Shaolin Literature

[KubanLink]

I am a fiend when it comes to studying things I get involved with. Are there any good books out there (in English) that discuss Shaolin kung fu history or Shaolin kung fu conceptually? Most of the knowledge I have gathered is from forums and websites. Thanks.

[NorthernShaolin]

One real good book that you may still be able to purchase in English is part of the Chinese Wu Shu Series called:

Essential of Chinese Wu Shu by Foreign Languages Press, 1992, Beijing, ISBN 0-8351-2830 X or ISBN 7-119-01477-3

[Roc Doc]

kubanlink,
you should check out this research paper by Dr. Shahar entitled;
ming period evidence of shaolin martial practice
you can find it in the harvard journal of asiatic studies
i think it is in the nov/dec issue/2001
enjoy,
~doc

[GeneChing]

Our most recent Shaolin Special was last years Nov Dec 2003 issue (http://store.martialartsmart.net/kf200119.html) and in it, you'll find a listing of all of our previous Shaolin issues. Plus you can search through all of our old magazine table-of-contents (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/index.php) for more. There are a lot of stray Shaolin articles that never made it to the specials - overflow, if you will.

Speaking of Dr. Shahar, our families just had dinner together last Friday. In fact, our wives and kids were supposed to get together for an outing this President's Day sinc eth sschools are closed, but my kid fell sick over the weekend, so it was postponed. Expect more from him to come. He's a truly brilliant researcher, and delightful company. We've been trading a lot of research lately. Expect to see some of his work here soon. :cool:

[Just a Guy]

Shahar's work has great historical merit. What's really nice is that he has drawn information together from disparate Chinese sources and put it all in one place. However...

I believe his speculation that Shaolin martial practices violate the Buddhist doctrine of non-violence and his hypothesis that 16th century Shaolin justified those practices, especially staff work, by invoking the celestial example of Jinnaluo is way off-base. I won't write a book here about it, but his premises deserve some serious scrutiny.

[KubanLink]

Does the full extent of Dr. Shahar's writings on the topic consist of "ming period evidence of shaolin martial practice" or is there more?

thanks.

Trying to figure out where to get a copy of that article. IF anyone is willing to provide me with a copy via email (pdf format or something) let me know, and I'll provide you with my email address.

[canglong]

I am looking for that article as well I was going to chime in earlier and mention you have to be a member to read the article online but if some one is sharing a copy I would like to get one as well. Thanks, I have emaild Dr. Shahar but no reply as of yet...

[mickey]

Greetings Brothers,

I would have to recommend "Shaolin Kung Fu" by Ying Zi and Weng Yi (1981). This one is very hard to find. The first four chapters are about Shaolin history and includes very nice photographs of the frescoes. The last chapter is on Shaolin Kung Fu. Special mention is made of the Jingang Chan Natural Style and Shorinji Kempo. One can see with this book the agenda toward the rebuilding of Shaolin. What's missing? The monks that we now all see. A lot has changed in 23 years!

mickey

[Just a Guy]

Good luck finding that book!!

It does have some nice tidbits, however. Of note, the authors mention T'ang Dynasty martial arts at the temple. However, the book is not a scholarly one. They don't really say where they get their info. Fortunately, Jeffrey Broughton's "The Bodhidharma Anthology" also has some info about early martial activities at the temple - recorded in Ch'an literature. And Broughton's book is widely available. Just a warning, the book isn't really about Shaolin - buried in the notes, there just happens to be a little history recovered from the Tun Huang Manuscripts about martial activity at the temple.

Shahar's article talks about how Shaolin were famous in the 16th century for staff work. But the Ch'an literature records famous staff masters at the temple even as early as Tamo's time - monks such as Seng-Ch'o. So when military commanders in the 1550's were talking about the staff techniques at Shaolin being ancient, they weren't a' kidding! (Of course, the stuff they do at the "temple" today is completely different.)

[Fen]

I have been looking over Dr. Shahar paper for over a month now, and this is just one thinking I have seen..

In the research paper by Dr. Shahar entitled;
Ming period evidence of Shaolin Martial practice.

Info only::::
On page 376. The last paragraph on this page says:

The Shaolin Monasstery has a staff-fighting method called " Five Tigers Interception" (Wuhu lan).
"One strike down, one strike up" (yi da yi jie)

And in BSL of today (?-2004) we have:
"Five tigers catch the lamb Staff "

Thesaurus
Entry: intercept ion
Function: verb
Definition: interrupt
Synonyms: ambush, appropriate, arrest, block, bug, catch, check, curb, cut in, cut off, deflect, head off, hijack, hinder, interlope, interpose, obstruct, prevent, seize, shortstop, stop, take, take away
Concept: prevention/restriction

I do feel that this is the same set as todays. Just with add name (the lamb Staff) on it. Why, I do not know yet.

But if this is the same set, then it poves that the set is older then 1562 (gessing on date do to the info on pages 375-377) that makes this set over 442 years old.

But this is just what I've gotten to at this time.
Any info that you all have will help....

~Jason

[blooming lotus]

For me, an important part of researching gongfu/shaolin martial arts has been chinese history in general...I think even if it seems unrelated, it gives good broader perspective and understanding...but you may have gathered that already ;) :D

[GeneChing]

Dr. Shahar actually has a fair amount of research that he is developing, but keep in mind that this is academic research, which operates at a much higher standard. If you really think you have solid evidence that refutes his claim, then by all means publish it in an academic journal. That's what real scholarly research is all about. I'm at odds with some of his research, in particular his analysis of staff, but I cannot refute it academically. In fact, his staff premise was challenged by a young monk at Shaolin at the Shaolin Academic Symposium (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=357) who cited the stele of Li Shinmin. Of course, Dr. Shahar did major work on the stele and no where on that stele does it mention that the monks actually wielded staff - that was added to the legend later - so the good doctor shot that ipetuos monk down with stunning academic flair. And the rumor is that the monk got a severe dressing down from the Abbot abou this.

As for Five Tigers Catch the Lamb, it's a classic movement in martial arts, akin to White crane spreads its wings. I'm reading General Yue Fei now, and it is mentioned even in there.

[canglong]

Hmmm ok Gene, I'll bite where exactly do you and Dr. Shahar differ on staff?

[rik]

Tao of wushu - Wu Shu's record was written in the seventeenth century so I'm not sure where you are getting your conclusion about 'five tigers interception' .

Also it is my feeling "wuhu lan," as mentioned in that document, refers to a tactic not a form.

Gene - I gather that you're not so much at odds with Dr. Shahar's research as you are with some
of his conclusions. I suspect that Dr. Shahar is questioning whether there was formal
staff combat training at Shaolin, before the Ming Dynasty.

[MasterKiller]

Is there an online copy of the article anywhere?

[GeneChing]

... since we are working together sharing research and it's far from complete. We've been discussing the development of weapon practice and empty hand, and there is little recorded on Shaolin prior to certain dates. Those dates are later than what is generally assumed, but such is the record.

[canglong]

Gene,
thanks and good luck with your research.

[GeneChing]

See our calendar (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/news/index.php?month=04&year=2004) April 7th, 2004.

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by GeneChing
... since we are working together sharing research and it's far from complete. We've been discussing the development of weapon practice and empty hand, and there is little recorded on Shaolin prior to certain dates. Those dates are later than what is generally assumed, but such is the record.


so when do we get to hear a progress report??? Do I smell a co-authored book GeneChing? Where are you going with this?

[Banjos_dad]

One of my favorites is The Art Of Shaolin Kung Fu, by Mr. Wong Kiew Kit.
It's not hard to find as it's from Tuttle Publishing.
ISBN 0-8048-3439-3.
I own a couple dozen books on KF and this is one goes into greater depth while still being understandable and relevant to what I'm doing. :cool:

[oasis]

The Ming Dynasty article is not available online because it came out in 2001. that Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies only puts its articles online (through www.jstor.org) after 5 years. However, you can access this one:

Dr. Shahar's article on the monkey king (http://www.jstor.org/view/00730548/dm990719/99p0161i/0?currentResult=00730548%2bdm990719%2b99p0161i%2b0 %2c01%2b19920600%2b9995%2b80079399&searchID=cc993341.10810944001&frame=noframe&sortOrder=SCORE&userID=9b3ac835@no.lsuhsc.edu/01cc99334100501260a56&dpi=3&viewContent=Article&config=jstor)


One other point he makes in the Ming Dynasty article that I thought was remarkable was that any two-fold notion of shaolin kung fu being a fundamental part of developing the mind/spirituality and chan as a means of developing one's kung fu developed much later than a similar concept of 'no-mind' or 'mind-martial art unity' developed in japan. I was under the impression that the two (shaolin and chan) went hand and hand from an early stage...He also postulated that the concept MAY have even filtered into china from japan (especially b/c of Japanese scholars coming to study at shaolin), but acknowledged that more research is needed on the subject.

[blooming lotus]

can't get into the link but i'm pretty sure I disaggree with both of those statements and as soon as I remember I'll give you a few references to back it up.....interesting though...kinda....

[oasis]

bl,
if the link isnt working for you (maybe it's the 'chinese connection' :p ), try this:
http://www.jstor.org/search
type 'shahar' where it says search for author.
check the 'asian studies' box and then go back and click 'begin search' and it will come up.

looking forward to your references :)

[GeneChing]

Do I smell a co-authored book GeneChing? Where are you going with this? Well, it's research, so we are going forward (or backward, since a lot of it's historical). I doubt you'll see any published collaborations between the good Dr. Shahar and me, but you'll see some overlap in our discussions. In fact, you'll see a fine submission especially for our magazine from Dr. Shahar in an upcoming issue.

One of Dr. Shahar's big postulations is that shaolin martial arts - specifically quan does not appear as such until somewhere in the Ming. That's a lot later than most CMA assume - but based on the literature record, he's got a pretty solid argument. There are earlier martial references, as well as earlier qigong references, but it's not until then that you find a fusion and the notion of quan as a martial art.

[rik]

.................................................. ..
oasis wrote:
I was under the impression that the two (shaolin and chan) went hand and hand from an early stage.
.................................................

Dhyana (seated meditation), 'scolding and beating', sermons and 'question and answer' methods are historically documented as being part of various sects of Ch'an. Although a good case can be made that there is an intimate connection between the notion of "original mind” as taught in Chan and the state of spontaneous response that is needed by a master martial artist, there are no historical documents that identify 'quan,' gung-fu, or martial arts as being intrinsic to the practice of Ch'an.

Historically, evidence points to a pragmatic reason for the development of wushu at Shaolin - the defence of the monastery. It was a combination of factors that made the Shaolin Monastery a source of highly developed martial arts expertise. The principal factors are:

1. From the AD 400s onward, northern Chinese Buddhism cultivated close relations with Imperial governments.
2. Buddhist monasteries, and in particular the large public ones, contained large granaries and other provisions. These supplies made them attractive targets for robber bands and renegade bands of rebels and invaders, which had plagued Henan for centuries.
3. Monasteries often held incredible wealth in the form of gold, silver, copper ritual objects, jewels and cash reserves.
4. Generally, large public monasteries like Shaolin Si were situated in more remote, unprotected areas that made them susceptible to attack.
5. Anti-Buddhist suppressions as well as lawless conditions during dynastic changes contributed to the development of martial arts among some groups of Buddhist clergy.
6. Chinese Buddhist monasticism was intimately connected with mendicant monks who commonly traveled great distances alone on foot.
7. There was continuous interaction between the military and the monks. Both military officers and senior clergy came from the same well-educated class and both were often posted to the same remote northern regions.
8. A decree by Emperor Tang Taizong provided the legal frame-work that made possible the long-term development of martial arts at Shaolin. To train and maintain a fighting force simply would not have been possible without governmental approval. As a documented example; when in 446, Imperial armies stumbled into a building in a Ch’ang-an monastery that contained stacks of weapons, the Emperor had all the monks of that monastery executed.

[blooming lotus]

like alot of people, I'll look forward to reading what you come up with...


as for my references, I think I'll have to do some digging and come back it, but it's one of my own main areas of interest, so leave it with me and I'll get round to it when I can

[canglong]

The history of the Shaolin Temple (north and south) and their fighting monks has been a long, exiting, honored tradition, full of political intrigue.Through the ages, the Shaolin Temples have been built, burned down, and rebuilt many times. Even so, through all its tribulations, it has never ceased to be a training ground and holy place for the monks. Out of about 1,500 years, it has been totally closed and deserted only a handful of years and even then, monks trained there at night secretly. Shaolin’s fighting monks, of which at its peak numbered thousands, had a reputation throughout China for being highly honorable, most courageous, and greatly skilled. They served as role models for the virtuous and spiritual warrior.Oddly enough, the Shaolin fighting arts came from a pacifist beginning: the merger of the spiritual philosophies of Buddhism and Taoism. The first main Shaolin temple was located in Henan (Honan) province, along the north side of Shoa Shih mountain, and built by the royal decree of Emperor Hsiao Wien during the early Northern Wei dynasty (386-534 AD) for an Indian Buddhist monk named Butuo (or Fo Tuo in Chinese) who is most remembered today by his statue, which depicts a fat and jolly seated monk, the "Laughing Buddha." The temple originally consisted of a round dome used as a shrine and a platform where Indian and Chinese monks translated Indian Buddhist scriptures into Chinese, toiling both day and night.

Shaolin's Warrior Monks (http://pages.eidosnet.co.uk/kungfumaster/shaolin.html)

Most of us have read this but it is such a good starting point (middle and end ;))for this discussion I gladly post it once more...

[GeneChing]

Actually, if you look at the historic record, Bodhidharma doesn't play a signifcant role as a Shaolin icon until the Ming. Prior to Bodhidharma, the patron of Shaolin is Jinnaluo. That can be a bit of a fly in the ointment for the Chan/Quan combined theory going back to Bodhidharma, and it's a major point of Dr. Shahar's research. If you go to Shaolin, you get a better sense of Jinnaluo's role. It's a lot like Zhen Wu for Wudang. Here, most people will discuss Zhang San Feng with Wudang, but if you actually go there, you'll find it's more about Zhen Wu. Today, Bodhidharma is clearly more venerated than Jinnaluo, but here, most Shaolin 'researchers' completely overlook Jinnaluo. That's a huge gap - it's incredibly shoddy research for anyone into Shaolin. Part of the problem is that Jinnaluo is Shaolin specific while Bodhidharma is far more famous because of Chan. You need to know a bit about Buddhism and Hinduism to understand Jinnaluo, so most people just overlook it. But his role, especially to Shaolin martial artists, is in a way, more significant, because it is so specific.

[canglong]

...and just what is the specificity of which you are refering to Gene and how do you view Hui Neng?

[norther practitioner]

Jinnaluo

Any good refferences to look at for this on Gene? You planning or have you done an article on this. I think it would be a great article, just 'cause of the fact you don't here about him too much (or ever).

[rik]

Gene wrote:
Jinnaluo is Shaolin specific while Bodhidharma is far more famous because of Chan.
....................
That's a pretty fuzzy statement. The Jinnaluo myth appears to be based on Narayana, a Buddhist guardian-deity/warrior associated with Dharmaspalas (guardians of Buddhist sanctuaries.) Basically Jinnaluo is associated with defense; Bodhidharma with Chan.
r.

[oasis]

Any good refferences to look at for this on Gene? You planning or have you done an article on this. I think it would be a great article, just 'cause of the fact you don't here about him too much (or ever).

Dr. Shahar's Ming Paper actually discusses this figure in good detail. Here's the reference again if you can look up the journal in a college library:

“Ming-Period Evidence of Shaolin Martial Practice,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 61.2 (December 2001):359-413.

by Dr. Meir Shahar

[norther practitioner]

Thanks....

[rik]

Gene wrote:
"if you look at the historic record, Bodhidharma doesn't play a significant role as a Shaolin icon until the Ming. Prior to Bodhidharma, the patron of Shaolin is Jinnaluo."
................................................

What "historic record" are you talking about????
To say that Bodhidharma didn't play a significant role at Shoalin is the same thing as saying Shaolin was was not a Chan Monastery when in fact it was. The Chan school remained a robust movement during the Song Dynasty and Yuan dynasties.
Chan, Bodhidharma and Shaolin were deeply connected long before the Ming Dynasty.
When Kublai Khan first arrived in China, he became very interested in Chan Buddhism after being introduce to it by two important Chan monks. One was Hai Yun the other was Venerable Fu Yu, Abbot of Shaolin. In 1245 Kublai Khan, as military governer, and his army stayed at Shaolin Si (this is before he became the first Yuan emperor.) To show their gratitude, Kublai and his army helped re-built the monastery, offered land, material support and rice to the Buddhist households . Between 1251 and 1260 Venerable Fu Yu of Shaolin was appointed Director of Buddhism by the Yuan government. In this role he was asked to lead the Buddhists in the famous Buddhist-Taoist controversies debates. The point of all this being that Shaolin was a important state Chan monastery, well before the Ming period, and that it would be incredible if Bodhidharma did not play an important role at Shaolin during that time.

r.

[GeneChing]

Finally, a rise out of you guys. I think a lot of you are reading Dr. Shahar's research and not fully understanding it. Perhaps that's unfair, since I'm privy to more given that I meet with Dr. Shahar every week, but let's have a go at this. Shahar's research may rock our world in terms of self perception - I think those who aren't students of history will be shocked, possibly even dishaeartened, to find that many of our basic assumptions lack any significant evidence and in fact, most ot eh evidence is to the contrary. But then again, anyone who has a basic understanding of history, we will be reaffirmed.

I discussed Jinnaluo in my article The Scholars of Shaolin in the Nov Dec 2003 Shaolin Special (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/article.php?article=397), but I also discussed Jinnaluo in a piece I did for Black Belt in Sep 98. to the best of my knowledge, this was the first time that Jinnaluo was ever discussed in the Western martial arts. I aslo discussed the Yuan reunification and Fu Yue in a translation that Gigi Oh and I did with Shi Deqian, Meet the Abbots, our Spring 2000 Shaolin Special (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/article.php?article=152).

canglong alluded to it well - prior to the Ming, Huineng was considered more of the patriarch of Chan. To some degree, he still is. His platform sutra is more read than Tamo's works. Tamo was clearly the first, but Huineng made more fo an impact and really distilled the teachings of Chan. Now Shaolin certainly venerated Tamo, but he didn't play a significant role until later. FWIW, Dr. Shahar found the earliest extant document of Tamo Yijinjing, and it was 16th century. Apparently you see Tamo Yijinjing in the Taoist traditions earlier, as ironic as that may seem, but you don't see it associated with Shaolin until the 16th. He postulates that the idea of what he is terming quan - the fusion of martial skills with internal and spiritual development - doesn't appear until the Ming. At that time, many of the texts claimed heritage, although those claims were questionable. For example, that 16th century yijinjing has a forward by General Nui Gao (of Yue Fei fame) which is quite obviously forged. When the heritage claims arose, this is quite possibly when the attribution to Tamo starts to appear more significantly at Shaolin.

[rik]

"Shahar's research may rock our world in terms of self perception "

Actually it has been my opinion that the martial arts / defensive art at Shaolin monastery ( and there is good indication that martial arts were trained at other monasteries) was connected to Narayhan and Kapila (both associated with Dharmapalas in China) and the protecting deities. During the Tang Dynasty these guardians became more ferocious.

Having said that, I am not convinced that Jinnaluo was considered more important than Bodhidharma by monks of Shaolin. If that were the case more would have been heard of him; more folklore retained in the various northern traditions, as well as more historical documents would be around.
On the other hand, Bodhidharma's importance to northern Chan Buddhism during the Song and Yuan is supported by significant 12 c. documents. Given Shaolin's status as an orthodox Imperial monastery, it makes sense that Bodhidharma would have been considered important there as well. Although Yijinjing, may well have been developed during the 16th century, assigning it to Bodhidharma simply reinforces his importance. Keep in mind, Chinese records often contained a mixture of pseudo-historical, fictive material and folklore. Folkloric myths, containing miraculous stories and individuals who possessed superhuman qualities, were often included to persuade or to underline some didactic purpose. These literary devices were even employed in official Chinese historical narratives.

[blooming lotus]

I haven't read the articles but what evidence is there that jinnaluo was the innitiating martial inflluence at shaolin...as for Ch'an being seperate, someone back here made reference to bodhidarmas' initiating influence there, yet Ch'an embodies martial artistry ( amongst other things) by definition. ????

[canglong]

He postulates that the idea of what he is terming quan - the fusion of martial skills with internal and spiritual development - doesn't appear until the Ming. Clearly Tamo had some experience with Yoga and his entire reason for undertaking his journey was spiritual thus he had some expereince with hei gung and spiritual development. Secondly the appearance of any fighting monks previous to the Ming is physical evidence that this statement may very well be incorrect. Evidence of Qi gung, hei gung, and spiritual awreness wouldn't even have to exist just establish the beginning of a pattern which one might be able to facilitate with evidence derived from things posted on this very forum.

Gene, next week please ask Dr. Shahar why he didn't respond to my email preferably before he reads this...;)

[oasis]

Gene, next week please ask Dr. Shahar why he didn't respond to my email preferably before he reads this...;)

i emailed Dr. Shahar about his article in Feb and he responded 2 weeks later. I'm sure he's in the middle of travelling, lecturing, researching, or even relaxing and will respond when he gets a chance :)

[canglong]

from the looks of things I emailed the good Doctor before you did, but then again who is counting days ;)

[GeneChing]

...it's an odd quirk, but such is the nature of his personality. We were over there yesterday for lunch (at's always fun to spend Easter with a Jew) and I'll see him again tomorrow. Then he's off to give a talk in Boston, so if you're near there, check it out.

Ok, I should qualify some things here, because I can tell that some of you are still working with some very old notions of what is real and what is history. As rik said, there is often fictative material in alleged historic accounts of China, especially where martial arts is concerned. There's a tradition of attributing lineage to mythic figures. What makes things additionally complicated is that martial artists weren't particularly literate, so there's almost no record of martial arts history. According to Dr. Shahar's research, Bodhidharma doesn't figure into Shaolin martial arts until the 16th or so. Prior to that, it was attributed to Jinnaluo. Now his findings are based on written records - archived documents, steles, and such. I think where we are splitting, rik, is that I'm talking about Shaolin martial arts and you're talking about Buddhism in general. Of course, there is overlap, in fact, as they say at Shaolin chan quan yi qi, but I think a distinction can be made here for acedemic purposes.

As for the Bodhidharma yoga connection, I've never felt that was particularly significant, mostly because asana as we know it is relatively new. It's more like trying to make a connection as some sort of parallel reaffirmation, when the fundamental question of 'did Tamo even create yijinjing?' has yet to be answered. Personally, I don't beleive that he did, but spiritually, I do. It's kind of like Noah in the bible. Do you disregard the moral of the ark just because you're skeptical of it's existence or do you take the teachings and their associated myths for their face value? In truth, there's no way to prove that Tamo created yijinjing - you have to take it on faith. Now, I really enjoy my yijinjing practice and even if I'm skeptical of it's creation, well, that doesn't detract from it. Nor do I complete disregard the myth because it is such a part of the tradition.

[norther practitioner]

Very well said Gene...

It sounds almost identical to my entire schpiel on religion. Take it all with a grain of salt if you are looking for the "truth"..

To me the truth is what I can learn.

[blooming lotus]

I'm always open to considering new information, so I'll be wrapped to hear anything either of you has to add

[mickey]

Greetings,

This thread really kills in the worst way. All I see is a Western approach to the verification of history based on extant written documents. Oral tradition is just as important. It is one thing to read about, e.g., the five ancestors of Shaolin; but through oral tradition, I got to know them as people-- with personality flaws and excellent kung fu.

All I can say is light your incense and connect to your ancestors. THE INFORMATION IS THERE WAITING FOR YOU!!!! It always has been.

mickey

P.S. Gene: "it's always fun to spend Easter with a Jew" That was really golden. If you put that on a T shirt, I would buy it -- seriously.

[blooming lotus]

that's why this forum is such a good place to spend some time..it might take only one word to initiate a search and some serious study....there are so many true and dedicated martial artists here and it's just absurdly grandiose to think that anyone of us has all the information.....don't quote me..but besides sharing war stories I think the info - trade is why we're all here

[mickey]

Hi blooming lotus,

Thanks for the bigger picture.

mickey

[GeneChing]

Oral tradition is frightfully unreliable. There is only one exception - the Mahabharata - but that's a whole other issue. Actually the southern tradition of Shaolin (five ancestors) is the most nutty. Dr. Shahar isn't even going there. Neither am I. We joke about it all the time actually. There's some really fine scholarly work on the Boxer Uprising which also was fueled by the "five ancestors" but those five are completely different than the five we commonly belief in CMA. So that's a big probelm, when you think about it...

[KubanLink]

Gene: Are there any reliable historical records on Bodhidharma that you can rely on for purposes of your research?

[kai men]

Hi fellows. I agree completely with Gene here, in order to rise the level of our art we should stress truth. And truth need people like this Schollar quoted in this thread.
I have read the work, I found it very important to be read, I am re-reading in order to be able to catch the full lenght of his reach.
He has made a great effort. As he is not a kung fu practicioner, he doesn't support any theory in advance. Instead, he is able to quote his sources, something often missed in so many books which rely on oral transmition.
Un abrazo
horacio
Pd I would like to be able to access to other Dr Sahar works about Yi Jin Jing and others. ¿Does anyone know how to contact him?
respectfully
horacio

[bungle]

I havn't posted in a long time and wasn't a big poster in the first place. I've recently became interested in martial arts again and the old frustrations are still there: 90% of martial arts out there seem to have dubious lineages. Oh well, why is it martial arts attract so much crap? I can probaly answer that one myself....

This thread is excellent though. I love to see this sort of serious research being done. It would be amazing to think that all these individual researchers could get together to create a bigger picture too. Researchers of okinawan styles in particular.

This sort of research could be the foundation or base for further speculation using corroboration on myths, legends and oral traditions.

It is good to trust your intuition but we all need a guide to poke us in the right direction first and this sort of research is great.

[GeneChing]

In truth, there is a tradition of falsification of lineage in CMA that goes back at least 400 years. That earliest extant Yijinjing document Dr. Shahar found was a classic example. The forwards, one by Niu Gao (a general under Yue Fei) and one by a general under Li Shinmin, were both clearly forged. Why do we do this? Tradition. ;) I suppose you could make some kind of argument about this as a Confucian artifact, but really, if you get so caught up in the lineage, you're missing the art. This gets a little tricky when dealing with Buddhism, since there is a direct lineage there, one that is verifiable in historic documents. It makes Shaolin all the more tricky - but if you want something linear, perhaps Zen isn't your cup of tea.

As for Bodhidharma, there's surprisingly little available. He was mentioned in an offhand way in Eminent monks. There are a few sutras attributed to him - two main translations are available in English, Red Pine's seminal work (which includes the Chinese) and a newer version that came out half a decade ago by Jeffrey L. Broughton. Both are important reads for anyone serious about this. Really, Chinese Chan starts to spark with the 6th patriarch - that's were you will find a lot of research, analysis and interpretation.

[bungle]

Hi Gene
Sorry to take this off topic. I'll let it go after this. I'm not overly concerned with lineage but i like honesty and value it highly so it would be nice to think i'm practicing something genuine. I'm just looking for something fun really. I use the sedona method so i have no need for buddhism or those associated benefits with martial arts. It makes a interesting hobby i think.

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by GeneChing
Oral tradition is frightfully unreliable. There is only one exception - the Mahabharata - but that's a whole other issue. Actually the southern tradition of Shaolin (five ancestors) is the most nutty. Dr. Shahar isn't even going there. Neither am I. We joke about it all the time actually. .

it's a huge task but theres more factors to the equation so I intend to find them...I am also interested in the fall out from the 2 monks ( alah journey to west) and if they were in afganistan ....I had considred that prior, that when the manchu came back into play a little later on their art had come from somewhere in that region but shared root..developing elsewhere......implying a whole range of stuff...........this is where i'm gearing my research coupled with whatever i get from you...

pls keep us informed..some of here are as keen to know as yourself

cheers GeneChing

[GeneChing]

Genuine martial arts, now there's a tricky assumption. A lot of spiritual traditions will make a leap into the magical and mythical - consider any religion. So to find such leaps in martial arts should actually be reaffirming. The problem is that we are so practically minded now, that we often disregard such leaps as fairy tales. I think you'll find ample examples of Buddhist parables that are beyond belief - Bodhidharma cutting off his eyelids to make tea, for example. Does such a myth sully the practice of Zen? If so, well, game over. If not, then would it sully the practice of martial arts? A lot of spiritual practice is not based on logic. It's based on faith. Now that doesn't mean you have to belief these myths as literal fact - that would be too fundamentalist. Quite to the contrary, you must understand what is real and what is not AND WHY. Therein lies the key to genuine faith.

As for research into the Southern lineages, the wise avoid it at all costs ;) My main advice would be to start with the Hung Men literature, since like I said earlier, there's a lot of good research there, AND THEN move to the CMA myths.

[blooming lotus]

alot of those myths are implictive of dedication to detatchment...??????

thanx for the sthn start point..be sure to check that out ;) :D

[bungle]

Gene. It is hard to proove that any martial art lineage is true and especially considering that, as this thread indicates, shaolin history is even hard to verify.

I'm talking about the obvious and grossly misleading lies. That book, bodisattva warrior that you mentioned in an old thread. The style of the guy who wrote that book is mushindo kempo. If you visit www.e-budo.com. You'll see the author of the book is the founder of mushindo and lay down a very well researched fabrication of his arts lineage and his experience with buddhism and martial arts. It turns out that some of the more extreme folks on the forum even consider mushindo to be a cult.

That's what i'm talking about. I do not want to be hood winked into wasting my time and i'm not a mainstream type of person. Though i think WTF taekwondo looks fun! I'd actually like to try shorinji kempo but it isn't available in my area. I know that even that lineage has been called into question and that Doshin may have been a member of Japanese mafia type group. He makes no extraordinary claims though and his style looks the business from what i've seen.

I'd like to feel that the art i'm practicing is something every practioner of which has faith in because all previous masters of that art had the same faith and 100% confidence in what they did.

The spiritual stuff i happen to think is probaly metaphorical and perhaps isn't something you can understand fully until your level of conciousness is high enough. I doubt the monks who wrote those stories would lie and if was just meant to be a fairy tale i'm sure there was a good reason for it.

Faith shouldn't be the base of any spiritual practice. It is useful but i think it shouldn't be relied upon. Eventually faith should be rewarded with evidence of the truth. One of the things that attracted me to buddhism so much was the less reliance on faith. All good masters would say;"don't believe a word i say but take it for checking". I believe the buddha said something along those lines. I was also under the impression that Zen was a rebellion against the chinese misinterpretation of the nature of buddhism. In that buddhism is a practice to see the truth not a faith.

[GeneChing]

Yes, faith is a tricky one, especially in today's world. Often, I think I'm inhibited in my practice from lack of faith. But then again, I have to be very practical about CMA, not in a street-effective but in a really weird way that's hard to imagine, just to keep my job.

Charlatans exist whereever there is money. If you want to avoid grossly misleading lies, go somewhere where such lies are not profitable. Not that you're saying this, bungle, but I often hear about people waiting for Mr. Miyagi, the kindly master who will show them all the secrets for nothing and give them a cool car to boot. They wait and they wait, until they are sure. All that time waiting could have been spent practicing. That's where you have to have some faith - faith that the truth is out there (and in good X files form - to trust no one). You gotta take the risk. Take it wisely, surely, check the masters out, but at least train somewhere.

[bungle]

Your right Gene. I think the further down the path we go the less important belief becomes. That probaly goes for martial arts too.

[GeneChing]

That's not what I meant. Actually I think faith is more important as you get further down the path. This is because it gets so much harder the further you go (and the older you get). Only faith keeps you going through tough times.

[canglong]

Oral tradition is frightfully unreliable. Oral history has its time and its place it could be argued that Dr. Shahar would have no starting point to begin his research if not for the oral history people are generaly so quick to dismiss. Additionaly it could be argued that the history of Shaolin is embedded in the actual practice of the art itself, the oral history and the physical evidence.

[bungle]

I think were talking about two different paths here Gene. The one i was refering to is spiritual and has no correlation with age. That is actually something someone else said on the sedona method forum. We were discussing Christianity and its relation to the sedona methods goal of freedom(satori). Lester Levenson often used the phrase christ conciousness when discussing the freedom and christianity and many of us debated what christianity was really about.

The best post of the discussion, imo, was someone just posted that the further we go with the sedona method the less important belief becomes. Why?

Because as you release your mind what is left is pure awareness and experience of the world. The less thinking you do, the happier you are. Thinking clouds your experience of life and makes you unhappy. Not that Lester is saying you shouldn't think, just that if you let it control you then your a victim and your life is going to be out of control.

The other beutiful thing about the method is intuition becomes very important; Lester said "Intuition is only right 100% of the time". Basically, as you get clearer and clearer you simply let go out not having the answers and get them! Good stuff. Ok, now i gotta go practice my sedona releasing....

[GeneChing]

canglong: The problem is that oral history could have been created very recently. Let's take Shaolin Temple - a common criticism is that it is a reconstruction - that there is no connection to the original Shaolin practice prior to the Cultural Revolution. If we just base our findings on oral/practice tradition, how can we refute such an argument? On the contrary, when some one makes a genuine scholarly find that confirms something we are saying/doing, that's very exciting. So what if it doesn't go back to Tamo's time? At least, it refutes the old Cult Rev argument.

bungle:
Intuition is only right 100% of the time Wow, if that was so, I'd be rich from my old gambling days. Sounds like you have a lot of faith in Sedona. ;) I think our dialog is being hampered by the media of the forum here. When I mentioned age, I was referring specifically to martial practice (as a spiritual path). You can say that age has no efect on that, then I might retort "how old are you?" In terms of faith, the fundamental assumption of any spiritual practice is that there is something more - something beyond the physical world. That, in itself, is a leap of faith. Now if I understand what you're saying, its about the dissolution of structure once spiritual transformation is achieved. Many of the methods to attain transformation are just that - methods. Like a road to the mountain, once you get to the mountain, you forget the road. Tamo was a big proponent of this - the notion of sudden enlightenment.

[bungle]

The sedona method is a tool, a device to regain control of your mind and to transform it. It is very simple. I do not need faith.

Gene, as i said earlier. Faith is nice but shouldn't be relied upon.

What is faith? It is wishful thinking really. A strongly held belief. As i said in my last post. As you release your thoughts you begin to see that you are not your mind or your body and they are merely tools. Being that faith is a product of the mind, then it becomes less important.

Your right about the method but that isn't to say some are not better than others. They frequently call them rafts from one shore to the other in buddhism.

The reason for starting a spiritual path might include faith that eventually it will bring great reward but if you are not reaping those rewards as you progress then there would be no evidence to indicate your faith is wise and so i would recommend dropping that spiritual path.

I cannot be a mainstream christian because i am not prepared to rely on faith without evidence. To me that is a gamble and one nobody needs to take.

As for intuition. Intuition is like being guided by something other than yourself and it is a progressive thing that increases the further down the path you go. The reason we cannot rely on intuition is because we have too much filtering and biasing in the way. Once that drops away you start to reveal buddha nature which is always right.

[GeneChing]

That is faith in the modern age of science. If you believe that there is a science to the spiritualism, that can border on fanaticism.

[bungle]

Gene. I'm not going to harp on about this. My motivation for replying to you was because i found it fun to debate. Like everything though, it comes down to personal choice. Life is about choice.

For me, sedona allows me to continually evolve as a person and eventually achieve emotional freedom. There is nothing fanatical about this.

Any negative emotions get left behind in the dust as we grow. In sedona we have a chart abreviated to AGFLAPCAP. You travel from left to right as you use sedona.

Apathy,grief,fear,lust,anger,pride,courage,accepta nce,peace.

Where am i right now? Where am i when i reply to your posts and harper on about sedona? Pride. I'm stuck in pride; that is my home based right now. Don't worry, i'm working on it.

But right now. My opinion is that people dvide the spirtual and material too readily. Lester said that the physical and spirtual are the same when you see it. He hasn't lied to me yet. At the same time none of what he says has negative effects on me or influences my decision too much. Apart from of course, the actual sedona method. There is no need to listen to Lesters talks....

To me, spirtualism is all about the mind. I feel psychotherapy is far more spirtual than spiritualism based in dogmatic beliefs.

[bungle]

i just re read my post. Your right. It does come across as fantatical. That is because i'm fantatical though.

[bungle]

see how fantatical i am. I'm posting another message!

Lama Surya Das calls it western buddhism.

Finally, it is a natural ability. ALL YOU DO IS LEARN TO USE IT CONCIOUSLY. It is releasing; you do it when you laugh!!!

Sedona method AKA the release technique!!!

[GeneChing]

see how fantatical i am. I'm posting another message! lol. I hope you're saying all of this somewhat tongue-in-cheek because I am. Like you say, it's about the laughter (although I've also found that passing wind is a great release too ;) ) I don't mean to be critical of Sedona in any way.

My point is more about faith in something beyond the ordinary, faith in the existence of the divine, not necessarily in the sense of GOD or something, but more that something lies beyond and that something is unifying. This is interesting to CMA because of the notion of qi. Qi is so intrinsic to CMA, but too use it, you have to have some faith. This is why it always amuses me to see people try to explain/define qi in psuedo-scientific terms - bio-magnetic energy and such - that very action will keep them from ever getting to it. It's sort of like the Heisenberg effect. to understand CMA, you must have faith in qi.

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by GeneChing
That is faith in the modern age of science. If you believe that there is a science to the spiritualism, that can border on fanaticism.


but then yu have the laws of physics.....

I know the Dalai says that to rty to win a spiritual argument based on science is fruitless or similar but it doesn't remove the fact that sienceand physics govern the universe and more specifiallly but loosely "energies"...which when we talk spiritual ...to keep out of thatfantasy world...ie: dude in sky ...you to helll...you to heaven..fire, brimstone, everlasting peace...etc etc....

it has to make sense intellectually....


but that's where it gets tricky right???

I guess that's why the concept ofempty mind, the void and nopthingness becomes extremely important ....to avoid falun gong type scenarios

[bungle]

Lotus, That is why i say the best religions are those based around an intellectual method that can be tested that will lead to greater understanding. So as long as the method is working for you then you don't care about the end result anyway...That's why buddhism can be studied by science as is now being done by the mind and life peeps. Read destructive emotions? Wicked book!

Gene, the faith in qi thing. I know what you mean. I tried practicing chi gong but i couldn't keep it up because i wasn't getting any sensation or feedback. Last week i introduced lifting the sky in the mornings nad evenings out of curiosity. Only takes 5 minutes and WKK says i should get some good results in 6 months. Not a big sacrifice 10 minutes a day for 6 months.

As for the tongue and cheek thing. I normally laugh at what you just posted (just because i find debating fun) and reply and the humour drifts a little and i get serious.

I'd say your right about the faith thing but would it matter if your content and happy? IT matters far less, i'd say that. That was my original point. Find a method that takes u up through the ranks. Raises your level of conciousness as Dr Hawkins puts it. As they always say, you probaly won't care anymore but you'll find out anyway.

[blooming lotus]

you were getting no sensation???.......


I think this more about you than it is about what you're practicing.....

[bungle]

sensation of chi energy. Yes it probaly was me. The same conclusion applies tho

[GeneChing]

Physics is a big problem for qi, especially when you get into emitting qi. Does qi obey the laws of physics? Now there's a koan for you....

This line of thinking - science vs. faith - can get really muddy quickly when taken from the spiritual standpoint. Science is clearly defined - anyone who has been trained as a scientist knows that. Anyone who has not been trained as a scientist tends to have a rather soft view of science, which can be very problematic in such a discussion. They tend to make the jump to theory too quickly and use the terminology too loosely - at least for a scientist. ;)

Add the notion of happiness and things get really ethically messy. We Buddhists often say "may all beings be happy" but by that we imply that all beings should escape delusion and stop the wheel of life and death. If you have faith, you can just be happy in a deluded sort of way. Often I find myself thinking, probably like any one who has grappled with this issue seriously, if only faith were enough for happiness...

All debates should be fun and bring laughter.

[bungle]

One big difference between science and spirituality is that spirtuality is a personal thing. Science is seeing external results in the physical world. Spirituality might bring results in the physical world but the emphasis is on yourself.

When i mention scientific point of view i'm really saying don't accept anything on faith. Proove it to yourself then believe it.

The difference in science might be that you proove it through experiementation and the results must be objective,predictable, replicatable and measurable.

Just for information. The sedona method has been studied scientifically.

Can you really be happy in a deluded way? What is happiness? Is it just the feel good chemicals and exhiliration that can even be gotten from drugs and anti depressants? I think not. This is just a glimpse and it is deluded.

Happiness is supposedly just experiencing our true selves. The more dust you clean off that table or mirror the nicer it looks.

People who are delusional and happy are just telling themselves they are happy. It is a program that has them on auto pilot. They are fooling themselves and they won't know what real happiness is until they start cleaning off that dust.

I'll explain from my experiences. When you release a certain amount of stuff you get a shift in conciousness. Sometimes a whole filter comes down. It feels so weird, like your experiencing everything in a new way that you've never ever, ever felt! You get highs and feel good stuff but the real shifts in happiness is when the bad stuff drops away. You kinda move up a level. You feel just a little more positive and free than you used to. You get lighter and lighter. The most important thing is though. Whenever you do get a shift it makes you realise just how low you actually were! Also how far you have to go!

You think, " all that time i thought i was happy but i had no idea!". When you shift up, you realise that was nothing compared to this new way of feeling. It is a definate SHIFT, not just feeling happy! Heck i have whole days when i'm chuffed to bits but it is nothing like this shift.

On the other hand. Better delusionally happy than delusionally sad.

I blaber a lot....

[blooming lotus]

Originally posted by GeneChing
Physics is a big problem for qi, especially when you get into emitting qi. Does qi obey the laws of physics? Now there's a koan for you....


does a lwa of physics exist if it has yet to be substantiated?? if a tree falls and there's no-one aroundto hear it etc etc


This line of thinking - science vs. faith - can get really muddy quickly when taken from the spiritual standpoint. Science is clearly defined - anyone who has been trained as a scientist knows that. Anyone who has not been trained as a scientist tends to have a rather soft view of science, which can be very problematic in such a discussion. They tend to make the jump to theory too quickly and use the terminology too loosely - at least for a scientist. ;)

science sciencealso involves debate and inquiry then path to prove it.....and yes, I am adept in Sciences




Add the notion of happiness and things get really ethically messy. We Buddhists often say "may all beings be happy" but by that we imply that all beings should escape delusion and stop the wheel of life and death. If you have faith, you can just be happy in a deluded sort of way. Often I find myself thinking, probably like any one who has grappled with this issue seriously, if only faith were enough for happiness...
happiness is an emotion so unless we'retalking the science of physcology it has little place......that said ..if you follow the "science " that buddhism is based on, you willattain "happiness" anyway...confuciussay : if you want to attain happiness , pratice being happy ;)




All debates should be fun and bring laughter.

on these boards..you're kidding right :rolleyes:

[GeneChing]

on these boards..you're kidding right I'm never more serious then when I'm discussing the bringing of laughter.

There was this often cited experiment where they rigged a monkey with a button that stimulated it's pleasure center, then gave the monkey the button. So what did it do? What would you do? It pressed the button. It kept pressing the button until it died. Did it die happy?

This raises an interesting question about happiness. Anyone who has pursued happiness as a spiritual quest naturally beleives that it spiritual - at some higher level - something you must have faith in because you can't measure spirit scientifically. But what if it's not? What if happiness is completely chemical? What if the spiritual is the delusion? That's a real tough one to grapple with and I beleive it's why Zennist say the goal is not enlightenment - why in Zen, there is no 'goal'. Perhaps you have to let go of the whole notion of the spiritual being somehow higher than the mundane. No distinction. Naturally we want to think our method, our quest, is somehow the higher ground. Ego, the every persistant enemy, creeps in again. It's so easy to be egotistic about one practice being good, or even better. Therein lies a huge psychic trap, one that many adepts never escape. You can't be attached to your method, be it Shaolin or Sedona. That's like being so attached to the mule that you ride into the Grand Canyon that you fail to see the panorama because your too busy admiring your ass.

Honestly, if it is just about chemicals, and it may well be, ****, get me one of those monkey buttons installed! ;)

[bungle]

Gene
The principle method in sedona is doing something called Aversions and Attachements

Lester Levensons biography book is called "No Aversions, no attachments"

You get my drift?

Now can i let go of wanting to be right? Will i let go of wanting to be right? And When?

Ok, i'll quit while i'm best!!!:D

[GeneChing]

Now can i let go of wanting to be right? Will i let go of wanting to be right? And When? You will let go of wanting to be right when you let go of wanting. Don't be attached to non-attachment. Don't be adversed to inaversion. ;)

[GeneChing]

I had no idea where to post this. Here will do.


China Focus: Space technologies to protect Shaolin heritage (http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-05/15/c_137180775.htm)
Source: Xinhua| 2018-05-15 16:51:35|Editor: ZX

BEIJING, May 15 (Xinhua) -- It was a strange sight: a group of monks from the Shaolin Temple, the cradle of Chinese kung fu, walking through the China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology (ALVT), producer of China's Long March carrier rockets.

Shaolin abbot Shi Yongxin, in a brown robe, led the delegation to explore the use of rocket technologies to protect the ancient books in the temple, which has a history of about 1,500 years and is listed as a world cultural heritage site.

The ALVT has developed an advanced book protection system based on aerospace technologies.

This drew the interest of the Shaolin monks who reportedly have many paper books damaged by pests and mildew. Located in the mountains of central China's Henan Province, the environment is humid in summer and cold and dry in winter, and has a huge number of visitors every year. These conditions are unfavorable for the protection of ancient books.

The main part of the ALVT protection system a sealed, waterproof, fireproof and insect-proof box.

Fan Xinzhong, director of the structure office of ALVT's department of tactical weapons, who is responsible for the design, said the box combined advanced aerospace technologies, such as rocket heat insulation, the honeycomb sandwich structure of the rocket fairing and the composite material used in the spacecraft capsule.

Fellow researcher Shan Yijiao said the heat insulation material can keep the temperature inside the box below 60 degrees centigrade for an hour in a fire. And the honeycomb sandwich structure enables the box to resist impacts and compression, and to float in water.

Lei Bao, designer of the box door lock, said they also borrowed spacecraft sealing technology to make the box 100-percent waterproof and dustproof.

Worms and insects cannot live inside the box with little oxygen. And the humidity can be controlled through a monitoring system to prevent bacteria and mildew.

ALVT is planning systems for more libraries, museums, archives and temples to help protect cultural relics on Earth by using technologies gained from reaching for the stars.