Lably
Skip to content

Ten suchnesses

Mahayana doctrine unique to the Buddhist schools of Tiantai, Tendai, and Nichiren

  • 5 min read
  • 3 chapters

Related on Lably

Through Buddhists, Dharma and Buddhahood

Origin

The list of ten suchnesses is neither found in Dharmaraksha's Chinese translation nor in the Tibetan edition or any of the extant Sanskrit manuscripts.

The Sanskrit editions of the Lotus Sutra list only five elements:

Only the Thus Come One knows all the dharmas:

what are the dharmas, how are the dharmas, what are the dharmas like, of what characteristics are the dharmas, of what nature are the dharmas; what they are, how they are, what they are like, of what characteristics they are, of what nature are the dharmas,

only the Thus Come One has had direct experience in those dharmas.

Kumarajiva translates the passage in Chapter Two as:

Only a Buddha and a Buddha can exhaust their reality, namely the suchness of the dharmas, the suchness of their marks, the suchness of their nature, the suchness of their substance, the suchness of their powers, the suchness of their functions, the suchness of their causes, the suchness of their conditions, the suchness of their effects, the suchness of their retributions, and the absolute identity of their beginning and end.

The discrepancy between Kumarajivas translation and the Sanskrit editions might be due to Kumarajiva's use of a manuscript variant but Groner and Stone suggest that "the expansion of this list to ten is probably Kumarajiva's invention and may well be presaged in a passage in the Dazhidulun that includes nine aspects."

In the preface of Miraculous Dharma Lotus Flower Sutra with Supplements (添品妙法蓮華經) ( Taisho Tripitaka 0264 ), the two translators, Jnanagupta and Dharmagupta (達摩笈多), stated that they had examined Kumarajiva’s work titled Miraculous Dharma Lotus Flower Sutra, as well as Dharmaraksa’s work titled True Dharma Lotus Sutra, and concluded that the two translation works were based on different sources. Dharmaraksa’s work was based on a Sanskrit scripture written on Tala-leaves (Palm-leaf manuscript), while Kumarajiva’s work was based on a Sanskrit manuscript found in the Kucha kingdom. Jnanagupta and Dharmagupta successfully collected both of them. After comparison, they found out that some contents in the Tala-leaf edition are omitted in Dharmaraksa’s work, and some contents in the Kucha kingdom edition are not presented in Kumarajiva’s work. Therefore they decided to translate the omitted contents, add them to Kumarajiva’s work, and rearrange the chapters, to produce a more complete translation of the sutra.

Kumarajiva’s translations differed from his contemporaries as he was trying to convey the true meaning of the sutras rather than literal meaning. Thus, this can often explain small discrepancies from the original text.

Sign in to keep reading

2 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Religion