the " weilue " was lost but some of its contents were quoted on other books; however since no corresponding part about her name remains , so how her name was exactly written is unknown . 『魏略』には他の書に引用された逸文が残っているが、そこには該当部分は存在しないため正確にはどう書いてあったのか不明である。
however , in the aspect of philology the majority of the text was an abstraction from " maka hannya haramitsu-kyo sutra " of tripitaka in the korean edition (in the first part of the thirteenth century ) translated by kumaraju , and was different from the corresponding part of the " mahaprajnaparamita-sutra " translated by genjo , so that there is also suspicion about whether it was translated by genjo , as well as the buddhist sutra , which was said to be a translation by raju . しかし、文献学的にはテキストの主要部分が高麗大蔵経版（13世紀前半）の鳩摩羅什訳『摩訶般若波羅蜜経』からの抽出文そのものであり、玄奘が翻訳した『大般若波羅蜜多経』の該当部分とは異なるため、これも羅什訳と同様に玄奘訳であるということが疑われている。
