Shaolin Literature

[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 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.

[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


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' ), 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

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).