在明清之际耶稣会士传入中国的西学中,解剖生理学是比较特殊的一门。目前,已有的研究成果集中在耶稣会士具体传入了哪些知识上,而对于这些知识的实质以及背后的原因鲜有探讨。文章主要分析对比了罗雅谷的《人身图说》(包括《人身图说五脏躯壳图形》)和昂布鲁瓦兹·帕雷(Ambroise Paré)的《著作集》,发现《人身图说》与西方的这本解剖学著作无论是从结构还是内容上,都有很大的差别。不仅如此,《人身图说》还借用了当时的中国医学中的部分知识。这说明,《人身图说》不能被认为是直接翻译,甚或是节译自某本西方解剖学著作,而是作者的重新编写。为了让中国人更容易接受,作者有意对传播内容采用了更“中国化”的方式。但是事与愿违,《人身图说》中所载的西方解剖生理学知识对这一时期的中国医学几乎没有产生任何影响。这应该与书中所采取的这种“中国化”的方式有一定的关系。 During the Ming and Qing dynasties, the Jesuits introduced China’s Western learning. Anatomy and physiology is a special one. At present, the existing research results have focused on what knowledge the Jesuits have specifically introduced, and there is little discussion on the essence of the knowledge and on the reasons behind it. The article mainly analyzes and compares Luo Ya-gu’s Biographies (including “Body Diagram Five-Body”) and Ambroise Paré’s Collection of Works, and finds that “Body Chart” Anatomy of the book, whether from the structure or content, are very different. Not only that, “figure figure” also borrowed part of the knowledge of Chinese medicine at the time. This shows that the “figure of the body” can not be considered as a direct translation, or even translated from a certain section of Western anatomy, but the author’s rewrite. In order to make the Chinese more receptive, the author intends to adopt a more “Chinese” approach to the dissemination of content. However, contrary to expectations, the knowledge of Western anatomy and physiology contained in “Body Chart” has had almost no impact on Chinese medicine in this period. This should have something to do with this “Chinese” approach taken in the book.