Identification and restoration: a study of two distinct medical systems in Huangdi Neijing

  • role: Corresponding author, First author通信作者, 第一作者
  • Affiliation:

    Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing 100029, China

  • Email:hejuan6428@sina.com
  • Introduction:Prof. HE Juan, Ph. D., Chief Physician, Doctoral Supervisor, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, No. 11, Beisanhuan Donglu Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100029. E-mail: hejuan6428@sina.com
HE Juan1*

ملخص

The current framework of traditional Chinese medicine is regarded as a medical system that places the zang-fu viscera at its core, encompassing external pathways, physical aspects, orifices, manifestation(hua), and the seasonal influence. Treatment modalities, such as pharmaceuticals, acupuncture and stone-needle, and moxibustion, are considered specific clinical applications encapsulated within this theoretical system. However, a closer examination of the medical theories within Huangdi Neijing reveals that the early medical theories in the Huangdi Neijing were developed based on external treatments using acupuncture and moxibustion, as well as internal treatments with pharmaceuticals. These early theories differ from the emphasis on internal treatment of zang-fu organs advocated in subsequent periods. The primary body of medical theory in the Huangdi Neijing is rooted in somatological medicine, which was primarily formed through external treatments, including theories related to meridians, acupoints, acupuncture, and encompassing theories such as the theory of five body constituents, the theory of the transformation of exterior and interior diseases, the theory of nutrient qi and defensive qi, the theory of deficiency and excess pathogensis, and therapeutic method involving tonification and purgation. These theories exhibit certain differences from the later dominant zang-fu viscera medicine theories. The oversimplification of amalgamating these two systems′ theories has result mistakes in inherent conflicts within the theory itself and a detachment from clinical practice. Thus, there is a pressing need for differentiation and a return to the original sources to reestablish a more coherent theoretical foundation.

مفهوم

Huangdi Neijing;medical system;needing stone;five body constituents;external treatment;nutrient qi and defense qi

References

  1. [1].
    印会河.中医基础理论[M].上海:上海科学技术出版社,2015:1.
  2. [2].
    廖育群.重构秦汉医学图象[M].上海:上海交通大学出版社,2012:6.
  3. [3].
    周祖亮,方懿林.简帛医药文献校释[M].北京:学苑出版社,2014:1.
  4. [4].
    司马迁.史记[M].北京:商务印书馆,2021.
  5. [5].
    班固.汉书[M].北京:中华书局,1964:1701.
  6. [6].
    赵京生.针意[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2019:233-234.
  7. [7].
    余新忠.中国疾病、医疗史探索的过去、现实与可能[J].历史研究,2003,43(4):158-168.
  8. [8].
    贺娟.内经讲义[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2021:61.
  9. [9].
    周瑾.多元文化视野中的身体[D].杭州:浙江大学,2006.
  10. [10].
    赵京生.针意[M],北京:人民卫生出版社,2019:139-140.
  11. [11].
    刘里远.经络的现代科学概念[J].中国针灸,1999(10):27-31.
  12. [12].
    陈昕力,贺娟.《黄帝内经》“血脉”“经脉”概念辨析.[J].中华中医药杂志.2022,37(12):6966-6969.
  13. [13].
    张维波,王燕平,李宏彦,等.解析《黄帝内经》[M].北京:中医古籍出版社,2022:33.
  14. [14].
    贺娟.论《黄帝内经》两种经脉循行模式的哲学基础及临床价值[J].北京中医药大学学报,2022,45(6):546-550.
  15. [15].
    马强,王茎.筋膜与卫气:古典针灸理论身体观构建一隅[J].中国针灸,2023,43(8):871-875.
  16. [16].
    侯冠群,鲁明源.论营卫与气血关系[J].中国中医基础医学杂志,2018,24(8):1029-1030.
  17. [17].
    张仲景.伤寒论[M]. 钱超尘,郝万山,整理.北京:人民卫生出版社,2005:46.
  18. [18].
    叶天士.叶氏医效秘传[M]//黄英志.叶天士医学全书.北京:中国中医药出版社,2005:679.
  19. [19].
    叶天士.温热论[M]//黄英志.叶天士医学全书.北京:中国中医药出版社,2005:341.
  20. [20].
    陈家旭,邹小娟.中医诊断学[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2012:103.

قراءة النص الكامل

The above content is generated by Large Model Translation. The translated content is for reference only. We do not assume any commercial or legal responsibilty for any consequences arising from the use of our website