--- title: "洛陽伽藍記合校本 · 提要" description: "北魏杨衒之撰写的洛阳伽蓝记是一部记述北魏都城洛阳佛教寺院兴衰的地方志著作。张宗祥先生的合校本综合历代版本精校而成具有很高学术价值。该书以北魏洛阳城佛寺为纲目详述了孝文帝迁都后洛阳佛教的鼎盛景象包括永宁寺等名刹的规模与盛况同时穿插了政治历史社会风俗和人物轶事。它不仅是研究北魏历史佛教史和中古城市建筑的重要文献更被誉为中国佛教地理志的开山之作为了解南北朝佛教艺术与社会变迁提供了珍贵的一手资料。" url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmgmyl2tl0ilvl104j96cuhao" --- ### 欽定四庫全書提要 > Complete Library of the Four Treasuries: Imperial Authorized Summary 洛陽伽藍記五卷後魏楊衒之撰劉知幾史通作羊衒之晁公武讀書志亦同然隋志亦作楊與今本合疑史通誤也其里貫未詳據書中所稱知嘗官撫軍司馬耳魏白太和十七年作都洛陽一時篤崇佛法刹廟甲於天下及永熙之亂城郭邱墟武定五年衒之行役洛陽感念廢興因捃拾舊聞追敘故蹟以成是書以城内及四門之外分敘五篇敘次之後先以東面三門南面三門北面三門各署其新舊之名以提綱領體例絕為明析其文穠麗秀逸煩而不厭可與酈道元水經注肩隨其兼敘爾朱榮等變亂之事委曲詳盡多足與史傳參證其他古迹藝文及外國土風道里採摭繁富亦足以廣異聞劉知幾史通云秦人不死驗苻生之厚誣蜀老猶存知葛亮之多枉蜀老事見魏書毛修之傳秦人事即用此書趙逸一條如幾引據最不苟知其說非鑿空也他如解魏文之苗茨碑糾戴延之之西征記考據亦皆精審惟以高陽王雍之樓為即古詩所謂西北有高樓上與浮雲齊者則未免固於說詩為是書之瑕纇耳據史通補註篇稱除煩則意有所恡畢載則言有所妨遂乃定彼榛楛列為子註若蕭大圜淮海亂離志羊衒之洛陽伽藍記是也則衒之此記實有自註世所行本皆無之不知何時佚脫然自宋以來未聞有引用其註者則其刊落已久今不可復考矣 > In five rolls, \*A Record of the Buddhist Monasteries in Luoyang\* was written by Yang Xuanzhi of the Later Wei Dynasty. Liu Zhiji's \*Shi Tong\* records the author's surname as "Yang," and Chao Gongwu's \*Reading Records\* agrees. However, the \*Sui Annals\* also uses "Yang," matching the current edition, suggesting the \*Shi Tong\* is mistaken. The author's precise background remains unknown, but from the text, he once served as a military advisor to the Governor-General. From the seventeenth year of the Taihe reign (493 CE), the Wei Dynasty established its capital in Luoyang. Buddhism flourished, and temples filled the city like no other place on earth. After the turmoil of the Yongxi period (532-534 CE), the city crumbled into ruins. In the fifth year of the Wuding reign (547 CE), Xuanzhi traveled to Luoyang and, reflecting on the city's rise and fall, gathered old accounts and traced past sites to complete this book. It is divided into five chapters, covering the city proper and the areas outside its four gates. The narrative proceeds in order: first the three eastern gates, then the three southern, and finally the three northern, each labeled with its old and new names as an outline. The structure is remarkably clear. The writing is rich and elegant, flowing yet never tiresome, worthy of being paired with Li Daoyuan's \*Commentary on the Water Classic\*. It also recounts, in detailed, exhaustive fashion, the upheavals caused by Erzhu Rong and others—many of these events corroborate official histories and offer useful cross-references. Other entries on historical sites, arts, foreign lands, customs, and routes are gathered in abundance, broadening knowledge and curiosity. Liu Zhiji's \*Shi Tong\* claims, "The men of Qin did not die—this proves Hou Sheng's false charges are baseless; the elder of Shu still lived—we know Zhuge Liang's many wrongs were exaggerated." The matter of the Shu elder appears in the \*Wei Annals\* in the biography of Mao Xiuzhi; the Qin affair uses precisely a passage about Zhao Yi from this book. Liu Zhiji cited sources meticulously—his argument is no empty claim. Furthermore, Xuanzhi's explanations of the "Sprout-Grass Stele" of Emperor Wen of Wei and his corrections of Dai Yanzhi's \*Record of a Western Expedition\* are scholarly and precise. However, his assertion that the tower of Prince Yong of Gaoyang is identical to the ancient poem "In the northwest stands a lofty tower, ascending to touch the floating clouds" is somewhat rigid—a minor flaw in the work. According to Liu Zhiji's "Supplementary Notes" in \*Shi Tong\*, "If I excise what is superfluous, the intent becomes cramped; if I record everything, the words cause hindrance. Therefore, I fixed the brambles and arranged them as sub-commentaries." For example, Xiao Datu's \*Chaos and Exile in the Huaihai Region\* and Yang Xuanzhi's \*Record of Buddhist Monasteries in Luoyang\* both contained the authors' own annotations. All extant editions lack these annotations, and it is unknown when they were lost. However, no one since the Song Dynasty has quoted them—the annotations have long since been cut away and can no longer be recovered. 宗祥案四庫提要予所見者文淵文津文瀾三閣各有異同以坊刻校之亦多不合不知坊刻當時據何閣疑是文宗也此篇據刻本錄出北面三門當係西面三門北面二門之譌脫又引古詩西北有高樓者乃清河王懌之樓在沖覺寺條下非高陽王雍也 > Zongxiang notes: The Siku Quanshu catalog I have seen shows differences between the Wenyuan, Wenjin, and Wenlan editions. Comparing them with the block-printed version also reveals many inconsistencies. I wonder which edition the block-printed version was based on—perhaps it was the Wenzong edition. This passage is transcribed from the block-printed version. The phrase "three gates on the north side" must be a mistake for "three gates on the west side" or "two gates on the north side." Also, the reference to the ancient poem about "a tall tower in the northwest" actually refers to Prince Qinghe Yi's tower, recorded under the entry for Chongjue Temple, not that of Prince Gaoyang Yong.