| Name | Date | Notes | Search |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bai Yan, 白延 | fl. ca. 248-259 | Palumbo (2003): 179-180 n. 31 argues that Huijiao, in the Gao zeng zhuan, got his “information” about *Dharmakāla, Kang Sengkai, *Dharmasatya, and Bo Yan from Zhu Daozu’s catalogue(s), and Huijiao in turn was then Fei Changfang’s source in LDSBJ. Palumbo argues further: “Tan Shibao 譚世保 has showed convincingly that [the] entries [cited from the various Zhu Daozu catalogues cited by Fei Changfang in LDSBJ] do not stand close scrutiny, for they teem with inconsistencies, anachronisms, and outright blunders; the logical conclusion is that the catalogues ascribed to Zhu Daozu are sheer forgeries [citing Tan, Han Tang Foshi tanzhen (1990), 111-120)]. But Fei Zhangfang should not be criticised for all this. If what has been said above is true, the forgeries must have been in the making during the latter years of Sengyou’s life (roughly between 514 and 518), as appears from the fact that Baochang (in 514) seemingly ignores *Dharmakāla and the others, and Sengyou himself only knows of Bo Yan from bibliographical sources (the monk and his translations are briefly mentioned in the biographical section of the [CSZJJ] 13.96a27-28) and a vaguely named ‘separate catalogue’. On the other hand, the fake catalogues must have been circulating by AD 529, when the Gaoseng zhuan had been completed.” | Bai Yan, 白延 Palumbo (2003): 179-180 n. 31 argues that Huijiao, in the Gao zeng zhuan, got his “information” about *Dharmakala, Kang Sengkai, *Dharmasatya, and Bo Yan from Zhu Daozu’s catalogue(s), and Huijiao in turn was then Fei Changfang’s source in LDSBJ. Palumbo argues further: “Tan Shibao 譚世保 has showed convincingly that [the] entries [cited from the various Zhu Daozu catalogues cited by Fei Changfang in LDSBJ] do not stand close scrutiny, for they teem with inconsistencies, anachronisms, and outright blunders; the logical conclusion is that the catalogues ascribed to Zhu Daozu are sheer forgeries [citing Tan, Han Tang Foshi tanzhen (1990), 111-120)]. But Fei Zhangfang should not be criticised for all this. If what has been said above is true, the forgeries must have been in the making during the latter years of Sengyou’s life (roughly between 514 and 518), as appears from the fact that Baochang (in 514) seemingly ignores *Dharmakala and the others, and Sengyou himself only knows of Bo Yan from bibliographical sources (the monk and his translations are briefly mentioned in the biographical section of the [CSZJJ] 13.96a27-28) and a vaguely named ‘separate catalogue’. On the other hand, the fake catalogues must have been circulating by AD 529, when the Gaoseng zhuan had been completed.” |