中國古代「禁方」考論

Jinfang: The Transmission of Secret Techniques in Ancient China

李建民(Jian-Min Li)

《中央研究院歷史語言研究所集刊》 68本1分 (1997/03) Pp. 117-166

摘要

古代如何對於不同性質的技術加以控制？其各別流傳的途徑又有那些？本文中，筆者以「禁方」爲個素對古代技術傳授的課題提出初步的探討。
結論有三：第一、「禁方」一詞是醫家、方士、術士彼此交涉、共同擁有的概念。亦即，此概念不僅用於醫方或藥方，亦適用於數術及其他方技之學；第二、從醫方、方書體例來看，「禁」在上述脈絡至少有三種意義：(1)避忌；(2)禁截、制止；(3)禁而不傳、秘而不宣。而禁方主要是藉由傳授儀式、師受口訣等程序，對珍異之方達到「禁」的目的。甚至，禁方「驗」與「不驗」也取決於這些儀式或師說。唯內容不專指咒禁、炁禁或房術，形式亦不拘於書寫或口傳。這些醫術或醫書又稱爲「古傳方」。古傳之方似包括周秦以來官學下替的方技內容。《漢志》〈方技略〉云方技「王官之一守」也。若就傳授型態區分，經方（經驗或經典之方）爲「常」，禁方爲「變」；第三、有「僞題」或「託名禁方」的情形。鋼如，有假託禁方之名以廣流傳，有因同業競爭而秘不示人，亦有假託禁方以圖利欺人等。值得一提的是，周秦兩漢的禁方並不完全等同於今人所謂「秘方」。不過，禁方在漢代以降有幾條流變的線索：(1)禁方與秘方混稱；(2)禁方成爲禁術專稱；(3)大量冠以禁方或秘方的方技書產生。
方術史的研究，往往統技術內容本身討論，但其文本與技術可能籍由何種形式或途徑傳授卻較少人論及。「禁方」的來源、性質及傳授方式可提供吾人省思上述的課題。

關鍵字

禁方 ； 方術傳授 ； 黃帝內經 ； 秘方 ； 禁術

並列摘要

How were different types of technical skills controlled in Ancient China? How were these different techniques transmitted? In the following case study of ”forbidden techniques” (jinfang 禁方), the author puts forward a tentative analysis of the transmission of secret techniques.
The author maintains that: firstly, the concept of ”forbidden techniques” was held in common by both physicians (yijia 醫家) and ”gentlemen who possess techniques” (fangshi, shushi方士、術士). The concept of forbidden techniques did not only pertain to medical prescriptions (yifang 醫方), but also to other types of learning as well, namely ”calculations and arts” (shushu 數術) and ”recipes and techniques” (fangji 方技).
Secondly, in medical prescriptions and medical compilations (fangshu 方書), the concept of the ”forbidden” (jin 禁) appears in at least three guises: (a), ”taboos” (biji 避忌); (b), ”constraints” (jinjie, zhizhi 禁截、制止); and (c), ”prohibitions” (jin'er buchuan, mi'er buxuan 禁而不傳、秘而不宣). These three areas sometimes overlap. ”Forbidden techniques” were transmitted mainly through regulated procedures such as transmission rites, and formulas passed on from master to disciple. The ”effectiveness” (yan 驗) or ”ineffectiveness” (buyan 不驗) of the prescriptions themselves were in fact dependent upon these rites or teachings. Not limited to spells (zhoujin, qijin 咒禁、炁禁) or to the ”arts of the bedchamber” (fangshu 房術) in content, these prescriptions were transmitted both in written texts and orally. On the basis of their pattern of transmission, ”proved prescriptions” or ”canonic prescriptions” (jingfang: jingyanzhifang, jingdianzhifang 經方：經驗之方、經典之方) were considered to be of a ”regular” (chang 常) type, while ”forbidden prescriptions” were considered ”exceptional” (bian 變).
Thirdly, there are cases of ”fake titles” (weiti 僞題) or ”false claims to she possession of forbidden techniques” (tuoming jinfang 託名禁方). Professional competition created a secretiveness about certain prescriptions, and false claims to the possession of forbidden prescriptions at times occurred for a variety of reasons. In some cases, plagiarized forbidden techniques obtained wide renown.
Research on the history of ”fangshu” (方術) generally tends to concentrate on the contents of the techniques themselves; less attention has been devoted to the forms or paths of transmission of both text and technique. The origin, nature, and forms of transmission of ”forbidden techniques” present us with an opportunity to examine these questions.