Thread: In a quandary
View Single Post
Old 05-19-2011, 05:42 AM   #50
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,248
Spain
Offline
Re: In a quandary

Hi Graham,

Quote:
You're more scholarly than me and so you may correct it as you please.
Only an aficionado (and you can be one too, it is not something outside of the possibilities of any ordinary person). Don't take the following as a correction but as offering an alternative point of view.

If you are interested in a scholar approach I recommend you to read The Shaolin Monastery: History, Religion, and the Chinese Martial Arts by Meir Shahar.

Also:
Quote:
Some Chinese accounts describe Bodhidharma as being disturbed by the poor physical shape of the Shaolin monks, after which he instructed them in techniques to maintain their physical condition as well as teaching meditation. He is said to have taught a series of external exercises called the Eighteen Arhat Hands (Shiba Lohan Shou), and an internal practice called the Sinew Metamorphosis Classic.[60] In addition, after his departure from the temple, two manuscripts by Bodhidharma were said to be discovered inside the temple: the Yijin Jing (易筋經 or "Muscle/Tendon Change Classic") and the Xi Sui Jing. Copies and translations of the Yi Jin Jing survive to the modern day, though many modern historians believe it to be of much more recent origin.[58] The Xi Sui Jing has been lost.[31]
While Bodhidharma was born into the warrior caste in India and thus certainly studied and must have been proficient in self-defense, it is unlikely that he contributed to the development of self-defense technique specifically within China. However, the legend of his education of the monks at Shaolin in techniques for physical conditioning would imply (if true) a substantial contribution to Shaolin knowledge that contributed later to their renown for fighting skill. However, both the attribution of Shaolin boxing to Bodhidharma and the authenticity of the Yi Jin Jing itself have been discredited by some historians including Tang Hao, Xu Zhen and Matsuda Ryuchi. This argument is summarized by modern historian Lin Boyuan in his Zhongguo wushu shi as follows:
As for the "Yi Jin Jing" (Muscle Change Classic), a spurious text attributed to Bodhidharma and included in the legend of his transmitting martial arts at the temple, it was written in the Ming dynasty, in 1624, by the Daoist priest Zining of Mt. Tiantai, and falsely attributed to Bodhidharma. Forged prefaces, attributed to the Tang general Li Jing and the Southern Song general Niu Gao were written. They say that, after Bodhidharma faced the wall for nine years at Shaolin temple, he left behind an iron chest; when the monks opened this chest they found the two books "Xi Sui Jing" (Marrow Washing Classic) and "Yi Jin Jing" within. The first book was taken by his disciple Huike, and disappeared; as for the second, "the monks selfishly coveted it, practicing the skills therein, falling into heterodox ways, and losing the correct purpose of cultivating the Real. The Shaolin monks have made some fame for themselves through their fighting skill; this is all due to having obtained this manuscript." Based on this, Bodhidharma was claimed to be the ancestor of Shaolin martial arts. This manuscript is full of errors, absurdities and fantastic claims; it cannot be taken as a legitimate source.[58]
The oldest available copy was published in 1827[61] and the composition of the text itself has been dated to 1624.[58] Even then, the association of Bodhidharma with martial arts only becomes widespread as a result of the 1904–1907 serialization of the novel The Travels of Lao Ts'an in Illustrated Fiction Magazine.[62]
(emphasis mine)

This is taken from wikipedia but you can check the source: Lin, Boyuan (1996), Zhōngguó wǔshù shǐ 中國武術史, Taipei 臺北: Wǔzhōu chūbǎnshè 五洲出版社

I'd say what you've told about Bodhidharma as originator of Shaolin martial arts is useful myth and legend, but historically unaccurate. In this sense, of useful myths and legend in martial arts history, I'd also recommend "Sense in Nonsense: The Role of Folk History in the Martial Arts" by Thomas A. Green in Martial Arts in the Modern World

I personally don't have any problems whith using myths, legends or fiction to illustrate a point or teach a lesson, as long one is aware of it and makes it clear to the audience. One should do not try to pass legends as historical facts and viceversa if we are after virtue. Get my point?

And you can call me DJ if you want, of course.

Last edited by Demetrio Cereijo : 05-19-2011 at 05:49 AM.
  Reply With Quote