwen* (Basic Questions), commentators consider it a work from the Warring States period. With the addition of several "supplementary" chapters, the language clearly differs from that found in the *Taisu* (Great Simplicity). Consequently, it is reasonable to regard these additions as not being the words of Yellow Emperor (Huangdi) and Qibo. Chen Wuzhuo stated that Wang Shuhe's *Maijue* (Pulse Secrets) was plagiarized by Gao Yangsheng. This too is due to later interpolations mixed into the text. How do we know this? I examined Liu Yuanbin's annotated edition; after the "Song on Life and Death of Miscellaneous Diseases," it lacks eight lines compared to other versions. These eight lines are not smooth in reading and overlap in meaning with the preceding text. How could later scholars not suspect them? This situation is no different from the mixing of red-script texts in the *Bencao Jing* or the confusion caused by supplementary chapters in the *Suwen*. It is no wonder that knowledgeable people criticized these texts, leading to endless disputes. I do not know who will correct these issues in the future. If one were to investigate thoroughly and clarify, as Liu Yuanbin and Zhang Jiegou did, deleting any doubtful parts that do not conform to ancient standards, or simply recording the original text without annotation, would that not make the meaning clearer? One must choose between these two approaches. Furthermore, regarding Wang Bing (courtesy name Qixuanzi)'s annotations on the *Suwen*, he likely felt his work was incomplete and used red ink to indicate areas awaiting revision, deletion, or addition by experts. However, copyists recorded everything in black ink, introducing errors. For instance, in the annotation for the *Cire Lun* (Treatise on Acupuncture for Heat), regarding the "Fifty-Nine Acupoints," it begins with "Wang Zhu" (Wang's Annotation). Is this Wang Bing referring to himself? This section remains suspicious. Moreover, discrepancies exist between this text and the *Lingshu* (Spiritual Pivot). Comparing this classic with the "Eighty-Nine Acupoints" in the *Suwen*, which is accurate? Such differences render study laborious and unprofitable; where should learners turn for guidance? It would be better to verify using the *Jingui Yaolue* (Essential Prescriptions of the Golden Cabinet). Anything Zhang Zhongjing did not mention should be disregarded, thereby establishing correct knowledge and true insight.
Lu Jun discussed blood depletion (Xueku), citing the *Taisu*: "This condition results from massive blood loss in youth." He also mentioned the retention of foul matter. Additionally, he cited cases of sexual intercourse during menstruation, where semen and stagnant blood clash, entering the Ren Mai (Conception Vessel) and remaining in the Baozhong (Uterus). Ancients termed this "Jingji" (Semen Accumulation). During the Yuanfeng era, Chen Bangji from Xiongzhou collected a prescription treating semen accumulation and stagnant evil blood, cold uterus causing infertility, with many verified cases. Its intent aligns closely with the *Neijing* (Inner Canon). Hai Piao Xiao (Cuttlefish Bone) traditionally treats leukorrhea and continuous menstrual bleeding; Qian Cao (Indian Madder Root) removes stagnant evil blood. The ancients' use of these herbs followed the principles of the *Bencao* (Materia Medica). Observing the note stating, "The ancients' use of these follows the methods of the Materia Medica," reveals profound understanding of origins. Thus, we know that the learning of Huangdi and Qibo indeed originated from Shennong. We also know that Yi Yin's decoction therapy did not originate from Huangdi and Qibo but also from Shennong. The word "all" (jie) carries deep and broad implications, extending far beyond just the method of using cuttlefish bone to stop bleeding. Therefore, we understand that Zhang Bozu's learning originated from decoction therapy. Zhang Zhongjing studied under and expanded upon this tradition, ensuring its continuity to the present day. Since the Jin, Tang, and Song dynasties, renowned physicians have all derived their knowledge from this source. Until the Dading era of the Jin Dynasty, when Zhang Jiegou (Zhang Yuansu), his son Zhang Yunqi, Zhang Bi, and Li Dongyuan (Li Gao) emerged, it is believed that such figures would not appear again for thousands of years. How do we know this? Although there were many scholars at the time, none possessed the substantial and unparalleled expertise of these three elders.