Having scheduled a year’s worth of praise and promises from the Lotus Sutra on this website, I need to address the criticism of that same praise and those lofty promises that were detailed in Yoshiro Tamura’s “Introduction to the Lotus Sutra.”
Yoshiro Tamura, "Introduction to the Lotus Sutra", p59Evaluations of the Lotus Sutra have traditionally run to the two extremes. In this respect, too, the sutra is indeed a wonder. First of all, one of the most severe criticisms of the sutra is the idea that it has no content. In chapter 25 of Emerging from Meditation, Nakamoto Tominaga comments that “the Lotus Sutra praises the Buddha from beginning to end but does not have any real sutra teaching at all, and therefore should not have been called a sutra teaching from the beginning.”
This is not new. I’ve already addressed this “emptiness” of the Lotus Sutra in the past. One can argue that it is deliberate.
In the Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra, Chih-i portrays the Ultimate Truth by equating it with empty space in a house:
The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra: Tien-tai Philosophy of BuddhismEmpty space in a house has neither roof beams nor pillars. The substance of a house, empty space, thus represents the Ultimate Truth. On the other hand, the roof beams and pillars are taken to analogize the cause and effect of Buddhahood. This is because if a house has no void, it cannot contain and receive anything. If the cause and effect of Buddhahood are not based on the Ultimate Truth as substance, they cannot sustain themselves. Thus, Chih-i holds that it is necessary to single out the correct substance that consists of only one empty space, upon which everything is able to function. (Vol. 2, Page 407-408)
The Lotus Sutra is, in effect, a blueprint for assembling all of the Buddha’s expedient teachings. Those roof beams and pillars form the house with empty rooms in which to practice. The emptiness essential to the function of the house is a function of the teaching of the Lotus Sutra.
More recently I published Taigen Dan Leighton discussion of the supposed shortfalls of the Lotus Sutra. In “Visions of Awakening Space and Time: Dōgen and the Lotus Sutra,” Taigen Dan Leighton lists these criticisms and then demolishes them.
The text does refer, in third person, to a designated text that one might keep vainly waiting for, as if for Godot.
However, this perspective misses the manner in which the Lotus sermon certainly does exist. Fundamental messages of the Lotus, such as the One Vehicle and the primacy of the Buddha vehicle, are difficult to miss, even if they might be interpreted in various ways. Furthermore, between the lines the Lotus Sutra functions within itself both as a sacred text or scripture and as a commentary and guidebook to its own use, beyond the literal confines of its own written text. The Lotus Sutra is itself a sacred manifestation of spiritual awakening that proclaims its own sacrality. Right within the text’s proclamation of the wonders of a text with the same name as itself, the text celebrates its own ephemeral quality with the visionary splendors of its assembly of buddhas, bodhisattvas, and spirits, and with the engaging qualities of its parables.
The synthesis of the immanent spirit spoken about in the text and the text’s own intended functioning as an instrument or skillful catalyst to spark awakening has been carried on among its followers.
Dōgen and the Lotus Sutra, p23-24
I should also address whether my entire “promise” project is just another example of how the Lotus Sutra is “merely a vulgar work meant to attract stupid men and women.” That was Tenyu Hattori’s criticism of the entire Lotus Sutra. Tenyu Hattori (1724–69) was a Confucian scholar in Japan who wrote Nakedness, a book that criticized Buddhism.
In Yoshiro Tamura’s “Introduction to the Lotus Sutra,” he discusses Hattori’s criticism:
Yoshiro Tamura, "Introduction to the Lotus Sutra", p61There are many places in the section of the Lotus Sutra that is considered to have come third historically that emphasize the benefits to be obtained in this life, such as the wonderful powers of faith, overcoming suffering, and having good fortune. And generally speaking, in later times devotion to the Lotus Sutra became mainstream as a result of these chapters. This is why such criticisms arose. As we have already seen, the third part of the sutra was added in order to respond to the magical and esoteric Buddhist and folk religions of India. It adds to and supplements the earlier parts of the sutra and, if taken in a positive way, can be its applied part. It is not appropriate to characterize the whole sutra in that way by emphasizing the third part, though historically admiration for the Lotus Sutra in China and Japan generally rested on that part, so, in one sense, we can understand why there were such criticisms.
Perhaps I am stupid. I would even confess to being vulgar in the sense of lacking sophistication. But I enjoyed putting together my eight months of daily promises from the Lotus Sutra and an additional four months of encouragement from Nichiren’s writings. I’m looking forward to reading these promises each morning.