This paper examines the debate over “mental dharmas and physical forms” (shinpō shikigyō 心法色形) found in the third volume of the Daisho shinanshō 大疏指南鈔 (hereafter Shinanshō) written by the Shingon monk Chōkaku 長覚 (1340–1416). Comparing this to the treatment of the same debate by his contemporary Yūkai 宥快 (1345–1416) in the fourth volume of his Shūgi ketchakushū 宗義決択集 (hereafter Shūketsu), I examine the characteristics of Chōkaku’s interpretation.
We would have expected Chōkaku to have taken the position that “form and mind are non-dual” (shikishin funi 色心不二), but instead the interpretation of “mental dharmas and physical forms” is discussed from the standpoint of “duality of form and mind” (shikishin ni ni 色心而二), which agrees with the stance of Yūkai. Their conclusion that “the mind has color and shape” is common, but it became clear that there are different points in the process leading up to that conclusion.
The Shinanshō discusses why the mind has color and shape by using “part and whole, no duality, identity and difference, not mistaken” (bunman funi sokuri fubyū 分満不二即離不謬), which associates “form and mind are non-dual” with “duality of form and mind”. However, Yūkai denies this interpretation using the same notion.
This interpretation affects the interpretation of “mental dharmas and physical forms” after Chōkaku, and it is this interpretation which was used by Ryōchō 良重 (?–1488) and In’yū 印融 (1435–1519).
