AD 68

White Horse Temple

Traditional Foundation of Luoyang's White Horse Temple

China's first undisputed written trace of Buddhism dates to 65 — three years before the religion's supposed official arrival.

A dream, an embassy, a temple

A later Chinese Buddhist tradition dates the foundation of White Horse Temple at Luoyang to 68 CE, the eleventh year of Emperor Ming's Yongping era.

In that narrative, Emperor Ming dreamed of a radiant golden figure identified as the Buddha and dispatched envoys westward. They returned with Buddhist texts and monks, for whom the emperor provided the temple.

The legend is younger than what it explains

Modern scholarship classifies the "official introduction" story as a pious legend that arose centuries after the alleged event, with its formation placed around the third century and development in the fourth and fifth.

The dates assigned to the western mission wander between 60, 61, 64 and 68 depending on the version. The two famous monks, Kāśyapa Mātaṅga and Dharmaratna, appear only in developed versions from the late fifth century onward.

Buddhism was already there in 65

An edict concerning Prince Liu Ying of Chu is regarded as the first undisputed Chinese reference to Buddhist monks, laypeople and practices — and it dates to 65, before the temple's traditional founding year.

The standing complex cannot settle the question either: its surviving historic structures are from the Yuan, Ming and Qing periods.

Sources

Researched 23 Aug 2026 5 sources not yet audited Date disputed

How this was checked

Researched from the web into a fact sheet and rewritten from that sheet. This article has not yet had an independent model audit. How the pipeline works →

Date disputed. Sources disagree about when this happened.

What the sources leave uncertain

The year 68 is a traditional foundation date, not a date established from contemporary records.
Scholarly analyses place the legend's formation around the third century, followed by development in the fourth and fifth centuries.
Some scholars allow that the story may preserve a small historical core; others reject it as fiction containing anachronisms.
The current temple's surviving historic structures are from the Yuan, Ming, and Qing periods, so the standing complex cannot verify a first-century construction event.