Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 126

Thread: What do/don't you consider as being "Shaolin" ?

  1. #46
    Gene,

    In my experience, Chan is not limited by doctrines or methods – people can approach it as a religion, a science or even a philosophy, whichever "door" they perceive and with which they identify.

    Chan is about getting to a deeper level of experience of reality (for ourselves, and ultimately for others, in the manner and tradition of the Bodhisattva path of Buddhism). With these "goals" any vehicle or method can lead to a deeper sense of reality (tea ceremony, swordsmanship practice, tea cultivation, Bonsai cultivation, seated/standing/moving meditation, washing dishes, cleaning, etc. are all examples). With these different methods, different concepts are employed to help take the practitioner "to the far shore". Chan is not the concepts – and can be experienced without the concepts – so the overall experience of the process depends on the culture and needs of the student (the karmic roots). The method of communication comes down to the tradition but even that can change at times, too. If someone does not understand the intent and language of Chan, I think you’re statement, "you should be very careful when you mix 'science' and 'chan.'," could potentially by misleading to them.

    In the HFY lineage, we describe the relationship of methods and communication to Chan in the phrase Hau Chyun San Sau – you have to have oral instruction, direct from your teacher and then you must experience the teaching through your six gates (eyes, ears, nose, mouth, skin, mind). Once you have an experience of the teaching (and you’re qualified to speak), different concepts can be used to help someone else. I can’t teach everyone using the same example in all cases – I have to adapt my communication style for the person to which I am speaking (explanation about the HFY Formula aside – in that case context is the same for everyone that has a body so the concepts are the same, but the language used to "see" the formula can adapt to circumstance based on the person that is hearing the explanation). Talking about universal compassion to someone that’s never experienced love might not be the best bridge to try to build. Maybe understanding force and power (or violence?) would be better for the moment – with an eventual guiding towards compassion by analogy and/or through gradual cultivation.

    Some HFY articles feature a lot of scientific and military imagery – the HFY system uses a lot of Buddhist imagery and the analogies in the articles to science or military references made are valid. However, much of the more modern imagery has been derided in the past with arguments such that the Chinese people from the timeframe of the Ming/Qing transition couldn’t possibly think in the manner suggested by the scientific and military imagery used in the articles. While finding this argument both racist and ethnocentric, I also find it empty. The more I study the actual level of knowledge and sophistication of Chinese culture, especially during the Ming/Qing transition, the more I see connections in scientific, militaristic, philosophic, and religious models of reality. You do raise a good point about language usage. The last few articles have been reviewed by different people for clarity of message prior to being completed – a practice that will hopefully alleviate some of the miscommunications or misunderstandings of the past.

    Going back to the original thrust of this thread, what is Shaolin – for me it comes to the cultivation of the mind/heart and nourishing the Buddha Nature in addition to technical training. There should be a focus in the system on three aspects: Chan, Health (both for self-cultivation and medicine) and Self-Defense (both as Chan cultivation and to prohibit the use of violence). Similar to Kung Lek’s assertion, I feel the body mechanics are less important that the combined focus on the above. If your intent is focused on the right goal, your life will eventually reach it. The heart of Chan is compassion for others – Shaolin is a faat, a method to reach that state. And I can’t remember where I read it – this thread or another – but sets/forms as sutras, this is something I can certainly identify with personally. The HFY system makes a distinction between Kuen Faat Dai Ji – a martial arts and Dharma disciple and Kuen Seut Dai Ji – a martial arts disciple. Kuen Faat means to use the kuen (and by extension, the learning of fighting) to experience the faat (method/reality – Dharma in a Buddhist context). Kuen Seut means to use the kuen to develop skill (I think this might be analogous to Mantis108’s usage of kung fu and wushu that I read in another thread with kung fu being in a similar vein to Kuen Faat and wushu in a similar vein as Kuen Seut.)

    Sincerely,
    Jeremy R.

    Oh, and as a side note, Hitler’s usage of the swastika is discussed here and here. It’s not quite as simple as "when you mix 'science' and 'chan.' That concoction often results in nazism."

    In brief,
    "Nazi Germany's use of it has an interesting history. The initial association that the symbol seems to have had was that of extreme nationalism, but not necessarily associated with the Nazi Party. It was first used in this context about 1870 CE by the Austrian Pan-German followers of Schoenerer.

    Wilhelm Schwaner displayed a swasticka on the title page of his "völkisch" periodical "Der Volkserzeiher" in 1897 CE as a symbol of the paper's "völkisch" sentiments, and this may be the first printed usage of it in this context.– from the first link above


    Therefore, when Hitler chose the swasticka as the symbol of the NSDAP, he was quite probably conciously choosing an already familiar symbol that already had the tenets of National Socialist ideology attached to it in the minds of the German public. This act of adopting an already familiar badge is just one more point of evidence that Hitler was a canny and cunning man, and willing to steal and pervert whatever would advance his program.

    The badge of the NSDAP was designed by Dr. Friedrich Krohn, a dentist who had belonged to several "völkish" groups, including the "Germanen Ordnung" (membership in which, incidentally, precluded -any- advancement in the NSDAP). As mentioned above, the symbol was originally drawn right-handed, and Adolph Hitler insisted on its being reversed. Many occultists shook their heads at this, thinking (rightly) that it presaged a bad end for Hilter's Germany."– from the second link above
    Last edited by passing_through; 12-22-2003 at 11:17 AM.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Fremont, CA, U.S.A.
    Posts
    47,947

    The danger zone

    Chan is not limited by doctrines or methods – people can approach it as a religion, a science or even a philosophy, whichever "door" they perceive and with which they identify.
    I won't argue that, but I stand by my point that mixing science and Chan is dangerous. Both are emphasize parsimony, and there's a baby/bathwater problem, which elicited my Kuanyin statement earlier. There's some philosophical challenges to something that is "not limited." It's like an old koan - if any 'door' is possible, can a Chan butcher exist? Can something evil be Chan? A lot of people use the doctrine of no doctrine as an excuse to do as they please, but that is not what Chan is about at all. It may seem so, but therein lies a fundamental paradox of Chan. Now where I think this gets tricky is that science attempts to resolve paradox through logic and control. That creates a schizophrenia because if you're looking for something equatable or mathematical, Chan is not your answer. It's like approaching a koan as a riddle to be solved - you miss the boat completely.
    If we chose to look at Chan through a scientific lens, it should be one more like quantum mechanics or even Heisenberg effects.

    Now as for use of scientific and military imagery, there's no problem with military at all. There is a long tradition of military imagery in China, a tradition that goes back to Sunzi, further even. But perhaps we should distinguish modern military with ancient here. Modern science has converted the military from warriors to soldiers. It's not man-to-man anymore. It's machine-to-machine. So we can get back to the problem being one of modern science. Now why would we want to use the scientific lens on martial arts? Certainly an argument can be made for the research now being done on qi and TCM, and perhaps something can be said for an anatomical approach. But otherwise, it could be perceived as just putting on airs. Are you actually reaching more people with the teachings using this approach, or are you being more exclusive with jargon - speaking in code, if you will, a common problem with scientific journals. Science demands sterility, the first condition for control, and combat is seldom sterile. It also demands a lack of attachment to the results - whether something is proven or not, you cannot be attached. Again there's a parallel to Chan, one that if compounded can be really dangerous. Being unattached can easliy slip into psychosis.

    A lot of people view Chan lightly, and that's fine. Especially lately, it's been such a fad - peace and love, you can't really fault that. But, like any spiritual pursuit, when taken to an extreme, it can be the razor's edge between heaven and hell. And we all know how extreme we like to be here. After all, we've all taken the warrior path. So if you're serious about it all, take heed and tread warily.
    Gene Ching
    Publisher www.KungFuMagazine.com
    Author of Shaolin Trips
    Support our forum by getting your gear at MartialArtSmart

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    USA - just outside NYC
    Posts
    6
    I'm new to this forum, and would like to say hello to all. Could someone please explain to me the differences and/or distinctions between the "Ch'an" practiced in China and associated with kung-fu, and Japanese Zen such as the Soto and Rinzai schools? I'm familiar with certain differences in emphasis between Soto and Rinzai, for example, but unclear as to what makes Ch'an distinctive: i.e., the degree of emphasis on zazen, koan work, seshin, etc. Thanks in advance for your input.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Fremont, CA, U.S.A.
    Posts
    47,947

    Chan vs. Soto, Rinzai and Zen

    Chan is the progenitor. The Soto and Rinzai schools of Zen originated from Chan and have picked up some variations over the course of time. But Chan is the Chinese way to say Zen (or Dhyana if you want to go back to the sanskrit). If memory serves, both Soto and Rinzai descend from some specific Chinese masters - both words are transliterations of the names of the Chinese masters, Soto being the combination of two names for two separate Chinese masters. Now within Chan, there are also some lineage variations, both before Dogen brings it to Japan and after, but they are all based on the same root, so your question is a little muddled. Or maybe it's the answer that is muddled.

    Like many things Zen (or Chan) there are distinctions that can be made, and yet paradoxically, it's the same thing. Well, sort of. Each school picks up it's regional and lineage variations - there is even an emerging school colloqially called American Zen.
    Gene Ching
    Publisher www.KungFuMagazine.com
    Author of Shaolin Trips
    Support our forum by getting your gear at MartialArtSmart

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    USA - just outside NYC
    Posts
    6

    Re: Chan vs. Soto, Rinzai and Zen

    Originally posted by GeneChing
    Chan is the progenitor. The Soto and Rinzai schools of Zen originated from Chan and have picked up some variations over the course of time. But Chan is the Chinese way to say Zen (or Dhyana if you want to go back to the sanskrit). * * *
    Like many things Zen (or Chan) there are distinctions that can be made, and yet paradoxically, it's the same thing. Well, sort of. Each school picks up it's regional and lineage variations - there is even an emerging school colloqially called American Zen.
    Thanks much for your reply, Gene. I'm sorry if my question was muddled; I wasn't confused about the spread of Zen from India to China to Japan. (And yes, there certainly is American Zen: Charlotte Joko Beck comes to mind.) I will attempt to be clearer in my future questions.

    Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but I am under the general impression that Zen/Ch'an is more of an adjunct to the majority of Western kung-fu practitioners, rather than constituting a principal part of their being; something they discover after they begin studying kung-fu, rather than the other way around. I'm curious as to how integral Zen/Ch'an is to the lives of the participants in this forum -- such aspects as daily zazen, being part of a sangha including sitting in a zendo or temple, participation in other Buddhist services, etc. In short, whether Ch'an is as integral a part of practitioners' lives as the study and practice of kung-fu, and what their Ch'an practice consists of.

    Thanks again for your response, Gene, and my apologies once again for the muddiness.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Canada!
    Posts
    23,110
    i owuld like to interject a viewpoint here.

    Chan/zen, while in practice is not hidered by dogma or doctrine has at it's roots some doctrinal knowledge and perhaps even a dogmatic approach to beginning.

    The very beginnings of Ch'an are the lankavatara sutra as transmitted by Pu Ti Ta Mo to Hui ke. If you take the time to read this sutra, it will indeed make many things clear about what Ch'an or Zen is.

    Even the most simple things on the outside, have very complex workings inside is what I am saying. Ch'an in practice is very simple, but in truth and as a way of life is very complex when weighed against the realities of modern living. It is in fact quite contrary to the western paradigm in its practice in so many ways.

    Many approach it imo with to much of a simple view. Like anything, and especially like Kungfu, Ch'an practice takes a great deal of effort and purpose to fully bring into ones life.

    As an aside, I agree that many people are introduced to it after they are introduced to martial arts practice. I also think that there is a lot left out of it in many martial practices and instead it is exploited to the ends of only the matial aspects instead of fully being delivered to the students as the vehicle it truly is.

    Maybe it's because people would get utterly confused with the dichotomy it will present them in regards to martial practice.

    I myself was introduced to Zen long before I began martial practice and even longer before I found a good kungfu teacher. I still know very little about it despite reading reems of information and pretty much daily practice of zazen.

    I think this is a yin and yang thing, because in the see of knowledge that Ch'an is, there is nothing to know and yet it about knowing everything about the deepest recesses of your own being. Probably one of the hardest things to look at ever.



    cheers
    Kung Fu is good for you.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Ill let you know nxt sign post I find
    Posts
    3,330
    I love that staemnt and I couldn't agree more. So many people have such a sincerely difficult time looking at their spirit all the way through until from the eyes of the deepest reaches of the universe and beyond that it so extremely easy to settle for a lie or justify a comprimise when so close to a sincere enlightenent or insight. Its not easy to see your self at your most ugly and continue looking...We all face it....some go beyond and some turn back. Be strong It's what you dont know or refuse to acknowledge that becomes the secret enemy









    pls excuse typos...dodgey keyboard :
    Last edited by blooming lotus; 12-24-2003 at 05:39 PM.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    5,492
    Good posts guys...

    Thanks, I now feel so enlightened...
    practice wu de


    Actually I bored everyone to death. Even Buddhist and Taoist monks fell asleep.....SPJ

    Forums are no fun if I can't mess with your head. Or your colon...
    uh-oh, I hope no one quotes me on that....Gene Ching

    I'm not Normal.... RD on his crying my b!tch left me thread

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Fremont, CA, U.S.A.
    Posts
    47,947

    chicken or egg

    Do martial artists become Zennists or do Zennists become martial artists? KL's probably right that for most martial artists, martial arts are a gateway to Zen, not the other way around. But if you ask a true Shaolin practitioner, they'll say chan quan yi qi Zen and martial arts are one. So it's a bit of a chicken and egg problem. From a western standpoint, there's an argument to be made. From a zen standpoint, the chicken is the egg.
    Gene Ching
    Publisher www.KungFuMagazine.com
    Author of Shaolin Trips
    Support our forum by getting your gear at MartialArtSmart

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    USA - just outside NYC
    Posts
    6

    Re: chicken or egg

    Originally posted by GeneChing
    Do martial artists become Zennists or do Zennists become martial artists? KL's probably right that for most martial artists, martial arts are a gateway to Zen, not the other way around. But if you ask a true Shaolin practitioner, they'll say chan quan yi qi Zen and martial arts are one. So it's a bit of a chicken and egg problem. From a western standpoint, there's an argument to be made. From a zen standpoint, the chicken is the egg.
    Having been introduced to Zen first, I subsequently learned that Bodhidharma introduced something more to the monks at the temple, which is what led me to kung-fu. I was somewhat surprised that not more students at the kwoon were Zen practitioners (or Buddhists at all for that matter). That was the reason for my curiosity about the Zen (Ch'an) practice of forum participants here (I think only Kung Lek replied: daily practice of zazen). How many of us here are guided by a roshi in Zen practice to the same or similar extent to which we study kung-fu under a sifu? Anybody else do daily zazen; sit regularly in a zendo; etc.?

    And to Kung Lek, thanks for your great post.

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    5,492
    I meditate every day, but I don't subscribe to any method... if that makes any sense.
    practice wu de


    Actually I bored everyone to death. Even Buddhist and Taoist monks fell asleep.....SPJ

    Forums are no fun if I can't mess with your head. Or your colon...
    uh-oh, I hope no one quotes me on that....Gene Ching

    I'm not Normal.... RD on his crying my b!tch left me thread

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    36th Chamber
    Posts
    12,423
    Kung fu is moving meditation as far as I'm concerned...
    He most honors my style who learns under it to destroy the teacher. -- Walt Whitman

    Quote Originally Posted by David Jamieson View Post
    As a mod, I don't have to explain myself to you.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Ill let you know nxt sign post I find
    Posts
    3,330
    exactly, and you can beg to differ all you like, but you still need to understand the process.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    the Temple
    Posts
    1,104

    chan and kung fu?

    From a western standpoint,
    yes, this has always appeared to be a stumbling block.
    Kung fu is moving meditation as far as I'm concerned...
    Well said.

    Who seperates chan and kung fu they do or you do...
    Tony Jacobs

    ng doh luk mun fa kin kwan

    "...Therefore the truly great man dwells on what is real
    and not what is on the surface,
    On the fruit and not the flower.
    Therefore accept the one and reject the other. "

    World Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Kung Fu Association
    Southern Shaolin Kung Fu Global Discussion Forum

  15. #60
    No more politic !!
    No more zen !!

    Please, have mercy.
    I was talking about kung fu styles, not nazis and chan meditation. I can only take so much. Y.....you......you sole this tread. My precious thread !!


    ~runs away crying~



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •