The Rushi lun (如實論), which was translated into Chinese by Pa-ramārtha (真諦), is regarded as an important source for under-standing the history of Buddhist logic before Dignāga. However, due to the lack of the work’s original Sanskrit version or a Tibetan translation, research on this treatise has hitherto progressed only slowly, despite the fact that many excellent scholars, including Tucci, Ui and Frauwallner, have discussed it in the past. More recently, the study of the Sanskrit manuscript of Jinendrabuddhi’s Pramāṇasamuccayaṭīkā chapters 3-4 and 6 that has been undertaken by Shoryu Katsura and his colleagues, as well as Eli Franco’s research on the so-called Spitzer manuscript, has shed new light on the understanding of the early history of Buddhist logic. On the basis of the results of this more recent research, the paper aims to reconsider the historical position of the Rushi lun by clarifying some basic problems regarding this work: its original title, the issue of its incompleteness, and its authorship.