以《中論》《百論》《十二門論》為主的三論教學在隋唐之時甚為活躍，甚至一度曾為南方佛學研究的代表者，中國佛教史通常以三論宗稱呼這一僧團，並定出這一僧團的祖統及發展過程。 然而唐宋之時，並未見有何討論這一宗派者，三論宗一詞皆專指這三部論書的宗旨，並未出現宗派義的三論宗。當法相學、天臺學、華嚴學及禪學相繼活躍於南北之時，三論學者卻已消聲了，以致於宋人的論述中根本不認為有所謂的三論宗這一宗派，顯然對於三論教學的發展，古人與現代人的認知是有差距的。 以資料所見，宗派義的三論宗首出於十三世紀之時的日本僧人凝然的著作《八宗綱要鈔》，並定下三論宗的祖統說，在日本的佛教史中是有三論宗這一宗派，並據而定出伺度及中國的三論宗祖統說。也就是說唐宋以下的中國僧傳的資料中並未見三論宗這一宗派，但同時的日本僧傳卻定出三論宗這一宗派的發展史。 本文的撰述目的在於論證今之所謂的三論宗乃是受日本僧史的影響，而唐宋的認知中並不存在三論宗這一宗派。

The teaching of San-lun, including Mulamadhyamaka-karika (中論)、catacastra (百論)、Dvadacamukha-castra (十二門論), had been active in SHU-TANG dynasty, and it was once regarded as a typical representative of southern Buddhism’s teaching. The Buddhism history of Chinese generally named the monks group as San-lun school and arranged the order of masters. But San-lun school had never been discussed in Tang-Sung dynasty the. The words, San-lun, indicate the propose of the classical. When the monks of Fa-shiang school、Hua-yen、Tian-tai schooland Chan shool active at northern and sour then of China in Tang-Sung dynasty, the monks of San-lun school disappeared silently. As a result, the works of scholars in Sung dynasty seemed never to know what San-lun school was, not mentioned the order of masters. Therefore, the understanding of the development of San-lun’s teaching has not fallen into the same treat between then and now. According to Japan’s Buddhism history, the San-lun school firstly definite as a school and arranged the order of masters at Ba-tzung Gung-yau (八宗綱要) that work belonged to Japanese monk, Nen-ran (凝然) in 13th century. But at the same time it was in Tang-sung dynasty in China. The essay aims at realizing that the discussion of San-lunschool has been influenced by Japan’s Buddhism history and it has never appeared at Chinese Buddhism history after Tang dynasty.