本文將「批判佛教」思潮的實質，概括為四個特徵「一個靶的，兩個淵源，視角異化泛化，佛教學養不實」；後一特徵貫串於前三個特徵中。 松本史朗將經籍中之「界」義，等價判攝為「基體」；再以梵我論思想，填充「基體」論；然後以此「基體」論分判大乘佛教的唯識和如來藏思想為外道梵論思想。由此，他提出要掀起清除中國傳統佛教對日本佛教影響的運動，完全否決中國傳統佛教中禪宗和華嚴宗等宗派的合法性地位。 本文建構基體（不帶引號）概念，除了起到不認可松本「基體」（帶引號）概念的作用外，還有如下意義：其一，對經典表述「實體」權說的理解和肯認。其二，安立基體並隨之予以揚棄，表顯出語言的無奈，彰顯「文字般若」的非究竟性。其三，起到評判點明以往對松本進行回應駁斥的諸種觀點之乏力及其原因所在，即不敢承認「涅槃寂靜」這一基體實性，大有似乎承認之就必定是「基體」乃至是「梵我」論；確立基體概念將便於指出松本史朗之謬誤能馳騁多年的原因。 松本史朗錯誤的本質或核心思路，實質就是以佛教「三法印」中的前兩個「法印」（將之轉化為「緣起說」和「無我說」後）來反對第三個「法印」—「涅槃寂靜」；這正是他批判「界」義、建立「基體論」立場的根本依託所在。 從松本的思路和行文可知，當唯識學將第八識和無漏法種以及如來藏等，視為是「法爾而有」、本來具足時，松本史朗就已在認為，這正是具有實體性的梵或我論；松本史朗對於一至三轉法輪經中所說，第八識如來藏異於大梵、異於常見我之種種差異，視而不見。 從《奧義書》和《梵經》等典型外道梵我論經籍，以其對梵我論的權威性解釋，能夠與如來藏正義作出比較和分判。 松本史朗推崇十二支緣起，并認為「基體論」與之相矛盾；松本所持的「緣起說」，若能涵括賴耶緣起和法界緣起等，便並未背棄第三法印「涅槃寂靜」；「十二支緣起」稟具「界」義。 松本將「法界圓融」義作了佛教外行的膚淺性解讀；日本社會的不平等性，被「批判佛教」論者視為是「基體」的總體發源造成，這是並未認清佛教的立教本質所致。 任何以哲學的範式試圖摹繪或捆綁佛教義理的作法都將證明是愚昧的，因為佛教所具有的與某些哲學思想或範式的表相相似性，並不能反映出佛教體系的真實本質。 松本以及支持「批判佛教」思潮的諸多介入學者，幾乎是以文獻學、語言學上的積累和思路，展開諸多細枝末節且是繁雜的考證論述，系統性的佛學知見往往闕如。他們在研究方法上存在著兩點通病。

This article summarizes the essence of Critical Buddhism in four characteristics: one target, two origins, alienation and generalization of vision angle, and lack of correct Buddhist knowledge; the last one runs through the first three. Shiro Matsumoto equated the meaning of Realm in the sutras with the Dhātu, filled the Dhātuvāda with the thought of Brahma-Atma-Aikya theory, and then used this ―Dhātu-vāda as the base to presume the thoughts of Vijnana-Only and Tathagatagarbha of Mahayana Buddhism to be the thought of Brahma-Atma-Aikya theory. Starting from that point, he brought up a campaign to eliminate the influence of Chinese Traditional Buddhism on Japanese Buddhism, and to completely veto the legal position of the Chan School, Huayan (Kegon) School, etc. in Chinese Traditional Buddhism. In disagreement with Matsumoto‘s concept of ―Dhātu (with quotation marks), this article builds the concept of Dhātu (without quotation marks) to help convey the following meanings: First, to understand and recognize the expedient expression of the real entity in the sutras, second, to set up the term Dhātu and then to give it up, expressing the incapability of language and manifesting the limitation of the prajna of words, third, to identify the reason why various viewpoints are unable to refute Matsumoto‘s concept is that they dare not recognize the real nature of Dhātu of the nirvana being tranquil, with the implication that what is admitted will become Dhātu or even the ―Brahma-Atma-Aikya theory; a well established concept of Dhātu will help to explain the reason why Matsumoto‘s errors can actively exist for so many years. The essence or kernel thinking logic of Shiro Matsumoto‘s errors is in fact using the first two ―dharma-seals (after transforming them into the ―Theory of Dependent Arising and the Theory of No-Self respectively) of Buddhist Three Dharma-Seals to oppose the third dharma-seal, the nirvana being tranquil; based on this fundamental concept, he built his Dhātu-vāda to criticize the meaning of Realm. From his thinking logic and context, Matsumoto thought, when Vijnana-Only theory regards the eighth vijnana, seeds of flawless dharmas, and Tathagatagarbha as existing just the way they are and being perfect and complete inherently, it is exactly the real nature of the Brahma or Self theory; Matsumoto completely ignored various differences, which are mentioned in the sutras of the three rounds of Buddha Sakyamuni‘s dharma transmission, between the eighth vijnana Tathagatagarbha and Mahabrahma or the self of eternalism. From Upanishad and Brahma Sutra, which are the typical non-Buddhist sutras of Brahma-Atma-Aikya theory, and their authoritative interpretations, we can make a comparison and identify its difference from the correct meanings of Tathagatagarbha. Matsumoto highly praised the theory of twelve links of dependent arising and thought that ―Dhātu-vāda conflicts with that theory; if Matsumoto‘s Theory of Dependent Arising can include the Alaya dependent arising and dharma-realm dependent arising, it will not violate the third dharma-seal, ―the nirvana being tranquil. The twelve links of dependent arising possesses the meaning of ―Realm. Matsumoto explained the meaning of the ―perfect harmony of dharma-realm with a shallow understanding, which shows that he was unfamiliar with Buddhist knowledge; the supporters of ―Critical Buddhism thought that ―Dhātu is the general origin of the social inequality in Japan; this is because they did not clearly understand the essence of Buddhism when it was founded. Any intention to depict or restrain the doctrines of Buddhism with philosophical models will be proved foolish; it is because the superficial similarities between Buddhism and some philosophical thoughts or models cannot reflect the true essence of the Buddhist system. Matsumoto and many scholars who support the ―Critical Buddhism mostly use the knowledge and thinking logic of document study and linguistics to start many trivial, miscellaneous textual researches and discourses, but they lack the systematic Buddhist knowledge. They have two general faults in their research method.