ABSTRACT
In order to identify the differences between " in () and " in (), the edition of Ninna-ji, Japan, the author analyzed all " and "of the extant , its annotation books, its handed-down books and its collated books during the past dynasties. " and " are similar in Chinese character pattern. The authors had also analyzed the evolution factors of Chinese character patterns in detail, which induced the misunderstanding of " as ". Hence, the phonology and Chinese exegetics were adopted in analysis. " and "()" were completely same in ancient pronunciation. In compliance with the theory as seeking for the connotation from the pronunciation, " was explained as "()", meaning cleft needling or point needling. Additionally, the academic significance of " was explored. It was believed that it was the specific recognition stage from the vessel to the point regarding the sites of acupuncture and moxibustion in terms of the differences in needling techniques, i.e. vessel needling, muscle needling or tendon needling. It is concluded that " resulted from the misunderstanding of " in the books of different dynasties, hence, the mistakes in the explanation and annotation of " since the Northern Song Dynasty have been clarified.