佛祖歷代通載 8.91

8.91

論曰。自漢西域傳范曄論釋氏大概。陳壽三國志則置而勿言。唐太宗晉書則班班紀著沙門神異之迹。未始輒有一言訾佛。況佛化自晉抵南北朝始大振於天下。賢哉魏收李延壽之作。當世帝王公卿從事吾佛者。未甞諱之而不書。書之亦未甞以人事議佛也。及顧歡傳則假乎當時群公。評議二教而罪歡曰。歡雖同二法。而意黨道教。嗚呼可謂良史矣。陋哉歡翼之論。猶昔人寶燕石者。渠信有真玉哉。

The commentary says: Since the 'Account of the Western Regions' in the *Book of the Later Han*, Fan Ye discussed the general contours of the Śākya clan, while Chen Shou's *Records of the Three Kingdoms* passed over it in silence. Emperor Taizong of Tang's *Book of Jin* clearly recorded the marvelous and wondrous traces of the śramaṇas without ever uttering a single word of slander against the Buddha. Furthermore, the transformation of Buddhism only began to flourish greatly throughout the realm from the Jin dynasty down to the Northern and Southern dynasties. How worthy were the works of Wei Shou and Li Yanshou! When the emperors, princes, dukes, and ministers of those ages engaged with our Buddha, they never concealed it from their records; nor, when recording it, did they ever criticize the Buddha from the perspective of human affairs. Coming to the biography of Gu Huan, it utilized various worthies of that time to evaluate the two teachings and condemned Huan, saying: 'Although Huan equated the two traditions, his intent was biased toward Daoism.' Ah, they may indeed be called excellent historians! How base were the treatises of Huan and Jingyi—just like those in ancient times who treasured the stones of Yan: how could they believe that genuine jade truly exists?