As I work my way through books on Buddhism, I’m constantly weighing them against Nichiren’s writings and the Lotus Sūtra. In introductory books such as Basic Buddhist Concepts and The Beginnings of Buddhism,  I find pieces of Buddhist concepts implied in the Lotus Sūtra but glossed over.  I wonder how this all fits together.

I find one compelling explanation in The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sūtra. T’ien-t’ai Philosophy of Buddhism by Haiyan Shen. I’ve only just begun the first volume, but in there is this enlightening passage:

Chih-i has stressed the unique feature of the Lotus Sūtra by comparing the Lotus Sūtra with other sūtras:

“All these various sūtras aim at catering to the will of others [i.e., living beings], causing others to gain benefits. They do not discuss the intention of the Buddha, and to where his intention tends. The present [Lotus] Sūtra is not so. Regarding the doctrines [which make up the Buddhist] system [of thought], the Mahāyāna and Hinayāna methods of contemplation, the ten powers and [four forms of] fearlessness [of the Buddha], and various rules and customs [of the Buddhist religion], [the Lotus Sūtra] does not discuss them at all, for they have already been stated in the previous sūtras. [The Lotus Sūtra] only discusses the original career of the Tathāgata’s preaching, how he resorted to the sudden and gradual [methods of the teaching] in [his] middle career, and how he finally approached [his] end career [by revealing] the great cause [of universal salvation]. [The Lotus Sūtra exhibits] the framework of [the Buddha’s] teaching, and [makes known] the expedient means [the Buddha employs] to universally transform [sentient beings].

Mou Tsung-san also reiterates the superiority of the Lotus Sūtra, in a way which is akin to Chih-i’s viewpoint. Its superiority is demonstrated by the fact that it is not concerned with expressing certain doctrines, but it only establishes the merging and ultimate teaching in order to reveal the real intention of the Buddha for universal salvation of sentient beings underlying his various teachings. Mou Tsung-san considers this nature of the sūtra as belonging to the level of the transcendent. This is to say that the Lotus Sūtra is concerned with wisdom and insight into the Ultimate Truth. In order for one to understand this Truth, one first has to acquire the basic knowledge stated in other Buddhist scriptures.

Hurvitz has also indicated a similar view when he comments on the nature of the Lotus Sūtra. He states that the Lotus Sūtra takes the existence of a formulated Hinayāna philosophy (Four Noble Truths, dependent origination, substantiality of the dharmas, insubstantiality of the ego, personal release, etc) and of an equally formulated Mahāyāna philosophy (insubstantiality of the dharmas, bodhisattvahood, the Six Perfections, etc) for granted.

And as I read I discover the threads of Buddhism taken for granted and acquire some of the basic knowledge merged in the Ultimate Truth contained in the Lotus Sūtra.