摘要
《灵枢》与《素问》究竟孰先孰后，历来有不同的看法。因《灵枢》一度失传，王冰注《素问》而未注《灵枢》，致谈《内经》者多称举《素问》，甚或视《灵枢》为伪书。本文根据《素问》所引“《经》言”书证，逐条加以分析，证明《灵枢》是“经”而《素问》是“论”，进而从先秦诸子书中追溯《内经》理论的渊源。
There are different opinions on priority of “Spiritual Axis” and “Plain Questions”. Because
“Spiritual Axis” was once lost, Wang Bing only annotated “Plain Questions” and did not
annotated “Spiritual Axis”. Consequently, “Plain Questions” was frequently mentioned in
talking about “Inner Canon”. Even, “Spiritual Axis” was regarded as a fake book. In
accordance with individual analysis of the evidences in “Foreword to ‘Canon’”quoted in
“Plain Questions”, this article approves that “Spiritual Axis” is a “canon” and “Plain
Questions” is a “theory”,and traces the theoretic origin of “Inner Canon” from the books
by various scholars in the early Qing Dynasty.
出处
《上海中医药大学学报》
CAS
1999年第1期11-13,共3页
Academic Journal of Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine
