KN X: 230, 8 anācakṣitapūrvam anākhyātam is a combination of the reading of the Kashgar recension (anācakṣita-) and the Nepalese recension (anākhyāta-). What does the difference between ā-khyā and ā-cakṣ mean? There is some room here for consideration.
These two verbs show a suppletive paradigm. For instance, the past participle is regularly derived from ā-khyā (ākhyāta-), but we can find ā-cakṣita- in Saddhp I 79, attested in all manuscripts. Most of the other examples can be explained as follows:
In the original “Lotus Sutra,” ā-cakṣ is conjugated as a thematic stem, as the Kashgar manuscript and the Gilgit recension show. KN VII: 109,7 (=T8 30a6) ācaṣṭe might be a secondary reading modified by later scribes (cf. Kashgar, Gilgit A, B ācakṣati). The readings of Gilgit A: 62,29 ācakṣatāṃ, Kolkata 61a2 ocakṣatām and KN V: 134,9 ācakṣamāṇānām (=T8: 35b7) represent the change to the middle from active.
On the other hand, we can find ā-cakṣita- in Saddhp I 79 and the prose portion of Kashgar X, and optatives ācakṣeyāt (Kashgar IV) or ācakṣeya (Kashgar X). These readings suggest that these chapters are linguistically close to each other. But Kashgar XVIII’s ācakṣet shows the distance.
These facts reconfirm the value of the Kashgar manuscript and provide useful suggestions for reconsideration of its relationship to the Gilgit manuscripts and the reconstruction of the history of the Lotus Sūtra.
