Previous studies have pointed out that Shinran advocated bodhicitta of Other Power to counter Myōe’s criticism of Hōnen’s Pure Land teaching. In this study, I examine Shinran’s interpretation of the six-character Name （rokuji shaku 六字釈） in light of Myōe’s criticism. Myōe maintained that the direct cause for birth in the Pure Land （ōjō 往生） is based on the arising of bodhicitta, applying the idea of unity of practice and aspiration （gyō-gan wagō 行願和合） found in the Yūshin anrakudō 遊心安楽道. The idea of the unity of practice and aspiration means that people who aspire for birth in the Pure Land must have a mind of aspiration and practice for birth, as explained in Shandao’s teaching of the fulfillment of aspiration and practice （gan-gyō gusoku 願行具足）. In the Kyōgyōshinshō, Shinran cites Shandao’s interpretation of the six-character Name, which demonstrates the idea of the fulfillment of aspiration and practice, and then presents his own interpretation of the six-character Name. I argue that Shinran introduced his interpretation of the six-character Name in the Kyōgyōshinshō to respond to Myōe’s criticism of Hōnen’s Pure Land teaching based on the Yūshin anrakudō’s idea of the unity of practice and aspiration.
