Another criticism of the Lotus Sutra is that it is merely a vulgar work meant to attract stupid men and women. This is what Tenyu Hattori said. For example, in chapters 18¹ and 25 and elsewhere, the sutra preaches about the benefits to be gained in this life as a result of faith in the sutra, such as the elimination of suffering and having good fortune. “This is just inferior, shallow stuff, best laughed at, for alluring stupid men and women. It’s too inferior and shallow to think about,” he said. “Its purpose is wholly to attract stupid lay people.” Atsutane Hirata followed Hattori in this vein, remarking that chapter 25 had been highly valued for a long time, “becoming a separate sutra which ordinary Japanese people know as the Kannon Sutra,” but which “only serves to attract stupid lay men and women because it is utterly clumsy.”

There 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.

Notes

1. I believe this should be Chapter 19, The Merits of the Teacher of the Dharma, not Chapter 18, The Merits of a Person Who Rejoices at Hearing This Sutra.
   return

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.

Among those who were transnationalist Nichiren devotees, some were only slightly different from [Chogyu] Takayama [(1871-1902), who argues that Buddhism was a world religion and in that sense had the same viewpoint as Christianity]. They moved toward the cosmic faith taught by the Lotus Sutra and mediated by Nichiren. One such devotee was Kenji Miyazawa (1896-1933), a poet, writer of children’s stories, and agricultural scientist. Around his final year of high school, he happened to come across the book The Lotus Sutra in Chinese and Japanese by Daito Shimaji in his own house. He read it through once and was immediately thrilled by it. From then on he gradually grew more and more devoted to the Lotus Sutra and, without doing so explicitly, often incorporated its teachings into his stories. He was often explicit in his letters. For example, in a letter written just before his graduation from high school, he wrote, “Namu myoho renge kyo! Namu myoho renge kyo! I sincerely offer myself in service to the Sutra of the Lotus Flower of the Wonderful Dharma, the foundation of the greatest happiness for all. When I chant ‘Praise to the Lotus Sutra’ just once, the world and I are enveloped in a wondrous light.”

[L]ooking at the Lotus Sutra from a point of view that combines the traditional perspective with that of its historical formation, we can conclude that the sutra is comprised of three factors: (1) the true (Dharma), (2) the personal (Buddha), and (3) the human (bodhisattva). That is, the unifying truth of the cosmos corresponds to the theme of the first division (the teaching of the historical Shakyamuni), the eternal personal life to that of the second division (the teaching of the Everlasting Original Shakyamuni), and human action in this world to the theme of the third division. These three factors succinctly express the title of the Lotus Sutra—Wonderful Dharma Flower Sutra (Saddharmapuṇḍarika Sutra). “Wonderful Dharma” (saddharma) means that which defines the truth. “Sutra” means the teaching of the Buddha, thus that which is related to the Buddha. And the middle term, “Flower” (puṇḍarika), signifies the bodhisattvas. The unifying truth of the cosmos is the eternally living truth of life and persons, and this is a practical truth that we ought to concretely embody in the world. This is concisely expressed in the phrase that makes up the title “Wonderful Dharma Flower Sutra,” the Lotus Sutra. Therefore, Nichiren emphasized embracing the title and reciting it.

Thus, the Lotus Sutra has three characteristic ideas. Lotus Sutra and Tiantai theory developed in distinct ways according to which of these characteristics they emphasized.

The Lotus Sutra in its present form has twenty-eight chapters. But since chapter 12, “Devadatta,” did not appear as a separate chapter until the time of Tiantai Zhiyi in the sixth century, the sutra originally had only twenty-seven chapters. Traditionally, the sutra was divided in two between chapters 14, “Safe and Easy Practices¹,” and 15, “Springing Up from the Earth.” But in modern times various attempts have been made to divide it according to research on and explication of original texts. If we now reexamine it with reference to these various divisions, the following seems reasonable: The part of the sutra that spans from chapter 2, “Skillful Means,” through chapter 9, “Assurance for Arhats,” can be seen as the first part, which we can assume to have been formed around 50 CE. Then the part that spans from chapter 10, “Teachers of the Dharma,” through chapter 22, “Entrustment,” together with the first chapter, “Introduction,” can be regarded as the second part, which we may assume to be from around 100 CE. And finally, chapter 23, “Previous Lives of Medicine King Bodhisattva,” through chapter 28, “Encouragement of Universal Sage Bodhisattva,” can be seen as a third part, formed around 150 CE.

As previously stated, the first group of chapters, formed around 50 CE, is the original part of the Lotus Sutra. Later the second group was put together and added to the first. It seems that chapter 1, “Introduction,” was created at that time and placed at the beginning in order to create some coherence between the first and second groups. I imagine that the third group was created after the formation of the second as a way of assimilating the general thought and faith that arose at that time. It seems that each of these chapters were created individually and then successively added to the sutra. The reason for regarding this third group to be from around 150 CE lies in the fact that citations from the Lotus Sutra, even from its last chapter, appear in the Great Perfection of Wisdom Discourse, written by Nagarjuna around 200 CE. …

When we explore the division into first and second groups, we see that between chapter 9, “Assurance for Arhats” and chapter 10, “Teachers of the Dharma,” the audience of Shakyamuni’s sermon changes. Up to chapter 9, Shakyamuni addresses the shravakas, one of the two kinds of followers of the Small Vehicle, while from chapter 10 on, he addresses bodhisattvas. In chapter 1 as well, bodhisattvas are the audience. As discussed, chapter 1 was created at the time of the formation of the second group in order to provide coherence between the two groups of chapters.

Next, it is worth noting that in chapters 2-9 the Buddha gives individual assurances of becoming a buddha, while from the latter part of chapter 10 on he advocates social propagation of the Dharma. The assurance of becoming a buddha is meant mainly to signify that Small Vehicle shravakas are equally assured of becoming buddhas in the future, after being awakened and transformed by the Wonderful Dharma of One Vehicle. In general, “assurance” (vyakarana) refers to assurance by the Buddha that one will become a buddha in the future. The special entrustment, general entrustment, and the like signify the transmission of the Buddha’s mission to those who put truth into actual practice, thereby propagating it in society. Such assurance symbolizes the paragon of Mahayana Buddhism and has a deep relationship with the Mahayana bodhisattvas. …

Here I want to mention briefly the chronological divisions involved in the formation of the Lotus Sutra. In the earliest part of the sutra the prose sections amplify the verse sections, or conversely, the verses repeat what is in the prose sections. This seems to indicate that the verse sections were created first and then the prose sections added to supplement them. On the other hand, in the second group of chapters there are many things in verse form that are not merely repetitions of what was in prose, and we can only make sense of the whole through a combination of the prose and verse sections. Therefore, we can imagine that in this case the prose and verse sections were created at the same time. In this respect, too, there seems to be some difference between the first and second groups of chapters.

Moreover, within the first group, the terms “receive and embrace,” “read and recite,” and “explain” occur regularly, but “copy” is not mentioned. “Copy” was added in the second group, completing the set that later came to be known as the five kinds of Dharma teacher practice—receive and embrace, read, recite, explain, and copy. Thus we see, again, a chronological difference between the first and second groups. The fact that “copy” is not mentioned in the first group is a vestige of the period of memorization prior to the development of writing in India, indicating that the first group is older. Also, the six lower realms or paths—i.e., those of purgatories or hells, hungry spirits, animals, asuras, people, and heavenly beings—are found in the first group, but the idea of the ten realms of living beings, which include the realms of shravakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, and buddhas, was not yet formulated. We see the ten realms, however, in the second group, which provides another reason for maintaining that there is a chronological division between the formation of the first and second groups. It was not until sometime after the beginnings of Mahayana Buddhism that the realms of shravakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, and buddhas were added to the six lower realms. Beyond this, there are several other reasons, in terms of contents and chronological period, for maintaining a distinction between the first and second groups of chapters.

1. Chapter title names come from Gene Reeves’ 2008 translation of the Lotus Sutra. return