香附虽为快气宣郁之圣药。妇人所必需但味苦气辛。苦主泄。辛主散。而一切阴阳气血
虚弱者忌之。若
脾气虚弱作痞。虚寒生胀。宜用四君。六君或加姜桂治之。中气既健。痞胀自消。此治本法
也。设使误用香
附耗泄真气。愈增胀满耳。甚有阴虚中败。火升作喘。而亦妄用之。只速其死也丹溪亦谓此
药。性燥。
牛膝乃足厥阴经之药。诸家本草历称其补肝肾壮筋骨益气力之功。但赋性苦润。专泄而
不专收。力
优于破瘀血。下生胎。消恶毒。利水通淋。在治实症者宜之。若云补。愚以为不然也。夫所
谓壮筋骨。益气力
者。盖由风毒犯足。湿热伤下。病从外得。因而痿软。用此拔毒导湿。则筋骨复常。若肝血
虚肾。精竭而筋骨
自痿。此病从内伤。即勤峻补。犹嫌不足。岂可用牛膝而益虚其虚乎。虽濒湖有云大都熟用
则补肝肾。生用则破滞血。此语亦未见妥。唯丹溪产后忌之义可见矣。
威灵仙性疏利。方家盛称其善疗诸风。蠲痿宣毒。功能不可尽阐。愚亦以为大谬也。若
病非实症从外
得者。不可轻饵也。故本草纲目有云此物能疏人真气。稍涉虚者宜禁之。意可知矣。大凡一
药具补泻两
性。只宜于实。不宜于虚。只宜暂用。不宜久服人知其泻之有功。而不知其补之。无能。殊
昧扶羸之理。益彰通治之害。
香附虽然是疏通气机、宣散郁结的圣药，也是妇女所必需的药材。但其味苦、气辛。苦味主要起泄降作用，辛味主要起发散作用。因此，一切阴阳气血虚弱的人应当忌用。如果是因为脾气虚弱导致的心下痞塞感，或因虚寒产生的胀满，适宜使用四君子汤或六君子汤，或者加入干姜、肉桂来治疗。中焦之气一旦强健，痞塞和胀满自然消除。这是治本的方法。倘若误用香附耗泄真气，只会增加胀满的症状。更有甚者，对于阴虚中气败坏、虚火上炎导致气喘的患者，也妄加使用，这只会加速其死亡。朱丹溪也曾说此药性燥。
牛膝是足厥阴肝经的药物。各家本草书中都称述它具有补益肝肾、强壮筋骨、益气力的功效。但它的药性苦润，主要起泄降作用而不主收敛。其力量擅长于破除瘀血、催生死胎、消除恶毒、利水通淋。这些功效适用于实证患者。如果说它能“补”，我认为是不对的。所谓“壮筋骨、益气力”，大概是因为风毒侵犯下肢，湿热损伤下部，病邪从外侵入，从而导致肢体痿软无力。使用牛膝拔除毒邪、引导湿气排出，筋骨就能恢复常态。如果是肝血亏虚、肾精枯竭导致的筋骨自然痿软，这是内伤疾病，即使频繁使用峻猛的补药，还嫌不足，怎么能用牛膝这种泄降之品去进一步损害虚弱的身体呢？虽然李时珍（濒湖）曾说：“大多情况下，熟用则补肝肾，生用则破滞血。”这句话也不见得妥当。只有朱丹溪关于产后忌用牛膝的观点才可见其真意。
威灵仙药性疏利，方书医生盛赞它善于治疗各种风邪，能祛除痿痹、宣散毒邪，其功能不可尽数阐述。但我认为这也是极大的谬误。如果病症不是从外部获得的实证，不可以轻易服用。所以《本草纲目》中说：“此物能疏泄人的真气，稍微涉及虚证的就应当禁止。”其中的意思就可以知道了。大凡一种药物兼具补泻两种性质，只适合用于实证，不适合用于虚证；只适合暂时使用，不适合长期服用。人们只知道它有泻下的功劳，却不知道它没有补益的能力，这很不明白扶持羸弱身体的道理，更加彰显了通治法（不分虚实一概而论的治疗）的危害。
Although Xiangfu (Cyperus Rhizome) is the supreme medicine for promoting Qi circulation and dispersing stagnation, and is essential for women, its taste is bitter and its nature is acrid. Bitterness primarily drains downward, while acridity primarily disperses outward. Therefore, it is contraindicated in all cases of deficiency of Yin-Yang, Qi, and Blood. If epigastric fullness (Pi-syndrome) arises from Spleen Qi deficiency, or abdominal distension results from deficiency-cold, Si Jun Zi Tang (Four Gentlemen Decoction) or Liu Jun Zi Tang (Six Gentlemen Decoction), possibly augmented with Gan Jiang (Dried Ginger) and Rou Gui (Cinnamon Bark), should be used. Once the Middle Jiao Qi becomes robust, the fullness and distension will naturally subside. This constitutes treating the root cause. Conversely, if Xiangfu is mistakenly used, it will deplete True Qi and exacerbate distension. In severe cases, patients with Yin deficiency and central collapse, presenting with ascending fire and wheezing, are also wrongly prescribed this herb, which only hastens death. Zhu Danxi also stated that this herb has a dry nature.
Niu Xi (Achyranthes Root) is a herb entering the Foot-Jueyin Liver Meridian. Various materia medica texts have historically praised its efficacy in tonifying the Liver and Kidneys, strengthening sinews and bones, and augmenting Qi and strength. However, its nature is bitter and moistening; it specializes in draining and descending rather than astringing and retaining. Its strength lies in breaking up blood stasis, expelling retained fetus, eliminating toxic heat, promoting diuresis, and unblocking painful urinary dysfunction (Lin-syndrome). These actions are suitable for excess syndromes. To claim it has a "tonifying" effect, I believe, is incorrect. The so-called "strengthening sinews and bones, augmenting Qi and strength" attributed to it generally applies when wind-toxins invade the lower limbs or damp-heat injures the lower body, causing weakness and flaccidity due to external pathogens. By using Niu Xi to extract toxins and guide out dampness, the sinews and bones can return to normal. However, if flaccidity of sinews and bones results from internal injury due to Liver Blood deficiency and Kidney Essence exhaustion, even frequent use of potent tonics may still be insufficient. How can one use the draining nature of Niu Xi to further damage an already deficient state? Although Li Shizhen (Binhu) claimed that "generally, processed Niu Xi tonifies the Liver and Kidneys, while raw Niu Xi breaks stagnant blood," this statement is not entirely appropriate. Only Zhu Danxi’s warning against using Niu Xi postpartum reveals its true nature.
Wei Ling Xian (Clematis Root) has a dispersing and purgative nature. Formulary physicians highly praise its ability to treat various wind-pathogens, dispel flaccidity syndromes, and disseminate toxins, claiming its functions cannot be fully elaborated. I consider this view to be a significant error. If the disease is not an excess syndrome acquired from external pathogens, it should not be taken lightly. Thus, *Bencao Gangmu* states: "This substance can disperse the body's True Qi; those with any degree of deficiency should avoid it." The implication is clear. Generally, a herb possessing both tonifying and draining properties is suitable only for excess conditions, not deficiency conditions; it is suitable for temporary use, not long-term administration. People recognize its merit in draining but fail to realize its inability to tonify. This ignorance violates the principle of supporting the emaciated and highlights the dangers of indiscriminate treatment methods.