Buddhism Grove

Originally Published in May 1965 Black Belt Magazine.

By: Dr. William C.C. Hu and Fred Bleicher

Much has been uttered about the semi-lengendary Shao-lin Monastery in China. However little or no research has been done to clarify the many stories surrounding the history of this place, thought by many to be the birthplace of the traditional oriental martial arts. Due to poor scholarship, many discrepancies have arisen concerning its location. That problem was discussed in the second part of this series.

Closely related with the story of the Shao-lin Monastery is the name Bodhidharma, also referred to as Ta-mo, Damo, Daruma. Bodhidharma, revered by Buddhists as the 28th direct spiritual descendant of the Lord Buddha and First Patriarch of Chinese Zen, was according to current general belief an Indian monk who traveled to China and settled at the Shao-lin sze Monastery. His teaching there are credited with generating the meditative philosophy known as Zen. Many also believe that Bodhidharma devised his own karate-type system of hand-to hand fighting at the Shao-lin Monastery.

The question arises, “Who was Bodhidharma and how much of the Bodhidharma story is pure legend?” Another question before us is, “To what extent was Bodhidharma associated with the oriental martial arts?” There have been so many stories about this person that questions have been raised about his origin. However, recent Chinese and Japanese scholars have definitely established the fact that such a person was in China during the period, 520-535 A.D.

In the Kuang-hsiao-ssu, written by Ku Kang, there is a record which states:

The first Patriarch Bodhidharma arrived in Canton from T’ien-Chu (India), and stayed at the Harilakit Grove. At that time, Emperor Wu was a faithful adherent of Buddhism. The Emperor sent emissaries to receive the monk at Chin-ling (Nanking). They had a meeting, but no impression was made on the Emperor. The monk crossed the Yang-tze to the north and stayed at the Shao-lin Monastery at Sung-shan.

The dialogue between Emperor Wu and Bodhidharma is recorded in the book, Fu-tsu li tai t’ung tsai, it reads:

When Bodhidharma was presented to the Emperor by the magistrate of Canton, Hsiao Ang, the Emperor said, “I cannot enumerate the number of monks that I have supported, since I ascended the throne, in erecting monasteries and transcribing the sutras. I wonder what merit is gained by all this.”

Bodhidharma answered “There is no merit at all.” The Emperor asked, “What achievement is considered without merit?”

Bodhidharma answered, “All these are insignificant doings that would not free the doer from being reborn into this earth again. These deeds still show traces of worldliness; they are like the shadows following objects.

“Although they appear actually existing, they are no more than mere nonentities.”

The Emperor asked, “What then can be considered true merit?”

Bodhidharma answered, “A deed of true merit is full of pure wisdom and is perfect and mysterious, and its real nature is beyond the grasp of human intelligence. Such as this is not to be sought  after by any worldly achievement.”

The Emperor asked, “What is the principle of the sacred truth?”

Bodhidharma answered, “Emptiness, and not sacred.”

The Emperor asked, “Then who is it that stands before me?”

Bodhidharma answered, “I do not know.”

The Emperor could not understand the deep meaning of all this. Bodhidharma remained for a few days and then he crossed the Yangtze River and proceeded north to the Shao-lin Monastery to remain there gazing at the walls.

What the Emperor did not understand was that Bodhidharma was advocating Cha’an (Zen) Buddhism, which centers its teaching “directly pointing to the human mind” and “becoming a Buddha just as you are,” believing that the Buddha nature is inherent in all human beings and that through meditative introspection this nature can readily be seen. By the Buddha-nature is meant the Buddha-mind in its highest attributes and true essence, which transcends all distinctions of object and subject or duality of any kind. It is emptiness, that is, empty of any specific character. The world of appearances, with all its specific characters, is but a product of the imagination.

To penetrate the Buddha-mind, the great masters of meditation variously advocated “absence of thought” in the sense that the mind should be freed from the influence of the external world. They taught “ignoring one’s feelings” so as to eliminate all defilements and attachments.

From its distaste for book-learning, Cha’an (Zen) Buddhism became known as the doctrine “Not founded on words or scriptures.” It was rather a teaching “transmitted from mind to mind,” that is, from one master directly to his disciple without the intervention of rational argumentation or formulation in conceptual terms. In essence, Cha’an (Zen) Buddhism is highly individualistic and often irreverent and iconoclastic with respect to tradition.

Bodhidharma was disappointed with his meeting with the Emperor and the failure to communicate with him on the aspect of Ch’an Buddhism. Bodhidharma’s propagation of the doctrine of meditation which seeks the reconciliation of reasoning and action is quoted in the Kao seng chüan as follows:

From my understanding of the truth, I fully believe that all living beings share the same basic nature. By wiping away the dusts of alien thoughts and returning to the true, by facing the wall in meditation, by being oblivious to what appears before one’s eyes, the sage and the common people are at one. By determination to stick to the truth, the refusal to follow alien teachings, the identification of one’s own self with the truth, and maintenance of peace and refraining from bustle, one will have achieved reason.

This statement gives light to the reason Bodhidharma sat for nine years facing the walls in the Shao-lin Monastery. However, to better understand this philosophy we must first know more about the man, Bodhidharma.

In the Hsü kao seng chüan, a supplement of Biographies of Eminent Monks by the T’ang dynasty monk, Tao Hsüan, we find this entry:

Bodhidharma came of Brahman stock in Southern India. He was a genius and caught on to things readily. He dedicated his life to the propagation of the doctrines of Mahayana Buddhism, and reached high attainments in meditation and communication with the infinite. He felt a duty to carry the light to the people in this part of the world and would seek to deliver them from ignorance. He first reached the NanYüeh area and later proceeded north to Wei. Wherever he went, he taught the people the doctrines of Ch’an (Zen).

According to Gile’s Biographical Dictionary, the statement that he was a Brahman is incorrect, as he belonged to the Kchattriya or Kshatriya case, a military case of warriors and kings. In the Fo tsu li tai t’ung tsai, we find a further statement that reads:

The 28^th Patriarch was the third son of Hsiang Chih, a king in Southern India. Bodhidharma was the 28^th Patriarch of Indian Buddhism and the first Patriarch of Chinese Buddhism.

Another entry which gives further details of his descent is found in the Li tai shen hsien t’ung chien, which contains the following statement:

Bodhidharma was descendant of the family of Sha-li ti. He was the third son of Hsiang Chih, a king of Southern India. His sincere desire to discover the truth led him to Buddhism and he studied under the teacher Panyatara or Pradjnatara. He practiced the new doctrine for over sixty years.

Further research notes that his real name was Bodhitara. However, after he studied the Buddhist doctrines under Panyatara (Pradjnatara) his teacher changed his named to Bodhidharma. This was to mark his unusual penetration (bodhi) in religious matters and the Buddhist law (dharma). The date of his birth is uncertain although his birthday is celebrated on the fifth day of the tenth month of the lunar calendar. However, this date appears to be the anniversary of his death rather than his birth. Nevertheless this is most justified, as Buddhists believe his death marks his acceptance into Nirvana; thus he was reborn to become a Bodhisattva, or saint.

It is common knowledge that Bodhidharma was an old man when he arrived in China on a boat trip that took three years. The Li tai shen hsien t’ung chien notes, without further elaboration, that he practiced the doctrines preached by Panyatara (Pradjnatara) for sixty years. It is possible that he was in his sixties when he arrived in China.

However, the date of his arrival into China has again brought about many disagreements and arguments. According to Buddhist tradition Bodhidharma arrived in China in 527 A.D., although the date 520 A.D. is often given by other writers. This mix up of dates appears to stem from the misinterpretation of the reign of Emperor Wu-ti of the Liang dynasty (502-550 A.D.). After seven years of his rule, under the dynastic title P’u-t’ung, the Emperor Wu changed his dynasty title to Ta-t’ung. So that the eight year of P’u-t’ung is synonymous with the first year of Ta-t’ung. Thus careless researchers sometimes considered the two names to have applied to different Emperors. The date 527 A.D. or the first year of Ta-t’ung is probably correct, the error having arisen through confusion of these two periods. According to the FO tsu li tai t’ung chien, Bodhidharma is said to have arrived during the cyclical year ting-moor the first year of Ta-t’ung which corresponds to the date 527 A.D.

One of the material objects Bodhidharma brought which him to China from India was patra, or as the Chinese called it, the Po’yu, the alms bowl of every Buddhist mendicant.

Legend states that the patra of Sakyamuni is to be used by every Buddha. It was first preserved at Vaisali, then taken to Gandhara, Persia, China, Ceylon, to the heaven Tuchita, and to the palace of Sagara which lies at the bottom of the sea. There it awaits the advent of Maitreya, the Buddha of the Future, whereupon it will divide into four pieces each guarded by Maharadja, as with its absolute disappearance the religion of Buddha will perish. The patra that Bodhidharma brought with him to China reportedly is now preserved in the Kuang-hsiao Monastery in Canton, in the province of Kwang-tun.

After Boddhidharma’s dissatisfaction with the Emperor who remained unenlightened he left Nanking and set out for the Wi kingdom, which occupied the greatest part of Northern China. The Emperor, regretting the loss of the great ascetic, sent a messenger to invite him to return. The officer’s report of what he saw upon reaching the bank of the Yangtze River has been recorded in the Li tai shen hsien t’ung chien:

The Patriarch Bodhidharma crossed the swollen waters of the Yangtze River on a reed.

This scene became a favorite subject in Buddhist art, which accounts for much of the legend with which it is associated. Bodhidharma’s refusal to return to Nanking led him to proceed to Loyang, in the province of Honan, to the Shao-lin Monastery on Sung-shan Mountain, where he remained for nine years in silent meditation facing a wall. The popular statement referring to Bodhidharma as the “Pi-kuan Po-lo-men” or the Wall-gazing Brahman was the result. As stated previously, the reference that he was of the Brahman case is incorrect.

Bodhidharma died after five attempts by his rivals to poison him, before he could accomplish his purpose of returning to India. The date of his death has also caused much controversy. The date is either the first year of Chung ta-t’ung or the first year of Ta-t’ung (529 or 535 A.D. respectively.) The latter date is probably more correct.

His disciples buried him on Hsiungerh-shan or Bear’s Ear Hill, to the west of Loyang in Honan province. Some writers contend that his body rests in the Pao-kuang Monastery two miles west of Canton in the province of Kwangtung. The latter statement does not present enough documentation to warrant its claim. The contention that he is buried on Hsiung-erh-shan is better documented and seems to be more accurate.

After his death, the Shen-hsien t’ung chien relates that Sung Yün, an official of the Wei kingdom who was sent to India to procure the sutras, or lectures of the Lord Buddha, reported to have met Bodhidharma on the Ts’ung-ling or the Onion Range. Sung Yün reported that he had seen Bodhidharma holding in his hand a single grass sandal. Sung Yün talked to the Patriarch asking where he was going, and Bodhidharma replied that “he was going to the Western Paradise.” Bodhidharma’s coffin was immediately opened and was found empty except for a grass sandal. The Wei Emperor ordered that this grass sandal be preserved as a sacred relic in the Shao-lin Monastery. In the year 727 A.D. the sandal was stolen from the Monastery and its whereabouts remain unknown today.

In reverence to the Patriarch Bodhidharma the last Emperor of the Liang dynasty, Chü Kang, erected a special monument in the year 587 A.D. on the spot where Bodhidharma left his footprint in the Shao-lin Monastery.

These events link Bodhidharma with the Shao-lin Monastery and later writers made the most of these facts. In his story of legendary Heaven and Earth Society (t’ien ti hui) Hsü K’o used the Sung Yün episode very well as he construed Bodhidharma as a divine savior. Whenever the monks in his story were in trouble the intervention of the divine Bodhidharma was used. Hsü K’o even related the mystery of the grass sandal and gave it magical powers. During the Ch’ing dynasty very little research was devoted to solving the many discrepancies surround the Bodhidharma story, so that his historicity was not established until the twentieth century.

Hsü K’o used Bodhidharma in the fashion of traditional Chinese Taoist stories, that is to say, he portrayed Bodhidharma as a savior to illustrate that the monks were in the path of righteousness, as Bodhidharma represented Divine intervention and sanction by Heaven.

These techniques used by Hsü K’o were contrary to the teachers of Bodhidharma himself. An outline of his principles of Ch’an (Zen) Buddhism is found in the T’ang-tai Kuang-chou Kuang hsiao-ssu yü Chung-Yin chiao-t’ung chih kuan his and quoted from the Kao seng chüan.

There are four categories of conduct which should justify all human experience. The first is the conduct of looking at an incident as the result of retribution. When a man has cultivated an austere way of living, he must not forget there might be sins in his past life. It will not do to neglect the fundamental and to harp on the incidental and give oneself away to emotions. Though one might have done nothing wrong in the present life, how could one say he had no blame in a past existence? Thus one must bear calmly all adversities without complaint. The scriptures say: One does not worry in face of adversity because he has become resigned to his lot. When such a thought is bred, one becomes identified with the truth, and makes progress in his spiritual life in spite of sufferings.

The second is the conduct of taking in all happenings as they come. All living beings are fundamentally self-less and the good and bad come to one as the law of cause and effect is in operation. One may receive an honor, but it might have been the reward for some good done in a past existence, and with the reward the good mark has come to an end, so that there is no cause for jubilation. To take in the good and the bad with a sense of resignation, without any emotional outburst, will lead to peace of mind and identification of oneself with the truth.

The third conduct is that of abstinence from desire. People are forever greedy and avaricious, and lustful after honor and fame. But when an enlightened man finds the truth, he must act differently from the common people. His heart is at ease, and his body moves as circumstance calls for. He knows that among all the three circles of mortal souls, there is suffering for all and real rest for none. The scriptures say: All who seek after things suffer, but those who refrain from desire are happy.

The fourth conduct is the conduct of living in accordance with the principles of Truth. This means the complete purification of one’s mind.

The reading of books was the life and soul of many monasteries, and Bodhidharma’s system made the monasteries much less educational, much more mystical and meditative than before. It was reserved for the fantastic genius of India to construct a religion out of three such elements as atheism, annihilation and the non-reality of the material world and by encouragement of mysticism and the monastic life to make these most ultimate negations palatable and popular.

The subsequent addition of a mythology was better suited to the tastes of the common people. This was another powerful cause contributing, in conjunction with these quietist and ascetic tendencies, to spread Buddhism through so great a mass of human kind.

Additional Resources

Daruma – Father of Zen Buddhism in China and Japan

Asian/Asian American Research Institute – The Legendary Bodhidharma