Difference between revisions of "Ratnamati"
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
While translating, an irreconcilable [[difference]] of interpretation broke out between the two translators, [[Bodhiruci]] and [[Ratnamati]]. [[Bodhiruci’s]] reading followed a relatively orthodox [[Yogācāra]] line, while [[Ratnamati’s]] interpretation leaned heavily toward a [[Buddhist]] ideology only beginning to receive [[attention]] in [[China]], [[tathāgatagarbha]] [[thought]]. When [[Bo-dhiruchi]] and [[Ratnamati]] translated The [[Treatise on the Ten Stages Sutra]] into {{Wiki|Chinese}}, [[Hui-kuang]] assisted in its translation and wrote a commentary on this treatise. At [[Nalanda]], [[Nagarjuna]] studied [[sutra]] and [[tantra]] with [[Ratnamati]] – an [[emanation]] of [[Manjushri]] – and, with [[Saraha]], especially The [[Guhyasamaja Tantra]] ([[dPal gsang-ba ‘dus-pa’i rgyud]]). In addition, he learned [[alchemy]] from a [[brahmin]], and gained the ability to transmute iron into gold. | While translating, an irreconcilable [[difference]] of interpretation broke out between the two translators, [[Bodhiruci]] and [[Ratnamati]]. [[Bodhiruci’s]] reading followed a relatively orthodox [[Yogācāra]] line, while [[Ratnamati’s]] interpretation leaned heavily toward a [[Buddhist]] ideology only beginning to receive [[attention]] in [[China]], [[tathāgatagarbha]] [[thought]]. When [[Bo-dhiruchi]] and [[Ratnamati]] translated The [[Treatise on the Ten Stages Sutra]] into {{Wiki|Chinese}}, [[Hui-kuang]] assisted in its translation and wrote a commentary on this treatise. At [[Nalanda]], [[Nagarjuna]] studied [[sutra]] and [[tantra]] with [[Ratnamati]] – an [[emanation]] of [[Manjushri]] – and, with [[Saraha]], especially The [[Guhyasamaja Tantra]] ([[dPal gsang-ba ‘dus-pa’i rgyud]]). In addition, he learned [[alchemy]] from a [[brahmin]], and gained the ability to transmute iron into gold. | ||
| − | [[Ratnamati]] was the author of an exegesis of the [[Cāndravyākaraṇa grammar]], a manuscript of which [[Gendün Chömpel]] and R. Sāṅkṛtyāyana located in Ripuk near [[Zhalu | + | [[Ratnamati]] was the author of an exegesis of the [[Cāndravyākaraṇa grammar]], a manuscript of which [[Gendün Chömpel]] and R. Sāṅkṛtyāyana located in Ripuk near [[Zhalu Monastery]], |
| − | [[Traditionally]] it is said that there were three main positions held in [[China]] during the Sui-T'ang period | + | [[Traditionally]] it is said that there were three main positions held in [[China]] during the Sui-T'ang period concerning the status or nature of the [[alayavij~nana]]: [[Bodhiruci]] and [[Ratnamati]] held the [[view]] that it is pure, [[Paramartha]] proposed a theory of a mixed (true-and-false) [[aalayavij~naana]], while [[Hsuan-tsang]] supported a {{Wiki|theory}} of a "deluded" [[alayavij~nana]]. |
</poem> | </poem> | ||
{{R}} | {{R}} | ||
Revision as of 16:28, 28 August 2013
Ratnamati 勒那摩提 translator, 後魏, Late Wèi Dynasty
Ratnamati
勒那摩提 (n.d.) (Skt; Jpn Rokunamadai)
A monk of central India and a translator of Buddhist scriptures. He is said to have memorized a great many verses of the sutras. In 508 he went to Lo-yang in China and, with Bodhiruchi, translated The Treatise on the Ten Stages Sutra into Chinese. The Chinese translations of The Treatise on the Lotus Sutra and The Treatise on the Treasure Vehicle of Buddhahood are also accredited to him. The Sanskrit text of Vasubandhu's treatise no longer exists, but two Chinese versions are extant, one by Bodhiruchi and T'an-lin, and the other by Ratnamati and Senglang. Both were produced in the sixth century. According to tradition, Ratnamati, who was from central India, went to Lo-yang, China, in 508 and translated the Saddharma-pundarika-upadesha with the assistance of Senglang. Bodhiruchi, a native of northern India, went to Lo-yang in the same year and produced another Chinese version at Yung-ning-ssu temple with the assistance of T'an-lin.
Treatise on the Ten Stages Sutra, The
十地経論 (Chin Shih-ti-ching-lun; Jpn Juji-kyo-ron )
A work by Vasubandhu, translated into Chinese in the sixth century by Bodhiruchi and Ratnamati. Bodhiruchi and Ratnamati translated the Sanskrit text of The Treatise on the Ten Stages Sutra into Chinese.
Treatise on the Treasure Vehicle of Buddhahood, The
究竟一乗宝性論 (Skt Ratnagotravibhaga-mahayanottaratantra-shastra; Chin Chiu-ching-i-ch’eng-pao-hsing-lun; Jpn Kukyo-ichijo-hosho-ron )
A work by Saramati, a Mahayana scholar of India, translated into Chinese in the sixth century by Ratnamati.
Ratnamati was an eminent monk who came from central India to China and arrived at Songshan Shaolin Temple in 508 A.D. (the 1st year of the reign of Yongping of the Northern Wei Dynasty). Here he was arranged by Dharma master Batuo (Buddhabhadra) to translate the Dasabhumikasutra sastra in the Scripture Translation Hall. Furthermore, he worked on to translate additional texts such as the Saddharmapundarika Sutra and preached Buddhism to his disciples in Shaolin Temple. His devotion to translation and preaching on scriptures has played an important role in Sino-Indian Buddhist exchanges.
While translating, an irreconcilable difference of interpretation broke out between the two translators, Bodhiruci and Ratnamati. Bodhiruci’s reading followed a relatively orthodox Yogācāra line, while Ratnamati’s interpretation leaned heavily toward a Buddhist ideology only beginning to receive attention in China, tathāgatagarbha thought. When Bo-dhiruchi and Ratnamati translated The Treatise on the Ten Stages Sutra into Chinese, Hui-kuang assisted in its translation and wrote a commentary on this treatise. At Nalanda, Nagarjuna studied sutra and tantra with Ratnamati – an emanation of Manjushri – and, with Saraha, especially The Guhyasamaja Tantra (dPal gsang-ba ‘dus-pa’i rgyud). In addition, he learned alchemy from a brahmin, and gained the ability to transmute iron into gold.
Ratnamati was the author of an exegesis of the Cāndravyākaraṇa grammar, a manuscript of which Gendün Chömpel and R. Sāṅkṛtyāyana located in Ripuk near Zhalu Monastery,
Traditionally it is said that there were three main positions held in China during the Sui-T'ang period concerning the status or nature of the alayavij~nana: Bodhiruci and Ratnamati held the view that it is pure, Paramartha proposed a theory of a mixed (true-and-false) aalayavij~naana, while Hsuan-tsang supported a theory of a "deluded" alayavij~nana.
