There is a belief that the Lotus Sūtra was taught over eight years at the end of the life of Śākyamuni Buddha. From the standpoint of the believer, this position is fine. However, from an academic standpoint, we cannot assert such a thing. A Buddhist historian would assert that there is no evidence that the historical Śākyamuni Buddha taught the Lotus Sūtra. In other words, the Lotus Sūtra is not a direct record of the historical Śākyamuni Buddha’s teaching. In that case, when, where and by whom was the Lotus Sūtra produced?

[W]e can present the standard answer that the Lotus Sūtra was one of the Early Mahāyāna sūtras, created in India around 100-200 CE. Was it created in a relatively short period of time, or was it gradually compiled and revised over a longer period of time? Who or what group compiled the Lotus Sūtra into one work? Regarding such issues, many academic theories have been presented, and opinions are certainly not in accord. …

Nevertheless we would like to pose a rather mean question. What if the Lotus Sūtra was not directly taught by the historical Śākyamuni Buddha, but was created in the form of Śākyamuni Buddha’s direct teachings? In other words, the Lotus Sūtra is written in the form of lectures by Buddha, but from an academic standpoint, we cannot easily accept the contents as the words of the Buddha. In this case, if we are asked, “Should we only consider sūtras that we can affirm were taught by the historical Śākyamuni Buddha as legitimate Buddhist sūtras?” What shall we answer? It is a difficult question to answer in a nutshell. But it is a question related to the root of faith.