Hey Ghost,
Good post.
Of course we needn't mention the clearly supernatural elements of the legends. These are fascinating enough and worthy of exploration, but not at this time. Comparative mythology and psychological archetypes allow us to understand somewhat.
Secondly we can agree that the attribution of the Physical Martial Arts to Damo is a later idea that we need not bother with. In the more serious sects I have encountered Jinnaluo as the central figure anyway.
Thirdly the Idea that Chan was not created and passed by one person. Nothing is ever so simple, but never the less I think we can agree there are major advances in all things which do center around individuals.
The above defined I can move on. The Center of the argument has to be the Lineage of Damo, and Damos presence at the Shaolin Temple.
Lets start with Lineage. I don't believe in any of the presented facts there is any piece of evidence which precludes this lineage? When looking back at lineage a lot of people somehow think that each generation is like a wall, one generation cannot know the facts of the previous, only what they are told. However this assumption is false. There is never a clear generation gap. There is an even gradation of people of all ages. And when people take disciples they often have many, although we only hear about the powerful ones.
Let me take my master as an example; I decided to go find him because I already knew who his master was. I know this because in DengFeng we have an even range of Kung Fu masters with all possible age overlaps and i have been told by younger (but still old) masters. He is 90 and could tell me anything about the 1930's DengFeng Kung fu scene and I would have no choice but to believe him right? Not exactly. Because he has other students who are now in their 50's... when they were my age other students of my masters generation where still alive and so they know the facts.
My point is this, just because my master is 90 years old, he cannot just make up facts about the 30's because even though he is the oldest now, people younger than him now remember when people older than him lived, and their stories. So through the overlap of generations there is a limit to how much embellishment each generation can add to a story.
A similar thing would have happened with the early generations of Chan. One couldn't make up the facts of his predecessor because chances are he wasn't the only disciple and other people would remember the older disciples, especially in a closed temple environment. Even if the torch passes A-C-E-G-I The generation B would have been known to both A and C, the generation D would have been known to both C and E. And B knew D. If C teaches E then E has only a 2nd hand connection to B (through D as well as C). It is complicated but means that there is a limit to embellishment.
If we apply this to the early generations of Chan there is only 170 years (approx) between Damo and the Shaolin lineage record. This is a short time when you consider the overlap of generations. It doesn't make sense for it to be completely fabricated. Certainly legends can be born (especially in a time before clear science when the supernatural is believable and a way of life). But I do not believe the lineage could be so easily corrupted. Not only would they have had more records to work with in 710 but also the living memory of many old monks. When they wrote stuff down then, it would have had to already been reasonably well established.
So there is a limit to what people can make up. (i probably overdid that example a bit huh?).
Unless there is an alternative lineage presented in the evidence, we really have little evidence to say against this one. You may argue 'Why must there be a lineage at all, Chan is probably the collection of ideas of many over time?'. While this may be true I think in all things there are Major players. Einstein was not the first to write the equation E=MC^2, yet he is wholly credited with it, because he put it all together in a coherent way. Even though he stood on the shoulders of giants we recognise him as the 'Lineage holder'. And deservedly so.
There is a great deal about the human condition we can learn through myth and legend. I agree historical fact is paramount, but it must be researched with responsibility. In history such a great deal of opinion is present in analysis, its not like physics. It is not enough to say something is false, one has to find out both why it is false and what the actual truth was before it becomes useful to say it is false. In this case I think there is far too much conjecture. I realise I myself am conjecturing a great deal indeed, but I have records over 1000 years old which back up the Damo story to fall back on.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by wenshu
