Buddhism and Taoism

[Armin]

Hello,

after reading (and still reading) Mastering Kung Fu, I still have the following question: originally Wing Chun, and all other related systems, trace back their roots to Shaolin. That means, as stated in the book, that Wing Chun has a Chan-Buddhism-foundation, right? Some teachers, however, say, that there's also a "Daoist-background" in the philosophy of the system. Is it possible to tell, when and where the Daoist influence came into the system? Is it even possible to say, who braught this influence into the system???


Thanks,

Armin.

[Cang Long]

Hello,

Armin,
From what I've read when religion from India came to China it was always tempered with some Daoist ideology to make it more accepting to the masses. Damo is usually credit with providing the Yogic influence brought to ascetic monks of China. The following link may possibly help you in your search.
Historical Overview (http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/G002SECT1)

[Armin]

Hi!

@ Cang Long:

Thanks for the link - it really helps.

Maybe I should give some more information about the backgrund of my question. Over here in Germany, there's a teacher that changed his whole Wing Chun into a "Daoist-system". Well, it's hard to undertand. He changed the whole way of training. On the outside his movements look relaxed and soft, there's no pressure in his contact. In the inside, he is strong and stable.

In another forum he asked the following question (in my words): Wing Chun is an inner system - inner system are more "Daoist" than "Buddhist". If you train a Daoist system, you have to make Daoist-exercises. But on the another hand, you strengthen your body by "Buddhist-exercises" oder "outer-exercises", like situps, push-ups, crunches, and so on. There's no real "inner-training".

Well, that made me think. I know that even todays "Shaolin-monks" train something called "hard Chi Gung". But as far as I know, Chi Gung is a Daoist-exercise. Did the "old Shaolin-monks" really train Chi Gung? To be honest - I don't believe that. Without wanting to discuss about this subject, I am aware that the "new monastery" and its abbot do try to make money with their system and dont' even mind to tear down whole villages.

You see, the question ist very complex, there are too many questions behind. If there is something like a pure Chan-Buddhism, one expects to find it in a monastery like Shaolin (and in it's figthing systems, too). And there has to be something like a pure Daoist-system. And of course there are influences, but would they lead to a "blend"?


A little confused,

Armin.

[Cang Long]

Hi Armin,

A little confused, yes a little,

maybe we should backup a small bit.
Here is a definition of Shaolin that may or may not help you find at least a part (buddhist) of the answer to your question.

According to the research of the Ving Tsun Museum as stated by Master Meng:

"What is Shaolin? Before looking at the technical expression of a martial art, you have to understand the essense of Shaolin in the first place.

I. Three Treasures of Shaolin
A. Chan
B. Martial Arts
C. Health

For a martial art to be Shaolin, it has to address all three treasures of Shaolin. Each of these treasures can be broken down:

A. Three Treasures of Chan (Also refered to as the three refuges)
1. Buddha (Master)
2. Dharma (Teaching, doctrines)
3. Sangha (family/community)

B. Three Treasures of Shaolin Martial Arts
1. Gong Fa (Specialized Skill)
2. Tao Lu (Sets/ patterns)
3. Ge Dou (Fighting)

C. Three Treasures of Health
1. Essence (Jing)
2. Energy (Qi)
3. Spirit (Shen)

Wuyi= Ancient term used in China representing Martial Arts."

[Armin]

Hi!

@ Cang Long:

Ok, let me see. Buddhism starts out with something like "There is suffering in the world". That means, that there are people that suffer from many different causes like illness, war, grief, and so on. To overcome these suffers you first have to acknowledge them. As far as I understood, all suffering comes from one thing - being born over and over again. The last goal of Buddhism is to break this rotation and to find peace in something, called Nirvana. To do this, you have to be enlightened - you have to see beyond the "curtain of reality" to see what's real and than you are able to get free.

Shortly, but right, no?

Daoism is totally different. Ok, I have to admitt, that I have to read it up (again) first, but as far as I remember, there's no such thing as making yourself free from "life". Daoism tells us, that we are a part of something bigger - it's useless to try to run away, you'll never make it. But Daoism tells us, too, that there is something real and that we have to e. g. meditate and get enlightened to find this realitiy, or better "the big thing behind reality" - the Dao. Finding this Dao and living in harmony with Dao will lead to highest blissfullness in your LIFE.

Shortly, too, but right, too.

The only thing that is shared is getting enlightened.

Of course, one may try, and I believe that a lot of people try, to combine these two ways - they really don't exclude each other and there will arise no harm if combined.

Ok, but back to my question: is it possible to tell, when the Daoist-philosophy became part of Wing Chun, maybe in the time of the Red Boat Opera? Or was it really "just" something, that "every" Red Bandanna believed in?


Thank again,

Armin.

[Cang Long]

Armin,
You say you have MKF to read well in there I would argue the case that my teachers are positing the fact that Ch'an a combination of Daoist and Buddhist ideologies are more than a part of Wing Chun but the basis for its creation the foundation underneath the principles and conepts that make up Wing chun are derived from Daoist and Buddhist concepts and principles and without them there is no Wing Chun. So if you are asking when were these religious/philosophical/Yi concepts added to Wing chun I would ask you to go back and find Wing Chun without these ideas and I would say that you would not be able to do so. I hope this answers your question if not I will try again later. :)

[Cang Long]

Hey Armin have you seen this thread? (http://www.hfy108.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=61)

[passing_through]

Armin,

Your overview of Buddhism is not quite complete, at least from a Shaolin Chan point of view.

You stated, As far as I understood, all suffering comes from one thing - being born over and over again.

The cause of all suffering is, according to Buddha, 'duhka' (I'm not sure if I'm spelling that right, it's been a while). Duhka literally means 'two-ness.' We suffer because we see ourselves as separate from the things we desire/want/need. This fundemental subject-object dichotomy is the source of all our suffering, Noble Truth #2. The 'being born over and over' part stems from some Buddhist sects but not all - and not Chan.

Shaolin Chan is an outgrowth of an earlier form of Buddhism - Cittamatra Buddhism (Mind only school) (AKA Yogacaric Buddhism) which states that all phenomena were empty except the mind which means that Mind or the pure consciousness really exists and is outside any subject-object dichotomy.

Following the development of Cittamatra Buddhism was the doctrine of the Tathagatagarbha or, the doctrine of the Buddha-essence or Buddha-nature. Proponents of this doctrine consider it to be the fourth and final turning of the wheel of Dharma.

This doctrine builds on Cittamatra in this way: The mind, which is real and is a substratum to all phenomena, is the Buddha-mind, it is permanent and eternal. The Buddha-mind is empty but, it is empty of defilements that simply do not exist at all from the point of view of its own innate purity. Each one of us has that Buddha-mind. Otherwise, liberation would not be possible. Consequently, since we already have it, there is no need of practice or cultivation. All that we need to do is to recognize it. Therefore, there is no need of sutras or disciplines. There is nothing to develop. The wish to develop something is a product of a mistaken consciousness that still operates in terms of subject-object dichotomy.

At the heart of Chan is the knowledge that all methods are possible and no methods are possible because the goal of Chan is to recognize something that already exists inside ourselves. In this way, Chan shares similarities with Taoism. There are some forms of Buddhism which to not share simularities with Taoism but Shaolin is not one of them.

Traditionally, Shaolin started from the outside and moved towards the inside. At the highest level, both internal and external must combine. The most often cited differences between Shaolin and Taoist martial arts often stem from foundational training rather than advanced knowledge.

Historically, Chan - and to a large extent Buddhism - was recognized as 'foreign Buddhism' by the Chinese, especially in the South. For an excellent discussion on this very topic, visit the following (http://www.hsuyun.org/Dharma/zbohy/Literature/7thWorld/7th-world-home.html) and read through Chapters 2-4. Chinese culture mixes Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism alltogether - add to that the fact that Shaolin and the Taoist temples had exchanges, even hosting groups for periods of time in each others' temples - and separating out what started where gets problematic. It is very apt to state, as you did that, it really "just" something, that "every" Red Bandanna believed in?

Buddhist discusion on meditation and enlightenment in three stages very similar to your write up on Taoism (http://www.dharmadrum.org/chan/chan.asp?NumID=585)

Sincerely,
Jeremy R.

[WilliamMathis2]

All this interesting discussion makes me wonder if Religon is important to kung fu, other then its historical value. I would love to get some other opinions on that, Is your PERSONAL religon imporant to your kung fu Development?:)

[Browning]

After I began my journey in Kung Fu, it became very evident to me that there is a definite connection between chan buddhism and shaolin weng chun. The two really are inseperable (in my opinion.) I personally am a christian and have been so for a long time. At first I honestly was a little turned off by the chan since I have always heard things about buddhism and how it is "wrong." The more that I learned about the chan, I began to apply those concepts and philosophies to my life as a christian. I no longer see chan as a "religion" as much as a way of looking at life. So that is my perspective.

[Armin]

Hi!

Sorry, I'm very busy at the moment - just enough time for reading and nothing else.

@ Jeremy R.:

Thanks for the link - I put that one to my favourites, to read it in depth.


@ Cang Long:

Yeah, I saw the discussion. And yes, I think the same - Buddhist- and Taoist-principles have always been a part of the system. I just wanted to be sure. Thanks again!


Regards,

Armin.