chan buddhism is full of paradox and unusual methods of training/practising. i know of people who practice shaolin kung fu as a spiritual path who’ve spent quite some time pondering just that question…ie. why did boddhidharma (as a buddhist) practice kung fu
i’ve heard that later in his life Musashi also commented on this, saying something along the lines of “the sword is not to destroy the enemy but to slice away those aspects of myself that are impure”
___________________________________________________________________________ “I never drive faster than i can see…other than that…it’s all in the reflexes” Jack Burton
I understand the concept of looking past the doctrines,HOWEVER, Buddhisms central and focal message(aside from all the doctrines and mantras for attaining elightenment) IS THAT YOU DO NOT HARM OR DESTROY ANOTHER LIVING THING. zen buddhism teaches self preservation, yes? but does self preservation mean literally to kill another life or even harm it to the extent of being killed? despite all the ledgends about DA MO i look to what he taught the monks at the temple regarding the body,The Muscle/Tendon changing classics were designed to strengthen the body so that one could be more focused during MEDITATION.
THE Message being"that if your body is out of shape you will NOT attain enlighten ment and utilize your mind body spirits full potential in MEDITATION. if what the previous posts say is true that there was already martial arts at the temple,then these things being taught by DA Mo were by the monks<not him> being incorporated in to the fighting. which brings up a question. IF,when Da Mo came to the temple and saw that the monks were weak and out of shape then these “martial arts that were supposedly going on there” would have been some of the sorriest lookin arts ever seen. hey you guys ever see an out of shape guy try to do forms? or even fight?
iT doesnt make sense does it folks? i still contend that these"shaolin" temples were military training centers for the emperors army. Hey like i am disagreeing with military training centers? nope. am i discrediting the shaolin temple? nope i dont think so. lets just put practicality where it needs to be put and disregard the fantasy. “warrior monks” not uncommon fellas. during the crusades we had paladins and bards who carried knives and swords and fought for the church,these were bonified men of the cloth. could it be said that the shaolin temples were bonified servants of the emperor? were they buddhist or did they present the appearence of being buddhist? the chinese box continues to open.
>>In fact, most did NOT and only Shaolin was ‘licensed’ to do so by the emperor.
So because the emperor licenses the temple to practice MA. The “Buddhist” Temple adopts martial practice though it is contrary to Buddhist doctrine? Why?
>>Da Mo was a renegade of the buddhists anyway for he did like to fight and condoned self preservation in this manner,seems to me he was more of a TAOIST than anything else.
Dharma was a renegade because he dicarded the Hindu amendments that were forced into the original form of buddhism after Buddha died. He broke away in an effort to restore buddhism to it’s original state and left India in fear of his life. As well Dharma did not like to fight, nor did he teach fighting at Shaolin. The Shaolin have never attributed Dharma with teaching or bringing fighting arts to China. He is attributed with introducing Buddhism. It was through teaching the “Five animal frolics”, which is an exercise not a MA, that Dharma introduced the concept of enlightenment through physical struggle. The Mohist adopted this practice applying it to their martial study. Whether Taoist or Mohist, they were impressed by what Dharma had to offer and ultimately became Buddhist, for the most part.
Buddhism in its orignal state lacked Deities and spirits and was more focused on the here and now rather than what happens when you die. However looking at Chan Buddhism it has many of the characteristics of Taoism, Mohism, and confuscism, as well it mentions spirits and Deities. This is probably why Dharma didn’t stick around. Despite his intent to restore buddhism to what it was, a philosphy not a religeon, It was again being amended.
I think you are trying to see Chan Buddhism with Tibetan Buddhist eyes, you have to look at the Shaolin variety as a specific path and not assume that it should necessarily play by the rules of other forms of Buddhism. There are MANY varieties across the world, a Buddhist practice from one part of the world may be alien and unheard of in another. Chan Buddhism should in no way be equated with pacifism The classic analogy is “refusing the gift of violence” where defending yourself from attack is simply a polite way of saying “No thank you, I don’t wish to be hurt, here is your punch in return.” It is heavily infused with Taoist thought, I would consider that to be its core difference.
It is like comparing Catholicism to Mormonism. Sure, they are both Christian but in practice have very little in common in beliefs or rituals
“You should never, never doubt what no one is sure about.”
–Willie Wonka
i see your point,to me buddhism is what it was first and foremost was. over the years it gets either re-written to some others ideology or gets borrowed from others who see its validity in thier own ways. i like the inference about christianity for there is a prime example of how religion gets perverted into a form of cultism that condones fighting and killing. jesus;s central message was love and unity,buddhas was as well, before him. in my opinion it is sad that we have in our own minds justified the killing of human beings through religion. i know this is wierd of me to state this being that i have been into the fighting arts for over 15 yrs. i have taken an internal path now that for me brings the fighting to where i think it should be in religion and pathways of life,at the surface. it does not go any deeper than that for me. I am about to teach on my own for ht efirst time and i want to do it well and really convey the message i have in my heart. i will not discount the fighting arts and the abilities attained for i feel that it is necessary in the beginning to learn this before realizing the futility of it and evolving…anyway thats all i guess for now. many respects,the willow sword
ABandit is right on point I believe. Buddhism, like all major religions, is against killing. But then again, buddhists are not idiots, not even the monks. Somebody comes to your temple and starts beating up the monks and steal incense you beat them over the head ith your Shaolin staff.
There is a historically verified tradition of warrior monks throughout the Far East . Shaolin monks with staffs in China (we can probably forget about bladed weapons, these were most likely never taught at Shaolin) and yamabushi with naginatas in Japan etc
If Bodhidharma taught the Shaolin monks some sort of physical exercise, isn’t it more likely that it was something in the yoga vein? Martial arts in China are much older than the Shaolin, calling Shaolin the mother of CMA is not historically tenable.
The classic analogy is “refusing the gift of violence” where defending yourself from attack is simply a polite way of saying “No thank you, I don’t wish to be hurt, here is your punch in return.” It is heavily infused with Taoist thought, I would consider that to be its core difference.