Evaluations 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.” Moreover, “the whole of the Lotus Sutra is nothing but words of praise.” In sum, the Lotus Sutra is nothing but words of praise either for the Buddha or for itself, teaches nothing like a doctrine, and therefore cannot properly be regarded as a sutra. In his book Nakedness, Tenyu Hattori comments similarly on the Lotus Sutra, saying, “It is only a big story in the sky,” meaning that it is only a big, empty, work of fantasy.

Atsutane Hirata, who abused Buddhism in vulgar and crude ways, ridiculed the Lotus Sutra in the third volume of his Laughter Following Meditation, saying, Sutra of the Lotus Flower of the Wonderful Dharma in eight fascicles and twenty-eight chapters is truly only snake oil without any really substantial medicine in it at all. If someone gets mad at me for saying this, I intend to tell him to show me the real medicine.” This criticism that the Lotus Sutra is merely snake oil devoid of content later became famous and highly regarded, and the theory that the Lotus Sutra has no real content, represented by Hirata, has since become quite common.

Actually, if one only glances through the Lotus Sutra one may get the impression that it is nothing but snake oil without real substance. We can find something like doctrines in the first half, but they are not analytical and no detailed theory is developed from them. The second half of the sutra vigorously teaches faith in the Lotus Sutra. The Lotus Sutra does praise only itself, to put it bluntly. Nor does the Lotus Sutra say what kind of thing it itself is. So it is not unreasonable that the above criticisms arose.

But it is not the case that there has been no defense against such criticism. Tiantai Zhiyi already rejected such criticism in early times, saying that if the Lotus Sutra “does not discuss all kinds of Mahayana and Small Vehicle forms of meditation, the ten powers, fearlessness, and various standards, it is because these things have already been taught in prior sutras. It discusses fundamental principles of the Tathagata’s teachings, but not the fine details.” In other words, in previous sutras the various detailed teachings and definitions are fully worked out, while the Lotus Sutra, generalizing upon them, aims to illuminate the fundamental and ultimate principles of Buddhism. Therefore, it does not discuss minute details of doctrine. In this sense, Tiantai Zhiyi calls the Lotus Sutra “genetic and essential,” “the great cause,” “the ultimate essence,” “the essential structure of the teachings,” “the Buddha’s device for saving people,” and so forth.