According to Gene Reeves’ introduction to The Lotus Sutra, Buddha-nature is the innate potential to attain Buddhahood through Bodhisattva practices:
It would be a great mistake, I think, to reify this notion (Buddha-nature), turning it into some sort of substantial reality underlying ordinary realities, something that is easy to do and is often done.
In the text itself, it seems to me, Buddha-nature has no such ontological status. It is mainly a skillful way of indicating a potential, a potential with real power, to move in the direction of being a buddha by taking up the bodhisattva way…
In addition to the extremely important but relatively abstract notion of following the bodhisattva way, the Lotus Sutra frequently advocates concrete practices, which are often related to the sutra itself.
They are often given as sets of four to six practices, but include receiving and embracing the sutra, hearing it, reading and reciting it, remembering it correctly, copying it, explaining it, understanding its meaning, pondering it, proclaiming it, practicing as it teaches, honoring it, protecting it, making offerings to it, preaching it and teaching it to others, and leading others to do any of these things.
The six transcendental practices (Paramitas) taught especially for bodhisattvas also play a prominent and important role.