PDA

View Full Version : Zen and Koryu



hg
1st May 2001, 07:48
Somewhere (i forgot whether in a book or on the Web)
I read that the Zen-Styles which strongly influnenced
the Kamakura Warriors more or less died out centuries
ago, and that the contemporary Zen styles in reality
have no connection to "warrior Zen".Is there any
Information about this subject in English?

Best wishes
Hans-Georg Matuttis

Paul Steadman
1st May 2001, 09:31
Hello Hans,

I'm going out on a limb here, but I've been led to believe that the koryu arts had more connection to and utilised Mikkyo Buddhism and the older Shinto (among other classical Buddhist sects) rather than Zen Buddhism.

The Zen that you see thrown around in the modern shin-budo/gendai-budo arts definitely have no place in koryu training IMHO.

I'm sure more knowledgeable koryu practitioners will correct me if I'm wrong. All the best.

Regards,

Paul Steadman
Shidokai Koden Bujutsu

hg
1st May 2001, 22:37
Dear Paul,
thank you, this is exactly what I think. But I remember that
I saw even some references about articles in books or
journals on the subject somewhere, just
I was unable to find the reference list when I searched
for it .....
My point is that in Kamakura, the Omiya Hachimangu definitely has a connection to the warrior traditions,
but the Zen Monasteries which belong to the "five mountains of Zen" there are nearly as old.

I have read the expression "Warrior Zen" somewhere (don't look on the Internet, useless, I already tried),
and it was claimed that this has a connection to the
Warrior Arts in the Kamakura Period and considerable
influence, but it was also claimed that the sects
related to it died out some time ago, or at least
the teachings changed.

That would mean that the monasteries in Kamakura may be older than the teachings there, like e.g. Westminster
Abby being founded as a catholic church, but the teachings
have changed over the times :-)

Hans-Georg

And I will not use the spellchecker henceforth, because
it complained about "Kamakura".

Victor
2nd May 2001, 12:43
Trevor Leggett wrote a fascinating book "Zen and the Ways" detailing how Zen was utilized in the Japanese Martial Arts. It described old martial Zen tracts, and gave descriptions how Japanese Martial Arts utilized Zen awareness.

Unfortunately I got my copy about 20 years ago, and I suspect it is out of print, but this work might give you the answers you're looking for.

Joseph Svinth
2nd May 2001, 13:22
Oh ye of little faith -- just because it's a good book, doesn't mean it has to be out of print.

ISBN 0804815240, Tuttle 1987, and it should be available through any major bookseller.

A complete list of Leggett's books can be found at http://www.leggett.co.uk/booklist.htm .

Check out the site, too, as it includes extracts, such as the following from "Robes of Honour":

"...In these ways, we put robes of honour on ourselves, and they hamper us and we can't do the job properly.

In Judo there is a certain grading contest called 'one-against-ten.' You have to take on ten men-one after another. They are generally a couple of grades below you, and with luck are so terrified of you, that it is easy to dispose of them. But one or two of them think, 'Everybody knows I'm going to lose anyway, so I've nothing to lose,' and they come shooting at you, taking fantastic risks. Because you are so sure of your own superiority, which he doesn't seem to recognize, and because he comes straight at you - 'whoosh' - you can't get the robes of self-conceit and assurance off in time, so that, once in a blue moon, he scores. Then you know what it is like to look an utter fool. This happened to some rather famous contest men who were not fully alert because they felt it was unnecessary. They had already put on the robes of their coming victory. No longer simply the judo champions they ought to be, they became judo champions combined with something restricting - judo champions in cumbersome robes of honour."

Joseph Svinth
2nd May 2001, 13:28
Hans-Georg --

It's not detailed, but "Zen and the Art of Divebombing" offers some introduction to the development of Zen in Japan. See http://www.friesian.com/divebomb.htm . Meanwhile, Victor is correct about "Zen and the Ways" including sections on Kamakura Zen -- http://www.leggett.co.uk/zaw.htm

Your keyword search on Google is Kamakura Zen.

Victor
2nd May 2001, 18:42
Joseph,

Thank you for the update on Leggett's book. My copy was from Shambala Press, tattered and well read many years long gone by.

As it is available, I URGE everyone to get a copy. It is the most fascinating account of how Zen had an impact on the Japanese Martial Arts, and some of the stories still have telling impact on our current teaching practices, IMVHO.

Karl Friday
3rd May 2001, 16:01
Originally posted by hg
the Omiya Hachimangu definitely has a connection to the warrior traditions,
but the Zen Monasteries which belong to the "five mountains of Zen" there are nearly as old.

I have read the expression "Warrior Zen" somewhere (don't look on the Internet, useless, I already tried),
and it was claimed that this has a connection to the
Warrior Arts in the Kamakura Period and considerable
influence, but it was also claimed that the sects
related to it died out some time ago, or at least
the teachings changed.

The connection between Kamakura warriors and Zen was political, not doctrinal. The Kamakura shogunate (and its successor regime, the Muromachi/Ashikaga shogunate, as well as its successors-to-power, the daimyo) were eager to acquire as many of the symbols and trappings of power and legitimacy as possible. The powers-that-were in the Court had long maintained patronage ties to the major Buddhist institutions in Nara and Mt. Hie (outside Kyoto), and so the new shogunate was naturally interested in something similar. The Zen institutions were new, and in need of patronage, and so they welcomed shogunal sponsorship. Hence the relationship between the shogunate and the Gozan ("Five Mountains") establishment. In other words, bushi interest in Zen had little or nothing to do with religion. For details, see Martin Collcutt's Five Mountains (Harvard, 1981).

In the area of personal religious beliefs: There were a few famous samurai and bugei ryuha during the late medieval and Tokugawa periods (as well as during the modern era) who were deeply into Zen and who drew lessons from it for their bugei practice. But the predominant forms of Buddhism followed by Kamakura bushi were Pure Land and the older Nara sects. The idea of "Warrior Zen" is an old cannard that was born from awareness of the shogunate/Gozan connection (but not of the true nature of the relationship) combined with logical extrapolation from some of the best-known tenets of Zen philosophy. Philosophers like DT Suzuki and historians like George Sansom reasoned that if Zen trivialized the line between life and death, and taught that enlightenment could be had through devotion to one's everyday job with the proper mindset (both of which propositions are, BTW, somewhat dubious), then it ought to have appealed to medieval warriors, whose vocations put them in constant contact with death and forced them to perform acts that ran contrary to traditional Buddhist morality. This is a reasonable surmise, but there's no foundation for it, and the evidence we do have concerning warrior religion points in an entirely different direction.

ben johanson
5th May 2001, 20:44
Karl Friday wrote:

"The connection between Kamakura warriors and Zen was political, not doctrinal."

I know, Dr. Friday, that you have criticized some of George Sansom's interpretations of Japanese history, but in his A History of Japan, 1334-1615, he claims that the relationship between the feudal magnates of the Kamakura and early Muromachi periods and the religious establishments, namely those of Zen Buddhism, could not be reduced entirely to mere political devices enlisted to gain support and symbols of legitamacy. He cites the examples of the Hojo Regents, Tokiyori in particluar, and the Ashikaga Shoguns, especially Yoshimitsu, who were rather devout and genuinely interested in the arts and religion. Would you disagree as to the historical significance of these examples? In other words, would these be exceptions rather than the general rule? Or was Sansom just completely out of his gorde?

And just as a side note, how would you rate Sansom's three volume series of Japanese history? It seems to me that, though some of his interpretations may be suspect, as far as the cold hard facts of Japanese history are concerned, his books are about as good a source as one could find in english. Would you agree, or am I mistaken?

I hope that you take the time to read and respond to these queries.

Thank you in advance,
Ben Johanson

hg
6th May 2001, 01:06
Thank you very much for your replies. By the way, talking about Zen, as far as I know, it is supposed to be founded by Boddidharma (forgot the Indian name), who brought his fighting art from Kherala to the Shaolin Monastery. Now, Zen as it came to Japan from China seems to already be much more "meditational" than the Shaolin practice. Is there any text which describes where or how the "vigorous" style got lost?

Thanks again
Hans-Georg Matuttis

Joseph Svinth
6th May 2001, 09:50
The Bodhidharma story is heavily mythological. See Michael F. Spiessbach, "Bodhidharma, Meditating Monk, Martial Arts Master or Make-Believe?" _Journal of Asian Martial Arts_, 1:4, 1992.

Be that as it may, and to the best of my knowledge:

1. Bodhidharma is dated to the early sixth century CE.

2. The emphasis on learning through epiphany ("enlightenment") seems to have originated with the Tendai (T'ien Tai) school of Mahayana Buddhism during the late sixth or early seventh century CE. Its most famous teacher was the Third Patriarch, Chih-i, and its principal scripture was the Lotus Sutra.

3. The introduction of Ch'an Buddhism into China is generally dated to the middle of the seventh century CE -- the traditional attribution is to a Chinese scholar named Hsüan-tsang, who took 600 Yogacara ("Unifying Practice") texts from North India to China by way of Katmandu during that time.

4. The Shaolin Monastery was not definitively linked to Chinese martial arts until the late fourteenth century. The reason was that an orphan raised there, Chu Yüan-chang, subsequently became the Hung-wu ("Extensive and Martial") emperor, thereby establishing the Ming Dynasty. (By the way, the word Ming means "Brilliant," and alludes to the Indo-Iranian god Mazda, King of Light; the reason was to convince religious sectarians that the millennium had arrived.)

5. According to a seventeenth century hagiographer named Wang Hsi-ling, Chang San-feng, a Taoist alchemist turned minor deity, created t'ai chi ch'uan ("Grand Ultimate Boxing") in 1391. To my knowledge, this would make t'ai chi the oldest still-extant Chinese system of unarmed combat. That said, the date must be taken with extreme caution, as Chang was not associated with boxing until the sixteenth century, at which time the boxer Chang Sung-ch’i mentioned that he had learned his methods from Chang in a dream.

6. The oldest contemporary illustrations of Chinese boxing that I've seen are the ones accompanying General Ch'i's book, which means 1561-1562. (The form shown is reportedly from the northern Shaolin form chi men jen.) If someone knows of earlier illustrations, please let me know.

All of which is a long way of saying that coincidence is not necessarily causality, and stories blur over time. Thus Xena knows Jason and the Argonauts as well as Julius Caesar. But to do that she would have to have lived a thousand years and hardly aged a day in the process. Same thing here.

Rennis
7th May 2001, 02:47
ben johanson wrote-

"George Sansom's interpretations of Japanese history, but in his A History of Japan, 1334-1615, he claims that the relationship between the feudal magnates of the Kamakura and early Muromachi periods and the religious establishments, namely those of Zen Buddhism, could not be reduced entirely to mere political devices enlisted to gain support and symbols of legitamacy. He cites the examples of the Hojo Regents, Tokiyori in particluar, and the Ashikaga Shoguns, especially Yoshimitsu, who were rather devout and genuinely interested in the arts and religion. Would you disagree as to the historical significance of these examples?"

I'm not Dr. Friday, but I'll open my mouth here anyways and hope that I am not too off. One of the big draws of Zen to those in power, such as the Ashikaga Shogun, was the craze for "karamono", that is "Chinese things". China was still seen as the country to copy and the possession of the trappings of China's "more sophisticated" culture (through art, tea parties with lots of expensive Chinese tea implements, etc) was simply something any "sophisticated" man would want to have. In some ways "karamono" might be seen as something akin to the big limousines, designer suits and expensive jewelry of today's elite.

How Zen fits into this picture is that Zen monks were just about the only people actively traveling to China on a regular basis. While they of course studied religious docrine there, they also got to keep current on what was "in" in China. They also brought much of this back with them to Japan and acted as sort of cultural go betweens between China and the Japanese elite who were eager and willing to pay alot of money for the arts and goods the monks were bringing back with them. Things like the famous monochrome landscape paintings and the early Chinese tea parties (which were very extravagant) are two examples that come to mind of things that were brought over through this sort of interaction. Of course what better way to get in good with the Zen priests than show some sort of interest in Zen. The overall scheme of things worked out well for both groups as the monks got the partronage of the elites of Japan, and the elites got a steady source for their important "Chinese things". It is only obvious that when having two groups interact at this level politics would get involved, nor is it surprising that with so many people interacting with these Zen monks an occassional few would actually take an interest in what Zen was actually about in a religious context. But that said, from what I have learned, the majority of the interaction between these two groups seems to have had very little to do with pure religion and had more to do with things like elite cultural arts.

As you mentioned from Samson's book, Tokiyori & Yoshimitsu were rather devout and "genuinely interested in the *arts* and religion". Yoshimitsu was also responsible for the renewal of trade with China and it is worth asking if it was for religious, economic or cultural reasons (or a mix of all of them)? While I haven't really studied Yoshimitsu in too much depth (and therefore can't really answer that question), it is worth noting that Yoshimitsu was very important in the arts and was largely responsible for what is known as the Kitayama period in cultural arts (named after the Kitayama area it was centered at), in which the arts flourished. Kinkakuji, his own person retreat, is sort of the symbol of Yoshimitsu's "Kitayama period". In both my Japanese cultural history and religion classes we have discussed Yoshimitsu and Kitayama culture and the discussion always revolves around the arts. Kinkakuji seems to been seen more as a cultural center than a religious one, even though it is technically a temple. Interestingly Yoshimitsu's grandson Yoshimasa was also responsable for another period of artistic development (named after the Higashiyama area where it was centered). Zen monks were very involved in this flourishing of the arts, but in the grand scheme of things they seemed to be doing very little in terms of pure religion. Yes some people were devout believers, but they seem to have be the exception rather than the rule.

Maybe this only confuses things more, but there's my two cents worth...

Rennis Buchner

ben johanson
7th May 2001, 08:12
Rennis Wrote:

"One of the big draws of Zen to those in power, such as the Ashikaga Shogun, was the craze for "karamono", that is "Chinese things". China was still seen as the country to copy and the possession of the trappings of China's "more sophisticated" culture (through art, tea parties with lots of expensive Chinese tea implements, etc) was simply something any "sophisticated" man would want to have.

Actually, I was under the impression that by the latter part of the 14th century, the desire in Japan for all things Chinese had waned considerably. It is definitely evident that by this time a distinctly Japanese culture had developed and that, though the level of Chinese influence was still considerable, it was nowhere near what it was during the Nara and Heian periods. If this is true, it would lead me to believe that Yoshimitsu's motivation for reestablishing trade with China was more economic than religious or cultural. I could be wrong though.

I really hope that Dr. Friday weighs in on this to clear the issue up (and I'm still eager to learn his opinion of George Sansom's books).

Regards,
Ben Johanson

Meik Skoss
8th May 2001, 05:55
Interesting question about the relationship of Zen to koryu bujutsu. Probably the best sources to examine on the subject would be the densho of different ryu. That being said, there's an almost total dearth of Zen-stuff in any of them. What one does find are references to kami (Shinto deities), devas and bosatsus (Buddhist worthies of various sorts), direct reference to mikkyo practices. If one takes these documents as reliable sources of valid information about warrior concerns, then Zen is pretty far down the list, ranking somewhere between absolute and asymptotic zero.

Oh, yes, what about Herrigel's and Suzuki's references to the importance of zazen and satori in budo or other Japanese traditional arts? I defer to Wayne's World for a definitive answer: "and monkeys might fly out of your butt." In other words: NOT!!

Herrigel was ein Herr Doktor Professor der philosophie of the old school and neither fluent in Japanese nor very experienced in either Zen practice OR kyudo. Nowadays, we call it "cooking one's data." The story about Awa at night, yadda yadda, is cool, but neither here nor there in terms of either discipline.

Suzuki was neither a budoka nor a major Zen-dude. If'n he's your authority (dubious at best, albeit nicely edited in the Dover editions), then you probably think the book by Westbrook and Ratti is a good one, too. I repeat my earlier statement: NOT!!

Yagyu Shinkage-ryu hyoho, to use the example Suzuki's so free with, *does* use a lot of Zen terminology, but it is due to the fact that, of all the intellectual systems the founder had available at the time, its vocabulary and its methods were the most sophisticated. I think it is more a case of Kamiizumi taking what was usable and putting his own particular spin on it, not because he also sat on a zabuton, contemplating the Ultimate Nature of Reality or attending sangha. Does a cow have Buddha Nature? Moo!

Yagyu Nobuharu Toshimichi, the current head of the ryu (and my teacher) has stated that, although he reads an awful lot about Zen, and his father was dedicated in its practice, that is a matter of personal interest and taste, not because one "needs" to do that. Some of the guys in the Yagyukai sit on a regular basis. Most of us do not; I think we are generally agreed that issho of sake has a lot more of Reality in it than is generally given credit. In any event, it works for us. As my swimming coach used to say: "different strokes for different folks."

Hope this helps.

Rennis
8th May 2001, 07:10
Ben wrote-

"Actually, I was under the impression that by the latter part of the 14th century, the desire in Japan for all things Chinese had waned considerably. It is definitely evident that by this time a distinctly Japanese culture had developed and that, though the level of Chinese influence was still considerable, it was nowhere near what it was during the Nara and Heian periods. If this is true, it would lead me to believe that Yoshimitsu's motivation for reestablishing trade with China was more economic than religious or cultural. I could be wrong though. "

As I said, I don't focus so much on Japanese of this period, but from what I have learned, trade with China was basically taken when it could be gotten. When Yoshimitsu became shogun (1368) China had finally restablized with the founding of the Ming dynasty and Yoshimitsu went so far as to create ties with China of a tributary nature. Obviously economic reasons were important, but things are rarely done for one simple reason and all three were probably important in some way or another. It is important to realize that economic reasons basically means trade with China, which means that Chinese goods will be coming back to Japan and if those goods were not profitable, it is unlikely they would have been bothered with Chinese trade in the first place. The fact remains that while Zen priests did have a strong influence, in the grand scheme of things it seems that it was rarely directly related to Zen as a religion. When you mention Shingon, Tendai and the older Nara schools, the court and court ritual comes to mind. Bring up the Pureland sects and the religion of the commoner comes to mind. Mention Zen and it is the arts, although this may just be the influence of my teachers coming through.

I agree that Japanese was developing a sort of distinct culture of its own at this time, but that is all but natural as they also in a fairly long period of limited contact with China. This gave them time to digest what they had taken in early and make it fit their own needs and tastes. With Yoshimitsu's re-establishment of trade with China we see a new influx of cultural arts and philosophies that in the later Muromachi period would also get digested into more "Japanese" forms. The art of Tea is but one obvious example. Interestingly, it appears that current research suggests that there was much more continuity between Heian and Kamakura Japan than had been originally thought. This has been briefly mentioned in a book which I am currently reading titled "The Gates of Power". Unfortunately I don't have the author's name on hand, although if Dr. Friday shows up he name him as he appears to know the author. Anyways, this has very little to do with koryu as we don't seem to have much Kamakura koryu around anyways, so I'll just shut up now and hope that Dr. Friday will correct whatever mistakes I have made here.

Best regards,
Rennis

marka197
8th May 2001, 12:58
Hi,

maybe a little of topic, but I was visiting one of the largest zen monasteries in Tokyo just a couple of weeks ago. Some of the monks there were practising Shorinji Kempo in their spare time and the Zen Master had obtained "black belt in both karate and Shorinji Kempo", whatever that means.

If you are interested in zen and come to Tokyo, paying a visit to a zen monastery is really worthwhile. Daihonzan Soji – Ji, 2-1-1 Tsurumi, Tsurumi-ku, Yokohama-shi is very welcoming to visitors and you can join the monks in zazen. I had a stay-over, including morning mass, two zen lectures and three meals. For 7000 yen, that is.. =)

BTW, I'm looking for a good koryu dojo in southern Tokyo (I live in Den-en-chofu on Toyoku line, between Shibuya and Yokohama). Anyone feeling like helping me out?

Thanks in advance,
Martin

Karl Friday
8th May 2001, 17:14
Originally posted by ben johanson
Karl Friday wrote:

"The connection between Kamakura warriors and Zen was political, not doctrinal."

I know, Dr. Friday, that you have criticized some of George Sansom's interpretations of Japanese history, but in his A History of Japan, 1334-1615, he claims that the relationship between the feudal magnates of the Kamakura and early Muromachi periods and the religious establishments, namely those of Zen Buddhism, could not be reduced entirely to mere political devices enlisted to gain support and symbols of legitamacy. He cites the examples of the Hojo Regents, Tokiyori in particluar, and the Ashikaga Shoguns, especially Yoshimitsu, who were rather devout and genuinely interested in the arts and religion. Would you disagree as to the historical significance of these examples?

In a word, yes. Yoshimitsu's interests in the arts and religion, for example, were extremely broad, and embraced a great deal that had nothing to do with Zen. He is also the paradigm of the would-be warrior monarch assembling symbols and mechanisms of power and legitimacy--which efforts made him the most powerful and the most effective of all the Ashikaga rulers.

In any event, the personal religious beliefs of some Kamakura period regents or Muromachi period shoguns aren't the issue. The question was about Zen practice among the general warrior population. The fact that the connections between the shogunate[s] and the Zen establishment was motivated by political rather than doctrinal concerns doesn't preclude the possibility of some political leaders developing a religious interest in Zen as well. Nor does the existance of such interests undermine the conclusion that the connections were primarily political in nature. And it doesn't tell us anything about what the guys out in provinces were thinking, either.

This isn't really my area of expertise--I'm just reporting what the experts say. For better information, see Martin Collcutt's book (cited in my earlier post) or the essays in Richard K. Payne's Re-Visioning "Kamakura" Buddhism (Hawaii/Kuroda Institute, 1998). For more on what "Zen" actually meant during the Kamakura period, see William Bodiford's Soto Zen in Medieval Japan (Hawaii/Kuroda Institute, 1993).


And just as a side note, how would you rate Sansom's three volume series of Japanese history? It seems to me that, though some of his interpretations may be suspect, as far as the cold hard facts of Japanese history are concerned, his books are about as good a source as one could find in english. Would you agree, or am I mistaken?

Sansom's three volume history represents the state-of-the-art for English-language studies of Japan as of fifty years ago. The research behind them was based mainly on literary, and to a lesser extent, chronicle sources, plus (mostly pre-war) Japanese secondary scholarship. Japanese historians had already moved well beyond this level of research at that time, confronting the actual primary sources of the period--letters, documents, diaries and the like. Western scholars began to do this in the late 60s. This kind of research produces a very different view of what was going on than the one Sansom was able to see.

The result is that while Sansom's work was very good for what it was, its value today is mainly historiographical. I wouldn't recommend these books to anyone as introductions to Japanese history. You'd do far better to look at John Hall's Government and Local Power (Yale, 1966) or the volumes in the Cambridge History of Japan series for this sort of broad introduction.

Your question, though, brings up an interesting and common misconception about history that's probably the result of the emphasis on memorizing names and dates in primary and secondary school history classes: the clear distinction between facts and interpretations. There really isn't any such thing. History is the science of reconstructing the past, on the basis of surviving evidence. It's all about interpretation. Even the selection of which names and dates (or "facts," if you prefer) to present is a function of interpretation. This becomes even more problematic in the case of historians like Sansom, who rely primarily on literature and chronicles for their base (without weighing what they find there against what they find in documentary evidence), since these are themselves compilations of selected facts--of facts chosen to reinforce particular interpretations.

EH Carr's classic essay, "The Historian and His Facts" (in What is History? [Macmillan, 1961; Pelican, 1984, rpt. 1964], pp. 7-30), offers an outstanding, eminently lucid and readable discussion of this issue.

ghp
8th May 2001, 23:34
Martin,

It's not koryu, but Nakamura Taizaburo teaches Nakamura Ryu (and his version of Toyama Ryu) at the Tsurumi Middle School gymnasium on Saturday evenings. Sensei is now 91 and most of the teaching is done by Sato Shimeo sensei and Suzuki Kunio sensei.

By the way, Nakamura sensei's ohaka is at Sojiji.
http://rudy.bay-ad.com/~guypower/kenshinkan/photo9911/memorial_marker.jpg

Regards,
Guy

marka197
9th May 2001, 01:05
Guy,

thanks for the pointer! I was not looking for Iaido, but this sounds quite interesting, so I might give it a shot. At least I'll go watch the class sometime!

BR
Martin

W.Bodiford
9th May 2001, 20:26
Joseph Svinth wrote:

*quote*
The oldest contemporary illustrations of Chinese boxing that I've seen are the ones accompanying General Ch'i's book, which means 1561-1562. (The form shown is reportedly from the northern Shaolin form chi men jen.) If someone knows of earlier illustrations, please let me know.
*end quote*

I believe there might be an earlier example. In 1973 Chinese archaeologists opened a Han dynasty tomb at Mawang Dui in Changsha, Hunan. They discovered a large number of ancient manuscripts. One of them, dated to 168 BCE, consists of a series of painted designs of gymnastic exercises. Each of the exercises is labeled with a name, most of which pertain to animals and bird (e.g., wolf, kite, sparrow hawk, ape, crane, etc.). Originally the manuscript seems to have depicted more than 40 exercises, but only 28 can be seen today. Of course, it is not immediately obvious exactly what these exercises or postures represent. Some scholars have suggested that they demonstrate that ancient Chinese had learned the postures (asana) of yoga from India. Others suggest that the postures depict qigong exercises or even taijiquan.

In this regard it is interesting to note that the Chinese word for "martial" (wu; Japanese bu) is etymologically related to the Chinese word for "dance" (wu). Some scholars have suggested that Chinese martial techniques have been taught as series of choreographed steps (kata) since as long as people have been speaking Chinese. They point to the Mawang Dui manuscripts as confirmation of their etymological speculation.

Regarding Bodhidharma and Zhang Sanfeng (Chang San-feng), the most important thing to remember is that these two figures exist in binary opposition with one another. Bodhidharma is identified as a foreign (i.e., external), Buddhist (i.e., foreign) who resided at Small Forest Monastery (Shaolin si) on Mt. Song (Song shan, Henan). During the sixteenth century Shaolin became famous for the militia that the local war lords commanded. In the popular imagination these militia were "monastic soldiers" (sengbing; Japanese sohei). Thereafter the name Bodhidharma became associated with "external" martial art texts such as the "Muscle Chang Classic" (Yijin jing). Zhang Sanfeng is identified as a Chinese (i.e., internal) Daoist (i.e., Chinese) who resided at the Five Dragon Cloister (Wulong gong) on Mt. Wudang (Wudang shan, Hubei). Wudang is home to the cult of Zhenwu sheng (perfect martial spirit), one of the most powerful gods in Chinese popular religion. Novelists frequently portray his mountain as the natural home of itinerant knights of fortune. Thus, the name Zhang Sanfeng became associated with "internal" martial art texts such as the "Great Ultimate Classic" (Taiji jing).

While Bodhidharma and Zhang Sanfeng provide a useful literary scheme for classifying various pairs of binary complementaries in Chinese martial art lore, there is absolutely no historical evidence to suggest that either of these personages ever did anything while alive that had anything to do with what we might associate with martial exercises.


Meik Skoss wrote:

*quote*
Interesting question about the relationship of Zen to koryu bujutsu. Probably the best sources to examine on the subject would be the densho of different ryu. That being said, there's an almost total dearth of Zen-stuff in any of them. What one does find are references to kami (Shinto deities), devas and bosatsus (Buddhist worthies of various sorts), direct reference to mikkyo practices. If one takes these documents as reliable sources of valid information about warrior concerns, then Zen is pretty far down the list, ranking somewhere between absolute and asymptotic zero.
*end quote*

This conclusion is absolutely correct. I would emphasize the phrase "almost total dearth" rather than "absolute zero," though. Initiation documents passed down in traditional martial lineages predominately reference combined exoteric-esoteric (ken-mitsu) forms of tantric Buddhism and Chinese learning (especially Daoist magic). There are rare examples, though, of martial initiation documents (densho) that contain subsection titles and contents identical to the initiation documents (kirikami) that were passed down in medieval Zen lineages. Just estimating from memory, I guess I have seen these kinds of initiation documents only in about 3 of the 50 or so collections of koryu document collections that are available in publications. These documents might represent only one or two of about 30 or 40 initiations taught in those particular martial art lineage and taken together they correspond only to about three or four of the hundreds of initiation documents taught in Zen lineages. (Regarding initiation documents in medieval Japanese Zen, please read my book: Soto Zen in Medieval Japan, 1994, Univ. of Hawaii Press.) A comparative examination of these overlapping documents would result in a completely different version of "Zen and the martial arts" than commonly imagined by Western writers.

Joseph Svinth
10th May 2001, 14:29
Prof. Bodiford --

My own take on the stuff from the earlier era is that it is related to the Wu Chin Hi, or Five Animals Play, exercises traditionally attributed to the second century CE physician Hua Tuo. According to tradition, Hua chose the bear for its strength, the crane for its ability to turn and roll, the deer for its gentleness, the monkey for its agility and alertness, and the tiger for its rooted and solid nature. Imitating their movements was supposed to lengthen and improve life by strengthening the legs and removing disease, apparently by causing perspiration.

Although the inspiration is said to have been observations of the animals themselves, I personally believe that the dances of Turkic animists seem a more likely source, especially if those dances were done by practitioners interested in acquiring the animals’ magical (cosmological) powers.

That said, there were definitely Chinese martial arts, but all the ones I've read about involved weapons or wrestling rather than boxing, jumping kicks, etc. An example -- ca. 220 CE, a Chinese warlord named Liu Pei was reported holding fencing tournaments. During one of these, a man armed with an iron rod knocked down a saber fencer, only to have his rod sliced in two by the fencer’s tempered blade. The maker of this magical weapon was a sword smith named Pu Yuan.

As for their character, well, the poet Chang Hua (232-300) described such fighters as being notorious for killing people in the marketplace. Their weapons included curved knives, swords, halberds, and spears.

ghp
15th August 2002, 18:16
Andrew,

Nakamura sensei gave him an HONORARY 7th dan. The Board of Directors and I sent him a very, VERY detailed letter of constraints. E.g., he is not to advertise the rank, he is not to charge for teaching Toyama Ryu (although he may instruct), and he MAY NOT grade or issue menjo for Toyama Ryu or Nakamura Ryu, etc.

The gentleman in question essentially took advantage of an aged man. When I found out what was going on I immediately informed the Board of Directors. After a lengthy session they concluded they could not refuse Nakamura sensei's gift -- but what they could do is add the word "Dono" [elevated form of "san"] after his name. And stick on a series of restrictions. To which the gentleman in question agreed in a response to me.

I saw last week that the gentleman again started advertising his 7th dan on his web site and I've e-mailed him, the man who introduced him to sensei, and the Board of Directors of the International Battodo Federation. I am awaiting responses before I take any overt action.

Essentially, he was given the equivalent of an honorary Ph.D. If someone tries to practice law, medicine, psychology, etc., with an honorary degree, he or she will get legally slammed. Unfortunately, we can't legally slam people abusing honorary budo ranks.

If I do not receive a satisfactory response and action from the Australian gentleman I will post a copy of the letter I sent him, as well as a copy of his agreeing to the conditions.

Also, the Board of Directors has taken steps to ensure no other "Honorary" awards are made by sensei.

Regards,
Guy

John Lindsey
18th February 2004, 20:43
Bump.

nicojo
18th February 2004, 22:55
Never mind, you all have probably wanted to write as much as you want to on this topic.