恽氏认为：近代医学晦盲否塞，是叶派末流之弊所造成。并认为：若“非以极明了之文字，达极真确之理由，将前此所有诸纠纷，一扫而空之，使此后学者，有一线光明坦平之途径，则中国医学，直无革新进步之可言。”为了达到这个目的，在外感热病学方面，他感到一需正名，二需抉隐。而正名与抉隐，他都从抨击叶吴学说入手，为什么要这样做呢？据其自云：“鄙人志在吕明中医学，不得不辟除谬说，并不欲以口舌与古人争胜，以为名高。王孟英、吴鞠通、叶天士之书，疵谬百出，若欲一一纠正，叠纸等身，其说不能尽，则吾以为是喧宾夺主，不暇为也。唯三人之谬说，流毒于天下已如此，苟不能有精切简明之方法，指示后来，则其黑幕总无从揭破，而流毒并无有穷时。”恽氏认为：陆九芝“因灼知条辨、经纬之误，而观彼等假经文以炫世售欺，故深恶痛绝之，而为此言，是其心公而非私。”所以他在《温病明理》中，不管是否合符一般著书体例，大段大段地原文照抄《世补斋医书》中抨击叶派学说的多篇论文，并加以引伸发挥，来“辟榛莽，启坦途”，冀为后学作南针。书是秉着这样一种目的写的，则其对叶吴王三家，攻排之力，自可想见。
恽氏在“近人崇拜天士儿医圣”，“苟倏然立异，将群起而排之”的历史条件下，不顾一切，将批判矛头直接针对了叶氏，他不但说：关于《温热论》为顾景文伪托一事，“九芝曲为辩护，犹是推崇前辈，稍存忠厚之道，然事理昭然，岂容讳饰。”而且还说：张天师乃酒肉道士之流，天医星云云之传，“按事理推测，是必天士行贿张天师，因为放此谣言，不图能满过雍乾时人，而不可以欺天下后世，然则天士为江湖医，已昭然无可逃矣。”按照恽氏看法，叶天士也沾污了沽名钓誉的恶习。这个问题，陆氏并不将其坐实，被恽氏一加注，倒反将它坐实了，设计谋名与从师十七等传说，与学术观点正确与否，并不发生关系，从这一点来看，恽氏之贬叶氏，实在是超过了陆氏。从现在的眼光来看，《温病明理》对叶氏这样贬诋，确乎是太偏激了。但如果历史地看问题，只要了解当时的时代背景及其撰作动机，则恽氏之猛烈攻排叶吴，就不觉得奇怪了。三、全书概况
《温病明理》同《温热辨惑》等著一样，是一本以批判叶派学说为主限的专著。此书原名《温病讲义》，为其自编函授讲义之一种，于1928年4月出单行本，系门人徐衡之，章巨膺参校，由上海华丰印刷铸字所印刷，恽铁樵医寓发行，后收入《药盦医学丛书》中。书共四卷，每卷不标目。卷一因鉴于“今有一病于此，甲医曰是伤寒也，乙医曰是温病也，温病与伤寒异冶，病家茫然不知所从，取决于余，余曰，温病乃五种伤寒之一，二说皆是，病家益无所适从，则延西医。”感到外感热病之病名不统一，不但授废止派以口实。也难以征信于病人，遂慨然有正名之计划。其正名认为《难经·五十八难》之关于温病定名，不足以为训；西医就微菌定名法，也不可从。主张以《内经》为宗，认为：“若以《内经》法则，则厘然划一，无有疑义。”卷二详考《内经》、《难经》诸家之论三焦。以揭露鞠通之三焦，与中医三焦原有之本义不个，然后指出：“假使有精当之学理，真确之经验，原不妨于古人所言者之外，别树一帜，然必所言者，与古人相发而后可？如其与古人所言相背，则必古人所说之理论不圆满，吾能证明其误处而后可，若表面崇古，里面反古，用以欺世敛钱，原滔滔皆是，不足深责，著书垂后，其罪不胜殊矣。”卷三继简要抨击“温病从口鼻入”说之后，大段节录《世补斋医书》中抨击叶吴学说之文，来表明自己见解，“证明条辨、经纬、叶案之谬”，并指出：“伤寒太阳证，是寒邪从肌表入。伤寒门明病，是病毒从口入。”但“惟其内部有弱点，然后外邪得以入里。”卷四详论《伤寒论·痉湿暍病篇》的湿暍二病，认为湿即湿温，恽氏借用了当时的西医学知识，来解释此二病之病理，通过病理解释以证明叶派学说之误。尤其是认为：吴鞠通别创一三焦之说，“说理无有是处，用药亦无有是处。“并有自己的诊治经验介绍。
四、治学精神
恽氏冶学，不因循流俗，不迷信权威，快人快语，文如其人，这从上论，已足反映。此外，他虽崇古而不泥古，虽信奉陆、戴之学，但不因此而偏爱，现举二例以证之：
1·不盲目泥古：他说：“《难经》自是古医书之一种，唐张守节史记正义扁鹊传中所指，即为今本《难经》文字，虽随书经藉志不见其目，唐人已认此书出自扁鹊，昭然无疑。然书之佳否，当以说理精粗力断，不以年代古近为衡，考《难经》全书所言，皆内经中表面文字，于《内经》之精义丝毫不曾有得，假使扁鹊读《内经》，亦只见五行六气，不知形能德藏，则所谓见垣一方者，真可谓寸无英雄，竖子成名矣。故吾于《难经》一书，总不敢绝对信奉。”这段文字，足证恽氏之推崇《内经》、《伤寒》，与盲目宗法汉唐、排击金元者，貌似雷同，实相悬绝。”
2·不偏爱一派：中医流派众多，有些医者，由于先入为主，志趣为夺，往往入主出奴，对自己一派之学有偏好。但恽氏则不如此。恽氏初步治医，从《广温热论》入手，他对此书虽十分推崇，认为“较之条辨、叶案，高出十倍。”但他也不讳言此书缺憾，他说：“若谓吾侪信奉此编，即此已足，正未必然，须知此书浅而狭隘，读之既久，恒偏于用凉，转以凉药误事，亦往往不免。又其辨舌一节，亦未可为训。”又如他虽推崇陆九芝，但遇不同看法，亦秉笔直言，他说：“九芝先生谓照阳明治法，葛根芩连清之，无勿愈者，此可以施于伤寒类之温病，不能施之于与伤寒相滥之湿暍。”谓其言系误。这样一分为二的看问题，较之有些医者，视《温热论》竟若天书，从不见内中有丝毫之瑕疵，甚至一旦他人言之，即便视作异己而深恶痛绝之的治学方法，是多么的不同。
五、争鸣论点
1·伤寒为温病之原：温热派说温病是温邪所致，恽氏认为温病也是寒邪所致。他说；“温病者，热病也，热病者，伤寒也。”“冬之热病是伤寒，春之热病，仍是伤寒，夏之热病，秋之热病，依然是伤寒，故曰：凡热病皆伤寒之类也。是故谓春之热病伤于风，夏之热病伤于热，秋之热病伤于燥，长夏之热病伤于湿，无有是处。”恽氏认力伤寒而病热，之所以有风温、暑温、湿温等之称，“是因时令之异而兼六气之化，故命名如此。”“凡热之而热，寒之而寒，惟死体为然，生物则否。”人体唯受寒而病热，“谓受热而病热，无有是处，须知受热竟不病热。”这实足以后祝味菊否定温邪致病说之先声。
2·石斛为热病大忌：恽氏对叶派药法有很多异议，他除了“清宫，增液，一甲，二甲，大、小定风珠，一派滋腻之药，无非痴人说梦。”等论说外，对叶氏以石斛治热病，亦痛加惩创，他说：“石斛用以治热病，亦始于叶氏，此物最为热病所忌。鲜生地可用，石斛不可用也。何以言之，生地黄之功，专能凉血，血之就干者，得此可以转润，故暑温证之汗多舌绛者最宜。石斛则非血分药，本经言其能厚肠胃，实与血分无与，且此物之功效，专能生津，暑温无不兼湿，生津则助湿，胸痞乃益甚，所以不可用。”“今之寸医，乃以羚羊犀角为习用之晶，以石斛为藏身之窟，不问伤寒温病。甘凉之剂，一例混施。最可恶者，以石斛施之风温痧疹，致咳嗽发热之病，十九成急性肺炎，当出痧子者，痧不得出，终成内陷，病家不知其故，医家不知其故，覆辙相寻，滔滔皆是，皆吴鞠通，王孟英所造孽也。”后谢诵穆论治湿温，谓其即用滋阴药，亦宁“用生地、玄参，麦冬，不用石斛、阿胶、熟地炭、龟板、生地、玄参，号为滋阴，实兼有解毒作用……与石斛，阿胶等之腻隔留邪者，有上下床之判。”这似亦系受恽氏之影响。
3·驳温风伤肺之说：条辨崇天士之说，谓“凡病温者，始于上焦，在手太阴。"对此，恽氏列举了四点理由来加以驳斥：(一)《内经》说邪风伤人皆始于皮毛，皮毛并非言肺之合，而是言驱体之外层。今言从口鼻入，由里出外，则这种温病，必须在《内经》“凡热病”三字范围之外而后可。(二)既言从口鼻入，鼻固通于沛，邪从口入伤脾，又与上焦何涉。(三)经云天之邪气感，则害人五脏，此言不治皮毛，即有害五脏之可能。若以从口鼻入应伤五脏解之，于《内经》无征。(四)寒风从毛窍入，温风从口鼻入之况，论出无稽，纯届杜撰。恽氏据此，认为：“温病从口鼻入之说，亦不成立。”他诘难吴鞠通说；“既认定温病从口鼻入，温邪是由里达表，何以第一方却用仲景之桂枝汤，岂非自相矛盾之甚哉！”
上述三点，举例而已，他如认为“神昏谵语谓是心包络病，乃想当然之语，于实际无有是处”等争鸣意见，书中尚多，因属于通过熔裁陆氏之说来表明其见解者，故从略不论。
六、结尾短评
1·温热派医家对仲景学说的某些曲解，与废止派出于消灭中医企图而对《伤寒论》进行攻击，有其本质上之差异，恽氏不加区别，对叶吴学派，在学术论争中，竟恣意嘲讽怒骂，开寒温二派互相攻讦、党同伐异之恶习，流毒于今！这虽是时代造成的局限性，诚亦我中医事业发展之不幸。这种恶习如不能彻底革除，则一家一派宰据医坛，另一派之医著医文即难得一见，这是毫不足怪的。
2·恽氏属伤寒派医家，在寒温二派之争中，伤寒派医家因崇尚经学，常被人戴上复古派、卫道士的大帽子，但论人要知世，不能离开特定的历史条件，轻率地给维护仲景学说的医家戴高帽。这在评论恽氏及其他伤寒派医家时，是都须注意的。从历史唯物主义观点来看，恽氏之崇张(仲景)排叶(桂)，功大于过，是于中医学之发展，有贡献的。
3.恽氏是一位著名的中西汇通派医家，故在《温病明理》中，经常可以看到他借用当时的一些西医知识，来解释伤寒温病的病理，现在看来，有些地方，显得很为牵强，这虽然不足挑剔，但毕竟是白壁有瑕。
4.寒温两派的攻讦，党同伐界的学风，不能保证百家争鸣的正常进行，只能影响“双百”方针的贯彻执行，故很不利中医事业的兴旺，历史的经验，值得引起我们的注意。
参考文献
①，③、④，赵洪钧，《近代中西医论争史》(内部资料)，中西医结合研究会河北分会印行，1982年。
②，上海中医学院，《近代中医流派经验选集》，上海科技出版社，1963年。
谢诵穆(1911-1973)，一名颍甫，后改为仲墨，浙江肖山尖山人。1931年毕业于上海国医学院，时其师陆渊雷正在办函授学校，嘱谢编辑《中医新生命》杂志，并解答函授生提出的质疑。1936年，谢又为裘吉生罗致，为裘编辑家藏书目提要，后因日寇侵华，战火蔓延，未能完成，避归故里。1955年，从上海赴北京，参加中医研究院工作，“于十年内乱期间被害致死，但谢老在中医学术上的贡献，仍被人们称颂不止。”谢氏生性淳厚，事母至孝。毕身钻研中医理论，卓有成绩，其于探讨感证学理，尤多心得，著有《温病论衡》、《湿温论治》，《温病要义》，《伤寒通论》，《温疫述义》、《历代医书丛考》等。亦长于考据及中国医学史料的研究，曾著《中国伪书考》一帙，惜未刊行，据《肖山医藉考》云：“北京中医研究院图书馆有存”从《温病论衡》来看，其学术思想，显系承陆九芝、恽铁樵之余绪，祝味菊、杨则民、章巨膺等人相接近。有鉴此书，不乏作者对温病学中许多纠缠不清问题之见解，故现将其人及《温病论衡》中的治外感学术现，介绍如下：
一、治学思想及方法
谢氏治学，具有创新精神。他认为历来名家俱出，“全力以赴”，“百家争鸣”，“夫致力温病者，如此之众，而温病学说之笼统庞杂凌乱，乃泊丝而益紊，此无他，灵府为旧说所锢蔽，不能夺门而出耳。”“故目光不凌驾于温病之上者，决不能澈温病之底蕴。”从这一角度出发，他在对古今治温病的各家学说进行研究后指出：“温病学说之派别极多，不仅叶吴等数家而已。”研究温病，如果“以叶吴之目光视叶吴，则叶吴之温病，自无可议。”但如果将“叶吴之外之温病学说，与叶吴相比较，亦可以见温病学说之异同，而度其长短也。”一般之“研究温病者，以为温病只有叶派，仿佛叶派即足为温病之代表。”这实在是一种错觉，谢氏指出：“叶吴之温病，不过温病学说之一部分，尚不足为全部温病学说之代表。”故后之来者，如果“各承家技，始终顺旧，”囿于一派之说，志趣为夺，这同沾上“捧经”恶习一样，不但影响思想创造上的发展，又复障碍学术建设上的进步。所以，研究学问，必须胸无喊府，虚怀若谷，折除一家一派之学的藩篱，要“敢于直薄古人之壁垒。”谢氏的这种治学思想，在一家一派之学几乎主宰了中医对外感热病研究的情况下，对启发人们思路，促进百家争鸣，实有不可低估的意义。
恽氏认为：近代医学的晦涩闭塞，是由叶天士学派末流的弊端造成的。他认为：“如果不以极其清晰明了的文字，阐明极其真实确切的理由，将此前所有的纠纷一扫而空，使后来的学者拥有一条光明平坦的途径，那么中国医学就谈不上革新进步了。”为了达到这个目的，在外感热病学方面，他感到需要正名和发掘隐微之处。而正名与发掘隐微，他都从抨击叶天士、吴鞠通的学说入手。为什么要这样做呢？据他自己说：“我的志向在于阐明中医学，不得不驳斥错误的学说，并不是想用口舌之争与古人争胜以求取名声。王孟英、吴鞠通、叶天士的著作，错误百出，如果要一一纠正，堆起来的纸张有身子那么高，他们的说法不能完全驳尽，我认为这是喧宾夺主，我没有空闲去做。只是这三人的错误学说，危害天下已经如此严重，如果不能有精确简明方法指示后人，那么其中的黑幕总无法揭开，流毒也没有穷尽的时候。”恽氏认为：陆九芝“因为深知《伤寒论条辨》、《温病经纬》的错误，看到他们借用经文来炫耀世人欺骗大众，所以深恶痛绝，说了这些话，他的心是公正而非私利的。”因此他在《温病明理》中，不管是否符合一般著书的体例，大段大段地原文照抄《世补斋医书》中抨击叶派学说的多篇论文，并加以引伸发挥，来“开辟榛莽，开启坦途”，希望为后学做指南。书是本着这样一种目的写的，那么他对叶天士、吴鞠通、王孟英三家攻击排斥的力度，自然可以想见。
恽氏在“近人崇拜叶天士为儿科圣手”、“如果突然提出异议，将会遭到众人的排挤”的历史条件下，不顾一切，将批判矛头直接针对了叶氏。他不但说：关于《温热论》是顾景文伪托一事，“陆九芝曲意辩护，还是推崇前辈，稍存忠厚之道，然而事理昭然，岂容掩饰。”他还说：张天师属于酒肉道士一类，叶天士星云云之类的传说，“按事理推测，一定是叶天士贿赂张天师，因此放出此谣言，没想到能瞒过雍乾时期的人，但不能欺骗天下后世，然而叶天士作为江湖医生，已经昭然若揭无可逃避了。”按照恽氏的看法，叶天士也沾染了沽名钓誉的恶习。这个问题，陆九芝并不将其坐实，被恽氏一加注，反而将它坐实了。设计谋名与从师十七等传说，与学术观点正确与否，并没有发生关系，从这一点来看，恽氏贬低叶氏，实在是超过了陆九芝。从现在的眼光来看，《温病明理》对叶氏这样贬低诋毁，确实太偏激了。但如果历史地看问题，只要了解当时的时代背景及其撰作动机，那么恽氏猛烈攻排叶吴，就不觉得奇怪了。三、全书概况
《温病明理》同《温热辨惑》等著一样，是一本以批判叶派学说为主的专著。此书原名《温病讲义》，为其自编函授讲义的一种，于1928年4月出版单行本，由门人徐衡之、章巨膺参校，由上海华丰印刷铸字所印刷，恽铁樵医寓发行，后收入《药盦医学丛书》中。书共四卷，每卷不标目。卷一鉴于“现在有一种病，甲医生说这是伤寒，乙医生说这是温病，温病与伤寒治疗方法不同，病人茫然不知听从谁，决定于我，我说，温病是五种伤寒之一，两种说法都对，病人更加无所适从，于是延请西医。”感到外感热病的病名不统一，不但授废止派以口实，也难以让病人信服，于是慨然有了正名的计划。其正名认为《难经·五十八难》关于温病定名，不足以作为准则；西医根据微生物定名的方法，也不可从。主张以《内经》为宗，认为：“如果以《内经》法则，则条理清晰划一，没有疑义。”卷二详细考证《内经》、《难经》诸家关于三焦的论述。以揭露吴鞠通的三焦理论，与中医三焦原有的本义不符，然后指出：“假使有精当的学理，真实的经验，原本不妨在古人所言之外，另树一帜，但必须所说的与古人相发（启发/印证）才可以？如果与古人所说相背，那么一定是古人所说的理论不圆满，我能证明其错误之处才可以，如果表面崇古，里面反古，用来欺世敛财，原滔滔皆是，不足深责，著书流传后世，其罪不胜枚举了。”卷三继简要抨击“温病从口鼻入”说之后，大段节录《世补斋医书》中抨击叶吴学说之文，来表明自己见解，“证明《伤寒论条辨》、《温病经纬》、叶案之谬”，并指出：“伤寒太阳证，是寒邪从肌表入。伤寒门明确病症，是病毒从口入。”但“惟其内部有弱点，然后外邪得以入里。”卷四详细论述《伤寒论·痉湿暍病篇》的湿暍二病，认为湿即湿温，恽氏借用了当时的西医学知识，来解释此二病的病理，通过病理解释以证明叶派学说之误。尤其是认为：吴鞠通别创一三焦之说，“说理无有是处，用药亦无有是处。”并有自己的诊治经验介绍。
四、治学精神
恽氏治学，不因循流俗，不迷信权威，快人快语，文如其人，这从上述论述，已足反映。此外，他虽崇古而不泥古，虽信奉陆九芝、戴天章之学，但不因此而偏爱，现举二例以证之：
1. 不盲目泥古：他说：“《难经》自然是古代医书的一种，唐代张守节《史记正义·扁鹊传》中所指，即为今本《难经》文字，虽然随书籍志不见其目，唐人已经认定此书出自扁鹊，昭然无疑。然而书的好坏，应当以说理精粗来判断，不以年代古近为衡量标准。考《难经》全书所言，都是《内经》中表面文字，对于《内经》的精义丝毫不曾有得，假使扁鹊读《内经》，也只能见到五行六气，不知道形神德藏，那么所谓‘见垣一方’者，真可谓寸无英雄，竖子成名矣。所以我对于《难经》一书，总不敢绝对信奉。”这段文字，足以证明恽氏推崇《内经》、《伤寒论》，与盲目宗法汉唐、排击金元者，貌似雷同，实则相差极远。
2. 不偏爱一派：中医流派众多，有些医者，由于先入为主，志趣偏颇，往往入主出奴，对自己一派之学有偏好。但恽氏则不如此。恽氏初步治医，从《广温热论》入手，他对此书虽十分推崇，认为“较之《伤寒论条辨》、叶案，高出十倍。”但他也不讳言此书缺憾，他说：“如果说我们信奉此编，仅以此已足，正未必然，须知此书浅而狭隘，读之既久，恒偏于用凉药，转以凉药误事，也往往不免。又其辨舌一节，亦未可为训。”又如他虽推崇陆九芝，但遇不同看法，亦秉笔直言，他说：“陆九芝先生谓按照阳明治法，葛根芩连汤清之，无有不愈者，此可以施于伤寒类之温病，不能施之于与伤寒相滥之湿暍。”谓其言系误。这样一分为二的看问题，较之有些医者，视《温热论》竟若天书，从不见内中有丝毫之瑕疵，甚至一旦他人言之，即便视作异己而深恶痛绝之的治学方法，是多么的不同。
五、争鸣论点
1. 伤寒为温病之原：温热派说温病是温邪所致，恽氏认为温病也是寒邪所致。他说：“温病者，热病也，热病者，伤寒也。”“冬季的热病是伤寒，春季的热病，仍是伤寒，夏季的热病，秋季的热病，依然是伤寒，所以说：凡是热病皆属于伤寒之类。因此说春季的热病伤于风，夏季的热病伤于热，秋季的热病伤于燥，长夏的热病伤于湿，是没有道理的。”恽氏认为伤寒而病热，之所以有风温、暑温、湿温等之称，“是因时令之异而兼六气之化，故命名如此。”“凡是热的而变热，寒的而变寒，只有死体是这样，生物则不然。”人体唯受寒而病热，“谓受热而病热，是没有道理的，须知受热竟然不病热。”这实在以后祝味菊否定温邪致病说之先声。
2. 石斛为热病大忌：恽氏对叶派药法有很多异议，他除了“清宫汤，增液汤，一甲煎，二甲煎，大定风珠、小定风珠，一派滋腻之药，无非痴人说梦。”等论说外，对叶氏以石斛治热病，亦痛加批评，他说：“石斛用以治热病，也始于叶氏，此物最为热病所忌。鲜生地可用，石斛不可用也。何以言之，生地黄之功，专能凉血，血之就干者，得此可以转润，故暑温证之汗多舌绛者最宜。石斛则非血分药，《本经》言其能厚肠胃，实与血分无与，且此物之功效，专能生津，暑温无不兼湿，生津则助湿，胸痞乃益甚，所以不可用。”“现在的庸医，乃以羚羊角、犀角为习用之物，以石斛为藏身之窟，不问伤寒温病，甘凉之剂，一例混施。最可恶者，以石斛施之风温痧疹，致咳嗽发热之病，十九成急性肺炎，当出痧子者，痧不得出，终成内陷，病家不知其故，医家不知其故，覆辙相寻，滔滔皆是，皆吴鞠通、王孟英所造孽也。”后来谢诵穆论治湿温，谓其即用滋阴药，亦宁“用生地、玄参、麦冬，不用石斛、阿胶、熟地炭、龟板、生地、玄参，号为滋阴，实兼有解毒作用……与石斛、阿胶等之腻隔留邪者，有上下床之判。”这似亦系受恽氏之影响。
3. 驳温风伤肺之说：《伤寒论条辨》尊崇叶天士之说，谓“凡病温者，始于上焦，在手太阴。”对此，恽氏列举了四点理由来加以驳斥：(一)《内经》说邪风伤人皆始于皮毛，皮毛并非言肺之合，而是言躯体之外层。今言从口鼻入，由里出外，则这种温病，必须在《内经》“凡热病”三字范围之外而后可。(二) 既言从口鼻入，鼻固通于肺，邪从口入伤脾，又与上焦何涉。(三) 经云天之邪气感，则害人五脏，此言不治皮毛，即有害五脏之可能。若以从口鼻入应伤五脏解之，于《内经》无征。(四) 寒风从毛窍入，温风从口鼻入之说，论出无稽，纯属杜撰。恽氏据此，认为：“温病从口鼻入之说，亦不成立。”他诘难吴鞠通说：“既认定温病从口鼻入，温邪是由里达表，何以第一方却用仲景之桂枝汤，岂非自相矛盾之甚哉！”
上述三点，举例而已，他如认为“神昏谵语谓是心包络病，乃想当然之语，于实际无有是处”等争鸣意见，书中尚多，因属于通过熔裁陆氏说来表明其见解者，故从略不论。
六、结尾短评
1. 温热派医家对仲景学说的某些曲解，与废止派出于消灭中医企图而对《伤寒论》进行攻击，有其本质上之差异，恽氏不加区别，对叶吴学派，在学术论争中，竟恣意嘲讽怒骂，开寒温二派互相攻讦、党同伐异之恶习，流毒于今！这虽是时代造成的局限性，诚亦我中医事业发展之不幸。这种恶习如不能彻底革除，则一家一派占据医坛，另一派之医著医文即难得一见，这是毫不足怪的。
2. 恽氏属伤寒派医家，在寒温二派之争中，伤寒派医家因崇尚经学，常被人戴上复古派、卫道士的大帽子，但论人要知世，不能离开特定的历史条件，轻率地给维护仲景学说的医家戴高帽。这在评论恽氏及其他伤寒派医家时，是都须注意的。从历史唯物主义观点来看，恽氏之崇张（仲景）排叶（天士），功大于过，是于中医学之发展，有贡献的。
3. 恽氏是一位著名的中西汇通派医家，故在《温病明理》中，经常可以看到他借用当时的一些西医知识，来解释伤寒温病的病理，现在看来，有些地方，显得很为牵强，这虽然不足挑剔，但毕竟是白壁有瑕。
4. 寒温两派的攻讦，党同伐异的学风，不能保证百家争鸣的正常进行，只能影响“双百”方针的贯彻执行，故很不利中医事业的兴旺，历史的经验，值得引起我们的注意。
参考文献
①，③、④，赵洪钧，《近代中西医论争史》(内部资料)，中西医结合研究会河北分会印行，1982年。
②，上海中医学院，《近代中医流派经验选集》，上海科技出版社，1963年。
谢诵穆(1911-1973)，一名颍甫，后改为仲墨，浙江肖山尖山人。1931年毕业于上海国医学院，时其师陆渊雷正在办函授学校，嘱谢编辑《中医新生命》杂志，并解答函授生提出的质疑。1936年，谢又为裘吉生罗致，为裘编辑家藏书目提要，后因日寇侵华，战火蔓延，未能完成，避归故里。1955年，从上海赴北京，参加中医研究院工作，“于十年内乱期间被害致死，但谢老在中医学术上的贡献，仍被人们称颂不止。”谢氏生性淳厚，事母至孝。毕身钻研中医理论，卓有成绩，其于探讨感证学理，尤多心得，著有《温病论衡》、《湿温论治》，《温病要义》，《伤寒通论》，《温疫述义》、《历代医书丛考》等。亦长于考据及中国医学史料的研究，曾著《中国伪书考》一帙，惜未刊行，据《肖山医藉考》云：“北京中医研究院图书馆有存”从《温病论衡》来看，其学术思想，显系承陆九芝、恽铁樵之余绪，祝味菊、杨则民、章巨膺等人相接近。有鉴此书，不乏作者对温病学中许多纠缠不清问题之见解，故现将其人及《温病论衡》中的治外感学术现，介绍如下：
一、治学思想及方法
谢氏治学，具有创新精神。他认为历来名家俱出，“全力以赴”，“百家争鸣”，“夫致力温病者，如此之众，而温病学说之笼统庞杂凌乱，乃泊丝而益紊，此无他，灵府为旧说所锢蔽，不能夺门而出耳。”“故目光不凌驾于温病之上者，决不能澈温病之底蕴。”从这一角度出发，他在对古今治温病的各家学说进行研究后指出：“温病学说之派别极多，不仅叶吴等数家而已。”研究温病，如果“以叶吴之目光视叶吴，则叶吴之温病，自无可议。”但如果将“叶吴之外之温病学说，与叶吴相比较，亦可以见温病学说之异同，而度其长短也。”一般之“研究温病者，以为温病只有叶派，仿佛叶派即足为温病之代表。”这实在是一种错觉，谢氏指出：“叶吴之温病，不过温病学说之一部分，尚不足为全部温病学说之代表。”故后之来者，如果“各承家技，始终顺旧，”囿于一派之说，志趣为夺，这同沾上“捧经”恶习一样，不但影响思想创造上的发展，又复障碍学术建设上的进步。所以，研究学问，必须胸无喊府，虚怀若谷，折除一家一派之学的藩篱，要“敢于直薄古人之壁垒。”谢氏的这种治学思想，在一家一派之学几乎主宰了中医对外感热病研究的情况下，对启发人们思路，促进百家争鸣，实有不可低估的意义。
Yun Shi believed that the obscurity and blockage of modern medicine were caused by the drawbacks of the later followers of Ye Tianshi's school. He believed: "If one does not use extremely clear and lucid language to convey extremely true and accurate reasons, sweeping away all previous disputes, so that future scholars have a bright and smooth path, then there is no talk of innovation and progress in Chinese medicine." To achieve this goal, in the field of exogenous febrile diseases, he felt that two things were needed: rectifying names (Zhengming, clarifying terminology) and uncovering hidden truths (Jueyin). Both rectifying names and uncovering hidden truths began with his attack on the theories of Ye Tianshi and Wu Jutong. Why did he do this? According to his own words: "My ambition is to clarify Chinese medicine; I must refute erroneous theories. I do not wish to compete with ancients through verbal arguments to gain fame. The works of Wang Mengying, Wu Jutong, and Ye Tianshi are riddled with errors. If one were to correct them one by one, the stack of paper would be as high as a person, and their arguments could not be fully refuted. I consider this to be letting the tail wag the dog, and I have no time for it. However, the erroneous theories of these three men have already poisoned the world so severely. If there is no precise and concise method to guide later generations, the dark curtain can never be lifted, and the poison will never end." Yun Shi believed that Lu Jiuzhi "deeply understood the errors of *Shanghan Lun Tiaobian* and *Wenbing Jingwei*, and seeing them borrow from ancient texts to dazzle the public and deceive people, he detested them deeply and said these words. His heart was public-minded, not selfish." Therefore, in *Wenbing Mingli*, regardless of whether it conformed to general writing conventions, he copied large passages verbatim from multiple essays in *Shibu Zhai Yishu* that attacked the Ye school, extending and developing them to "clear the thorny paths and open up smooth roads," hoping to serve as a compass for future students. Since the book was written with such a purpose, the intensity of his attack and rejection of Ye Tianshi, Wu Jutong, and Wang Mengying can be imagined.
Under the historical conditions where "contemporaries worshipped Tianshi as the Sage of Pediatrics" and "if one suddenly proposed differences, the crowd would rise to reject him," Yun Shi disregarded everything and directed his critical spear directly at Ye. He not only stated regarding the matter that *Wenre Lun* was forged by Gu Jingwen: "Jiuzhi's biased defense still shows respect for seniors and a slight retention of loyalty and kindness. However, the facts are self-evident; how can they be concealed?" He also stated: "The Heavenly Master Zhang belongs to the category of wine-and-meat Daoist priests. Legends such as those involving Ye Tianshi and Xingyun... based on logical deduction, it must be that Tianshi bribed the Heavenly Master Zhang to spread this rumor. It may have deceived people during the Yongzheng and Qianlong periods, but it cannot deceive the world and future generations. Thus, Tianshi's status as a Jianghu (folk) doctor is already self-evident and inescapable." According to Yun Shi's view, Ye Tianshi also indulged in the bad habit of seeking fame and reputation. This issue, Lu Jiuzhi did not substantiate, but after Yun Shi added annotations, it became substantiated. Legends about plotting for fame and seventeen discipleships have no relation to whether academic viewpoints are correct. From this point of view, Yun Shi's denigration of Ye Tianshi actually exceeded that of Lu Jiuzhi. From a modern perspective, such denigration and slander of Ye Tianshi in *Wenbing Mingli* is indeed too extreme. However, if viewed historically, once one understands the contemporary background and the author's motivation, Yun Shi's fierce attack on Ye and Wu does not seem strange. III. Overview of the Book
*Wenbing Mingli*, like *Wenre Huohuo* and other works, is a monograph primarily focused on criticizing the Ye school's theories. Originally titled *Wenbing Jiangyi*, it was one of his self-compiled correspondence course lecture notes, published as a single volume in April 1928. It was reviewed by his disciples Xu Hengzhi and Zhang Juying, printed by Shanghai Huafeng Printing and Type Casting Institute, and distributed by Yun Tieqiao's medical residence. Later, it was included in the *Yaotan Medical Series*. The book consists of four volumes, each without a specific title. Volume I, noting that "now there is a disease here; Doctor A says it is Shanghan, Doctor B says it is Wenbing. The treatments for Wenbing and Shanghan differ, leaving the patient bewildered and unsure whom to follow. When asked for my opinion, I said Wenbing is one of the five types of Shanghan; both sayings are correct, leaving the patient even more lost, leading them to seek Western medicine." He felt that the lack of unified terminology for exogenous febrile diseases not only gave ammunition to the abolitionists but also made it difficult to convince patients. Thus, he resolutely planned to rectify terminology. He believed that the definition of Wenbing in *Nan Jing·Fifty-Eighth Difficulty* was insufficient as a standard; nor could one adopt the Western medical method of naming based on microbes. He advocated taking *Nei Jing* as the master, believing: "If one follows the principles of *Nei Jing*, everything becomes clear and uniform, without doubt." Volume II details the examinations of discussions on the Sanjiao (Triple Burner) by various schools in *Nei Jing* and *Nan Jing*. It aims to expose that Jutong's concept of Sanjiao does not align with the original meaning of Sanjiao in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), and then points out: "Suppose there were sound theoretical principles and true empirical experience; originally, there would be no harm in establishing a new school outside what the ancients said. However, what is said must resonate with or corroborate the ancients. If it contradicts what the ancients said, then it must be proven that the ancients' theory was incomplete, and one must be able to prove its errors. If one superficially worships the ancients but internally opposes them, using this to deceive the world and gather wealth, this is common and hardly worth severe blame. But to write books for posterity, the crime is incalculable." Volume III briefly criticizes the theory that "Wenbing enters via the mouth and nose," then extensively excerpts texts from *Shibu Zhai Yishu* attacking the Ye-Wu theories to express his own views, "proving the errors of *Tiaobian*, *Jingwei*, and Ye's case records," and points out: "The Taiyang syndrome in Shanghan is caused by cold pathogens entering from the muscle surface. Clear illnesses in the Shanghan category involve viruses entering via the mouth." However, "only because there are internal weaknesses can external pathogens enter the interior." Volume IV discusses in detail the dampness and heat-dampness diseases in the *Spasm, Dampness, and Heat-Dampness Chapter* of *Shanghan Lun*, believing that dampness is essentially damp-warmth. Yun Tieqiao borrowed contemporary Western medical knowledge to explain the pathology of these two diseases, using pathological explanations to prove the errors of the Ye school. Especially, he believed that Wu Jutong created a separate theory of Sanjiao, stating, "His reasoning is flawed, and his medication is also flawed." He also introduced his own diagnostic and treatment experiences.
IV. Spirit of Scholarship
Yun Tieqiao's scholarship did not follow vulgar trends, nor did he blindly worship authority. He spoke frankly, and his writing reflected his personality, as evident from the above discussion. Furthermore, although he revered the ancients, he did not adhere rigidly to them; although he believed in the teachings of Lu Jiuzhi and Dai Tianzhang, he did not show favoritism because of it. Two examples are cited below to prove this:
1. Not blindly adhering to antiquity: He said, "*Nan Jing* is naturally one of the ancient medical books. The reference in Tang Dynasty Zhang Shoujie's *Justice to Records of the Grand Historian: Biography of Bian Que* points to the text of the current *Nan Jing*. Although it does not appear in the *Book of Sui·Treatise on Books*, the Tang people had already recognized this book as originating from Bian Que, which is self-evident. However, whether a book is good or bad should be judged by the subtlety or coarseness of its reasoning, not by how ancient or recent its era is. Examining the entire *Nan Jing*, all it says are superficial texts from *Nei Jing*, gaining nothing of the profound essence of *Nei Jing*. If Bian Que had read *Nei Jing*, he would only have seen the Five Elements and Six Qi, unaware of the storage of form and spirit/virtue. Then the so-called 'one who sees through walls' could truly be called 'no hero in an inch,' a mere upstart achieving fame. Therefore, regarding the book *Nan Jing*, I dare not absolutely believe in it." This passage sufficiently proves that Yun Tieqiao's reverence for *Nei Jing* and *Shanghan Lun*, while seemingly similar to those who blindly followed Han-Tang traditions and attacked Jin-Yuan scholars, was actually vastly different.
2. Not favoring one school: There are many TCM schools. Some physicians, due to preconceived notions and biased interests, often become exclusive, showing preference for their own school's learning. But Yun Tieqiao was not like this. Yun Tieqiao initially studied medicine starting with *Guang Wenre Lun*. Although he highly praised this book, believing it to be "ten times superior to *Tiaobian* and Ye's case records," he did not hide its shortcomings. He said: "To say that our belief in this compilation is sufficient is certainly not necessarily true. One must know that this book is shallow and narrow. After reading it for a long time, one tends to偏 (deviate) towards using cooling medicines, mistakenly causing harm with cooling drugs, which is often unavoidable. Also, its section on tongue diagnosis cannot serve as a standard." Similarly, although he admired Lu Jiuzhi, when encountering differing views, he wrote frankly. He said: "Mr. Jiuzhi stated that treating according to Yangming methods, clearing with Gegen Qinlian Decoction, results in cure without exception. This can be applied to Wenbing similar to Shanghan, but cannot be applied to damp-heat-dampness (*Shiyue*) which overlaps with Shanghan." He considered this statement erroneous. Viewing issues in a dialectical manner, this is how different it is from some physicians who regard *Wenre Lun* as a heavenly script, never seeing any flaw within it, and even regarding anyone who points it out as an alien force to be detested.
V. Debated Arguments
1. Shanghan as the Origin of Wenbing: The Warm Disease School claimed that Wenbing is caused by warm pathogens. Yun Tieqiao believed that Wenbing is also caused by cold pathogens. He said: "Wenbing is heat disease; heat disease is Shanghan." "Heat diseases in winter are Shanghan; heat diseases in spring are still Shanghan; heat diseases in summer and autumn are likewise Shanghan. Therefore, it is said: All heat diseases belong to the category of Shanghan. Thus, saying that spring heat diseases are injured by wind, summer heat diseases by heat, autumn heat diseases by dryness, and long-summer heat diseases by dampness, has no basis." Yun Tieqiao believed that the reason why Shanghan presenting as heat has names such as Wind-Warmth, Summer-Warmth, and Damp-Warmth is "due to the difference in seasons combined with the transformation of the Six Qi, hence the naming." "For things that become hot when heated and cold when cooled, this applies only to dead bodies, not living beings." The human body only develops heat diseases upon contracting cold; "saying that contracting heat causes heat disease has no basis; one must know that contracting heat does not result in heat disease." This was indeed a precursor to Zhu Weiju's later denial of the warm pathogen etiology.
2. Dendrobium (Shihu) is a Major Taboo for Heat Diseases: Yun Tieqiao had many objections to the medicinal methods of the Ye school. Besides arguments such as "Qinggong Decoction, Zengye Decoction, Yi-Jia Jian, Er-Jia Jian, Da Dingfeng Zhu, Xiao Dingfeng Zhu—a batch of cloying and greasy medicines, nothing but nonsense told by fools"—he also severely criticized Ye's use of Dendrobium (*Shihu*) to treat heat diseases. He said: "The use of Dendrobium to treat heat diseases also started with Ye Tianshi. This substance is most taboo for heat diseases. Fresh Rehmannia (*Sheng Dihuang*) can be used, but Dendrobium cannot. Why? The merit of Raw Rehmannia lies specifically in cooling the blood. For dried blood, this can restore moisture, making it most suitable for Summer-Warmth cases with excessive sweating and crimson tongue. Dendrobium, however, is not a blood-level medicine. *Ben Jing* states it can thicken the intestines and stomach, having no real connection to the blood level. Moreover, its efficacy lies specifically in generating fluids. Summer-Warmth invariably involves dampness; generating fluids aids dampness, worsening chest stuffiness. Therefore, it cannot be used." "Current mediocre doctors use Antelope Horn and Rhinoceros Horn as routine items, hiding behind Dendrobium. Regardless of Shanghan or Wenbing, they indiscriminately apply sweet-cooling agents. Most detestable is applying Dendrobium to Wind-Warmth and Sand-Rash, causing nineteen out of twenty cough-and-fever cases to develop into acute pneumonia. In cases where rash should erupt, the rash fails to emerge, ultimately sinking inward. Neither the patient nor the doctor knows the cause. Tragedies repeat endlessly, all the sin created by Wu Jutong and Wang Mengying." Later, Xie Songmu, discussing the treatment of Damp-Warmth, stated that even when using yin-nourishing herbs, one should prefer "Raw Rehmannia, Scrophularia, Ophiopogon, and avoid Dendrobium, Donkey-hide Gelatin, Charred Prepared Rehmannia, Turtle Shell. Although called yin-nourishing, [the former] actually possesses detoxifying effects... compared to Dendrobium and Donkey-hide Gelatin which are cloying, obstructing, and retaining pathogens, there is a vast difference." This seems to also be influenced by Yun Tieqiao.
3. Refuting the Theory that Warm Wind Injures the Lung: *Tiaobian* revered Ye Tianshi's theory, stating, "All warm diseases begin in the Upper Jiao, affecting the Hand-Taiyin (Lung)." Regarding this, Yun Tieqiao listed four reasons to refute it: (1) *Nei Jing* states that evil winds injuring humans always begin at the skin and hair. Skin and hair do not refer to the Lung's exterior association but to the outer layer of the body. Today, saying it enters via the mouth and nose and emerges from the interior to the exterior means such Wenbing must fall outside the scope of the three characters "All Heat Diseases" in *Nei Jing*. (2) Since it enters via the mouth and nose, the nose connects to the Lung, but evil entering via the mouth injures the Spleen; how does this relate to the Upper Jiao? (3) The Classics state that Heaven's evil qi affects and harms the Five Viscera. This implies that failing to treat the skin and hair leads to potential harm to the Five Viscera. If interpreting entry via mouth/nose as injuring the Five Viscera, there is no evidence in *Nei Jing*. (4) The notion that cold wind enters via pores and warm wind enters via mouth/nose is baseless and purely fabricated. Based on this, Yun Tieqiao believed: "The theory that Wenbing enters via the mouth and nose is also untenable." He challenged Wu Jutong: "Since you affirm that Wenbing enters via the mouth and nose, and warm pathogens move from interior to exterior, why is the first formula used Zhang Zhongjing's Guizhi Tang? Is this not extremely contradictory!"
The above three points are merely examples. There are many other debated opinions in the book, such as considering "confusion and delirious speech as Pericardium disease, which is presumptuous and practically unfounded." These are omitted here as they belong to expressing his views by synthesizing Lu's theories.
VI. Concluding Comments
1. There is an essential difference between the Warm Disease School's certain misinterpretations of Zhongjing's theories and the Abolitionists' attacks on *Shanghan Lun* driven by the intent to eliminate Chinese medicine. Yun Tieqiao failed to distinguish between them. In academic debates, he freely mocked and cursed the Ye-Wu school, opening the vicious habit of mutual attacks between the Cold Damage and Warm Disease schools, fostering factionalism. This poison persists today! Although this is a limitation caused by the times, it is indeed unfortunate for the development of Chinese medicine. If this vicious habit is not thoroughly eradicated, it is no surprise that if one school dominates the medical arena, writings from another school become rare.
2. Yun Tieqiao belonged to the Cold Damage School. In the debate between Cold Damage and Warm Disease schools, Cold Damage physicians, advocating classical studies, were often labeled as reactionaries or defenders of tradition. However, one must understand the context when judging people; one cannot lightly label physicians who defended Zhongjing's theories with such titles. This must be noted when commenting on Yun Tieqiao and other Cold Damage physicians. From a historical materialist perspective, Yun Tieqiao's reverence for Zhang (Zhongjing) and rejection of Ye (Tianshi) had merits outweighing faults, contributing to the development of Chinese medicine.
3. Yun Tieqiao was a famous physician of the Integration of Chinese and Western Medicine school. Thus, in *Wenbing Mingli*, one can frequently see him borrowing contemporary Western medical knowledge to explain the pathology of Shanghan and Wenbing. Looking back now, some parts seem quite forced. Although this is not picky criticism, it remains a flaw in an otherwise perfect jade.
4. The attacks between the Cold Damage and Warm Disease schools, and the factional academic style, cannot ensure the normal conduct of a hundred schools of thought contending. They only hinder the implementation of the "Double Hundred" policy, thus being unfavorable to the prosperity of Chinese medicine. Historical experience deserves our attention.
References
①, ③, ④ Zhao Hongjun, *History of Modern Chinese-Western Medical Debates* (Internal Material), Printed by Hebei Branch of Integrated Chinese and Western Medicine Research Association, 1982.
② Shanghai College of Traditional Chinese Medicine, *Selected Experiences of Modern TCM Schools*, Shanghai Science and Technology Press, 1963.
Xie Songmu and His *Wenbing Lunheng*
Xie Songmu (1911-1973), also named Yingfu, later changed to Zhongmo, was from Jianshan, Xiaoshan, Zhejiang. He graduated from Shanghai National College of Traditional Chinese Medicine in 1931. At that time, his teacher Lu Yuanlei was running a correspondence school, instructing Xie to edit the magazine *Zhongyi Xin Shengming* and answer questions raised by correspondence students. In 1936, Xie was recruited by Qiu Jisheng to edit an abstract of Qiu's family collection of books. However, due to the Japanese invasion of China and the spreading war, he could not complete it and returned to his hometown to take refuge. In 1955, he went from Shanghai to Beijing to join the work of the Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences. "He was persecuted to death during the Ten-Year Cultural Revolution, but Old Mr. Xie's contributions to TCM academia are still endlessly praised by people." Xie was naturally honest and filial to his mother. He devoted his life to researching TCM theory, achieving remarkable results, especially in exploring the principles of infectious diseases, with many insights. He authored *Wenbing Lunheng*, *Shiwen Lunzhi*, *Wenbing Yaoyi*, *Shanghan Tonglun*, *Wenyi Shuyi*, *Daili Yishu Congkao*, etc. He was also skilled in textual research and the study of Chinese medical historical materials, having compiled a volume of *Chinese Pseudo-Books Examination*, unfortunately unpublished. According to *Xiaoshan Yiji Kao*: "A copy exists in the library of the Beijing Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences." From *Wenbing Lunheng*, it is apparent that his academic thought clearly inherited the legacy of Lu Jiuzhi and Yun Tieqiao, being close to figures such as Zhu Weiju, Yang Zemin, and Zhang Juying. Given that this book contains the author's views on many tangled issues in Warm Disease theory, we now introduce his person and his approach to treating exogenous diseases as presented in *Wenbing Lunheng*:
I. Thoughts and Methods of Scholarship
Xie's scholarship possessed a spirit of innovation. He believed that although past masters emerged, "going all out" and "a hundred schools contending," "so many people dedicated themselves to Warm Disease, yet the theory of Warm Disease remained vague, bulky, messy, and chaotic. This is no other than the mind being shackled by old theories, unable to break through the door." "Therefore, those whose vision does not transcend Warm Disease cannot penetrate its depths." From this perspective, after studying the theories of various schools treating Warm Disease throughout history, he pointed out: "There are extremely many schools of Warm Disease theory, not limited to just a few families like Ye and Wu." In studying Warm Disease, if "one views Ye and Wu through the eyes of Ye and Wu, then the Warm Disease of Ye and Wu is naturally beyond reproach." But if one compares "Warm Disease theories outside of Ye and Wu with Ye and Wu, one can see the similarities and differences of Warm Disease theory and measure their strengths and weaknesses." General "researchers of Warm Disease believe that Warm Disease only has the Ye school, as if the Ye school alone is sufficient to represent Warm Disease." This is truly an illusion. Xie pointed out: "The Warm Disease of Ye and Wu is merely a part of Warm Disease theory, insufficient to represent the entirety of Warm Disease theory." Therefore, later comers who "inherit family skills and always follow the old," confined by the theories of one school, biased by interest, are the same as falling into the bad habit of "worshipping scriptures." This not only hinders development in ideological creation but also obstructs progress in academic construction. Thus, studying scholarship requires an open mind, humility, removing the barriers of one school or faction, and being "daring enough to directly assault the ramparts of the ancients." Xie's such scholarly thought, under circumstances where one school almost dominated the TCM research on exogenous febrile diseases, had an undeniable significance in inspiring people's thinking and promoting a hundred schools of thought contending.