Talk:Bodhidharma/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

One entrance ... now—act nice

The page has been unprotected at my request, and I have put in the introductory paragraph that seemed not to be offensive to anybody. Citations can be easily added if deemed necessary (I made a brief reference to the relevant books and pages in a comment above). Now—let's not get all cabalistic and argumentative, shall we?

In the meantime, I'm going to consider and/or start working on a second paragraph to flesh out the introduction more (and possibly move the info in the current intro's last sentence further down, into the biographical section); that is, a second paragraph with the basic ideas behind the legendary material, so as to provide more information about Bodhidharma's actual significance. Still waiting for thoughts on this matter, assistance, et cetera ... Cheers. —Saposcat 19:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

== Disputed neutrality tag ==Fk

As part of the agreement, I'm proposing to remove this tag from the top of the page. Just checking that's ok ... --MichaelMaggs 19:47, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Good point. I'll just go ahead and do it. Cheers. — Saposcat 20:17, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm wary of the cabal. They'll not relent from pushing the red Han Chinese agenda. Take a look at Yi Jin Jing for the sick joke of an article the cabal has made it, all for turning it into a-point-for-point rebuttal despite them having an article exclusively catering to even this agenda (Disputed Indian origins of East Asian martial arts).

Since additional editors, already privy to all POVs are involved I won't object to it. Done by Saposcat and proposed by MichaelMaggs, it has my backing.

Freedom skies (send a message to Freedom skies) 23:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Good work, guys. Appreciated a great deal

First my best regards to Saposcat and MichaelMaggs, without whom an agreement would have been impossible.

Kindly take a look at Bodhidharma#Bodhidharma_and_the_Martial_Arts. The article Indian influence on Chinese martial arts has been altered to Foreign influence on Chinese martial arts as the influences are many from many countries. Would someone rename Indian influence on Chinese martial arts to Foreign influence on Chinese martial arts in Bodhidharma#Bodhidharma_and_the_Martial_Arts? I'll refrain from editing here for now as should the cabal.

Thanks in advance.

Freedom skies (send a message to Freedom skies) 22:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm getting tired of reading your ramblings... since you would rather read a book by a lay person rather than a book by a professor of history on google scholar, why don't you look at the intro to this book... it's an amazon best seller. read the introduction on page 2 and page 3 [[1]] Zen existed before bodhidharma in china on page 2 and then on page 3... most scholars consider bodhidharma to be just a legend. sorry for bursting your bubble... you also should get some prozac for your paranoia. there is no cabal... just people tired of your pov pushing. Kennethtennyson 23:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm getting tired of reading your ramblings

As long as you keep up the martians and Cinderella routines I cannot say the same of you, Kenny.

since you would rather read a book by a lay person rather than a book by a professor of history on google scholar

I'll read Encyclopedia Brittanica. You have to quit the routine about "lay" people, when you and I have accomplishments that surpass the men in question then we earn the right to call them lay or otherwise. Calling people lay in a serious tone, people from either side of the divide, highlights your mentality.

why don't you look at the intro to this book

should we hold that to a challenge ? The one who brings more books to the table wins, the one who does not quits Wikipedia forever.

Lemme know.

most scholars consider bodhidharma to be just a legend

Actually scholars believe stories like eyelids falling off and tea, stories which surround religious figures like jesus Christ, Prophet Mohammed and Siddhartha Gautama exist. Scholars do not believe that Bodhidharma himself as a living and breathing flesh and bones human being did not exist.

Zen existed before bodhidharma

Buddhism existed before Siddhartha Gautama. The impact of him identifying margas (paths) from a wider philosophy are not undermined. He is the founder of the unique philosophy.

you also should get some prozac for your paranoia

Despite your suggestion, which no doubt is based on extensive experience, I don't do pills. I'll pass.

there is no cabal

Are you trying to say you don't follow JFD and do what he does? Observe this, this, this, this . Again more citations will be provided on request.

just people tired of your pov pushing

POV pushing, POV where have I heard that before? Oh, the Yi Jin Jing article? Isn't it tailor made for a point-by-point rebuttal than a description of a book?

Anyways, I'm taking a wikibreak soon. Judging by your recent actions, the cabal should too.

Freedom skies (send a message to Freedom skies) 02:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

"sick joke of an article"

If anyone is curious to see what inspired Disputed Indian origins of East Asian martial arts, please see this, which one admin described as an "unreferenced, rambling, highly opinionated personal rant".

Are you trying to say you don't follow JFD and do what he does?

Hi Bakaman!
Welcome to the Bodhidharma discussion page!
Haven't seen you here before!
JFD 03:12, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Mentioned above is further verification of the fact that the cabal operates in order to create point-by-point rebuttals to cater to their han Chinese agendas, not encyclopedic articles.

Freedom skies (send a message to Freedom skies) 03:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


If you see my posts earlier in the page, he is from Kanchipuram . See interview with Jayendra Saraswati, and other sources I found with a quick google and google book search. Also kenny, see legend. Legend is little more than embellished stories stemming from fact. Legend is based on fact meaning much of Bodhidharma is embellishment, but the basics (Kanchipuram, high-casat Buddhist origin, yoga master, establishment of shaolin) is obviously true. One should (by reading the article) be able to discern the facts from the Chinese legend. Bakaman Bakatalk 02:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Shows up nowhere in canonical Buddhist sources. That JSTOR article is the first time I've ever seen it in a reliable source.
high-casat Buddhist origin
Canonical Buddhist sources do refer to Brahmin ancestry.
yoga master
Appears nowhere in canonical Buddhist sources.
establishment of shaolin
Appears nowhere in canonical Buddhist sources.

JFD 02:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


Not quite, The son of a pallava king resides in the capital of the Pallavas. The capital of the Pallava empire happend to be Kanchipuram.

high-cast Buddhist origin

As the son of Shudra can attain the rank of a Brahmin, the son of Brahmin can attain rank of a shudra. Even so with him who is born of a Vaishya or a Kshatriya- Manu Smriti X:65

People of kayastha origin like PM Lalbahaur have been known as brahmins (shastris) due to their knowledge, ditto for Vivekanada Dutta.

Societies of scholars have called themselves Brahmins and Pundits as well.

yoga master

A Dyana master, meaning a very well versed Yogi. As is the opinion of authorities related to the subject.

establishment of shaolin

That was batuo. Wong Kiew Kit the authority on Shaolin arts does refer to him in similar terms regarding his role in martial arts.

Freedom skies (send a message to Freedom skies) 03:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Where does "Kanchipuram" appear in canonical Buddhist sources in reference to Bodhidharma?
Where does the Pallava dynasty appear in canonical Buddhist sources in reference to Bodhidharma?
high-caste Buddhist origin
Wasn't so much disputing as clarifying.
yoga master

A Dyana master, meaning a very well versed Yogi. As is the opinion of authorities related to the subject.

Authorities such as...?
Names please.
establishment of shaolin

Wong Kiew Kit the authority on Shaolin arts does refer to him in similar terms regarding his role in martial arts.


JFD 04:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Replies - With all the horizontal lines, this page is a mess. Rediff is a mainstream paper, and Jayendra Saraswati (otherwise known as the Shankaracharya of Kanchi) has cited Bodhidharma. I was confused with Buddhabhadra about the shaolin thing, and never said Pallava dynasty. You do know that Buddhist texts are not the only thing one can cite on wikipedia, there are other sources lol.Bakaman Bakatalk 05:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


Connection with Kanchipuram


The Dharma Master was a South Indian of the Western Region. He was the third son of a great Indian king

Bodhidharma travels by sea to southern China


The third son of a great Indian king. In south India, there have been three great kingdoms, Pallavas, Cholas and Cheras


Cholas became great kingdoms during the tenth, eleventh and twelfth centuries. This was much after Bodhidharma's time so we need not concern ourselves with them.



Cheras, with capital at Kodungallur and Karur (which is not linked to sea).

So let's see, prince to a great south Indian kingdon making his way to southern China from the western coast of India, not possible.



Pallavas, with their capital established at Kanchipuram in the 4th cent. CE. The son resides in the capital, capital is Kanchipuram. If the account does say that he was' a son of a great king from south India and he made it to southern China by sea all indications are towards this one kingdom, and it's capital, very strategically located.

If it is a prince from a south Indian kingdom who made it to China by sea, the strongest indication, as endorsed by Encyclopedia Brittanica, is that he was from the capital of the Pallavas -- Kanchipuram.

That is why most sources believe that he was from Kanchipuram, Encyclopedia Brittanica and all.


Wong Kiew Kit


Wong Kiew Kit the authority on Shaolin arts does refer to him in similar terms regarding his role in martial arts.


JFD 04:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


in his homepage, JFD

About 150 years later in CE 527 the great Bodhidharma, a prince-turned-monk, came from India to teach Zen at the Shaolin Monastery. Since then the Shaolin Monastery has become the fountainhead of Zen Buddhism, which is a major school of. Mahayana Buddhism.

Bodhidharma left behind as a legacy three great sets of exercise, namely Eighteen Lohan Hands, Sinew Metamorphosis and Marrow Cleansing. Eighteen Lohan Hands became the forerunner of Shaolin Kungfu, and Sinew Metamorphosis the forerunner of Shaolin Chi Kung. "Bone Marrow" in Chinese medical terms is not just the bone marrow in Western terms, but figuratively refers to the nerves. The great Bodhidharma is honoured and worshipped as the First Patriarch of the Shaolin arts, as well as of Zen Buddhism.

Your quote, in full:

That was batuo. Wong Kiew Kit the authority on Shaolin arts does refer to him in similar terms regarding his role in martial arts.

Where does Wong Kiew Kit refer to Batuo in similar terms regarding his role in martial arts?



Tradition holds that Bodhidharma's chosen sutra was the Lankavatara Sutra, a development of the Yogacara or school of Buddhism.

Sanskrit: “Practice of Yoga [Union]

Yogacara means to practice yoga. [2]

A monk in the Shaolin practices Yoga, the grandmaster Wong Kiew Kit himself revers him. Self elplainatory.



The amount of malice you displayed towards bakaman is too low even for you, JFD.

Michael Maggs apperared on the Indian influence on Chinese martial arts article as well. I extended my best regards to him and replied to his every question, I talked to him. i did not subject someone to misbehaviour like you did to Bakasuprman, instead I explained and talked to him. appeared there as well. I talked to him, i made the article neutral to the extent of naming it "Foreign Influence", he replied to previous changes in making the article more neutral by saying he appreciated them.

People related to you in the past came to an article I largely contributed to, what do I do ? I talk to MichaelMaggs and extend my regards to him.

Bakasuprman contributes in your words "the only reliable piece of evidence" (JSTOR) about Bodhidharma and you subject him to abuse.

I never abused your aquaintences. I do get blamed for being combative, stubborn, unreasonable but I was not uncivil to MichaelMaggs, your aquaintence. He came to the article following a conversation with the cabal.

You abused mine, JFD. A distasteful act which highlights your pervese mentality.

I kept it to the cabal of you and Kennthtennyson, the barnstar couple, not to your aquaintences who took intrest in your business. I draw the line there, they are not the cabal but just their aquaintences.

You obviously have other principles of morality, JFD. Low ones.

The good thing is that you,JFD, not me is the one who'll have to live with it.


Freedom skies (send a message to Freedom skies) 08:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

The amount of malice you displayed towards bakaman is too low even for you, JFD.

I think I'll let Bakaman be the judge of whether I've behaved maliciously towards him or not.[3][4]
JFD 12:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Pushing an agenda

They'll not relent from pushing the red Han Chinese agenda.

By the way, speaking of nationalist agendas:

  • "The science of medicine originates in Ancient India"[5]
  • "Ancient India is widely considered to be the origin of martial arts"[6]
  • "if the archealogical survey near Dwarka completes the unearthing of an undersea civilization which might be the oldest in human history, thereby making India the cradle of human civilization."[7]

JFD 13:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

A better encylopedia?

Please consider, all of you, whether any of this is going to change anyone's mind. No. Is it going to help build a better encylopedia? No. Are any of you actually enjoying this? Unlikely. I suggest you all take a deep breath, accept that you won't agree and stop worrying about who's going to have the last word. None of this is worth it. --MichaelMaggs 13:23, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

What is going to build a better encyclopedia is standards.

Standards such as the official Wikipedia standards for reliable sources:

  • third-party publication
  • peer-review
  • academic journals or university presses

What is not going to build a better encyclopedia are stunts like taking the following passage from an article[8] that makes no mention of martial arts—

In the sixth century, the Buddhist monk Bodhidharma came to China from India. Once, while meditating, he fell asleep, and this lapse so enraged him that he tore off his eyelids: no eyelids, no more sleep.

The eyelids fell, and where they fell, two bushes soon grew. Bodhidharma put leaves of the bushes in boiled water, and when he drank the water he found he was more alert. His meditating improved. Tea-drinking was introduced to China.

—describing its writer as a "martial arts author"[9] and citing it as an endorsement of the historicity of Bodhidharma.

Nor will falsely citing sources for material.[10]

I'm afraid I must disagree with you, Michael, because I do think that holding Wikipedia to high standards—especially in the face of such deception and dissembly—is worth it and does, in fact, make for a better encyclopedia.
JFD 14:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

IMO, None of the conversations on this Talk page since the article was unprotected have contributed to anything except inflamed passions. --MichaelMaggs 15:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Then I shall do my best to keep my contributions to the discussion to just that: contributions.
JFD 15:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Yet again


establishment of shaolin

That was batuo. Wong Kiew Kit the authority on Shaolin arts does refer to him in similar terms regarding his role in martial arts.

Meaning: The man credited for the establishment of the Shaolin is Batuo (now turn to Ta Mo). Ta Mo is referred in similar terms (terms like father) as Batuo regarding his role in shaolin martial arts.

You misunderstood.


Take a look at the Foreign influence on Chinese martial arts. The quote JFD so gleefully went to is not mentioned in the NYT citations.

again, the NYT citations mentioned are this and this.

Read them, arrive at your own conclusions.


For falsely citing the material. The material stayed and I bought the citations for it following a conversation with Subhash Kak, with him directing me to Stanley Wolpert.

Take a look at the article in it's finished form, the only thing my contribution has done is provide sources.


I could go at length about the past when JFD tried to stop the Shaolin from being menioned at all, a part of his compromise. JFD tried to erase Batuo from the very history of the Shaolin, an act I did not allow him and such but I'll refrain from going into the details for now.


Take a look at Indian martial arts and Foreign influence on Chinese martial arts in their final forms.

Take another close look at Yi Jin Jing and Disputed Indian origins of East Asian martial arts, articles which the cabal created.

Judge the finished articles. Arrive at your own conclusions.


  • third-party publication
  • peer-review
  • academic journals or university presses

The most prestigious martial arts institutions on the planet, views from the Shaolin, the Discovery Channel. Arrive at your own conclusions.


IMO, None of the conversations on this Talk page since the article was unprotected have contributed to anything except inflamed passions.

I cannot stand it when someone of the cabal's agenda and standards of morality talks back. I will go on a wikibreak as soon as this is finished though.

If insult would not have been inflicted on Bakaman, this would already have been finished.

As far as I'm concerned this is finished now, time for a break. Unless the cabal feels otherwise.

Freedom skies (send a message to Freedom skies) 23:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm neutral in this edit war. I just want to ask that you cut down on the amount of space that you take up with your comments. I've noticed that yours are several times larger than most editors. It will only be a short time before this page needs to be archived yet again. (Ghostexorcist 23:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC))

establishment of Shaolin
Bakaman mentioned the establishment of Shaolin in reference to Bodhidharma[11] which, with all due respect to him, is incorrect.

Take a look at the Foreign influence on Chinese martial arts. The quote JFD so gleefully went to is not mentioned in the NYT citations.

Actually, it is.
Ctrl-F for "Pete Hessler".
It's currently footnote 50.
The quote I went to can be found there.

JFD tried to erase Batuo from the very history of the Shaolin, an act I did not allow him and such but I'll refrain from going into the details for now.

See for yourself the early edits I made to the Batuo article.[12]
I added sources, detail, even a sourced quotation which a subsequent editor deleted for some reason.

If insult would not have been inflicted on Bakaman, this would already have been finished.

Would this be the same Bakaman whose request for assistance[13] I fulfilled by standing up for him against those who would have him banned?[14]

I cannot stand it when someone of the cabal's agenda and standards of morality talks back.

If someone's going to make accusations against me that are demonstrably incorrect, then I feel I have no choice but to "talk back".
JFD 02:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Two entrances

any thoughts on my proposal about a second intro paragraph outlining the significance of Bodhidharma to Chan/Zen practitioners (i.e. a paragraph incorporating the basic concepts underlying the legendary material)?

The consensus among both Eastern and Western scholars is that the Two Entrances can be attributed to Bodhidharma.
The challenge is how to convey the significance of the Two Entrances to Zen without

  1. retreading the articles on the Two Entrances and Zen
  2. getting unnecessarily weighed down with "specialist crap"

The two entrances are the entrance of principle and the entrance of practice, but outlining their significance without getting bogged down in arcana is beyond me.

One could try to concisely distinguish Zen from other schools of Buddhism. Within the historical context of the times in which it arose, Zen was distinguished by its lack of emphasis on textual scholarship. Zen stories arose out of the need to explain practices and traditions and we can see this in the elements which first appear in the "Anthology of the Patriarchal Hall," such as the encounter with the Liang emperor. Bodhidharma pretty much tells the Liang emperor that his construction of monasteries and funding of translation are all for naught because they lack principle and practice, the elements of the Two Entrances.

An analogy could be drawn between Bodhidharma's emphasis on principle and practice and the Christian Protestant doctrine of "justification by faith alone" (as opposed to works).
JFD 03:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree that trying to explicate (ouch! Bodhidharma and a whole slew of other eminent Zennists would kill me if they heard that word being bandied about) the Two Entrances without, as you eloquently put it, "getting bogged down in arcana" is a rather impossible endeavor.
However, for a second introductory paragraph, I wasn't thinking of putting anything so precise in. Rather, I was thinking more along the lines of broad concepts that are often viewed (from within the Chan/Zen tradition) as somewhat bound up with and/or largely initiated by Bodhidharma, such as the "lack of emphasis on textual scholarship" that you mention. In other words, things that Bodhidharma was (at least later) seen as having done and that eventually came to be considered especially "characteristic" of Chan/Zen: seated meditation or "wall-gazing" (the former of which, of course, was by no means exclusive to Bodhidharma at the time in China, though it was eventually co-opted by Chan/Zen, as it were); the emphasis on "special transmission" and "pointing directly to mind" (which is connected with the lack of emphasis on scriptures that you mention—though Bodhidharma himself, of course, seems to have had a real thing for the Lankavatara Sutra); and, connected with the "special transmission" schtick, the lineage of Bodhidharma going back to Gautama Buddha (fabricated as that probably is).
All this sort of stuff is, admittedly, largely just made up in later eras—except for the meditational emphasis, which is probably the most important part—but when we're dealing with religious figures who, to one extent or another, founded distinct traditions and whose actual lives are essentially unknown, then the legends and myths and all that brouhaha actually form an extremely important element, I think, in what there is to be said about that figure (e.g. Jesus, Gautama Buddha, Laozi—to move backwards in time and into increasing unknowability).
Anyhow ... let me know whatcha think. Cheers. —Saposcat 19:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


I was in the process of collecting citations to reply for JFD's little "If someone's going to make accusations against me that are demonstrably incorrect, then I feel I have no choice but to "talk back"." line.

I came across this:-

I'm neutral in this edit war. I just want to ask that you cut down on the amount of space that you take up with your comments. I've noticed that yours are several times larger than most editors. It will only be a short time before this page needs to be archived yet again.

Y'know. What I came here to do has been done.

In response to "IMO, None of the conversations on this Talk page since the article was unprotected have contributed to anything except inflamed passions.":

I'm going to save myself the trouble of writing another very lengthy post with citations about the cabal in response to a flamebait post which "will take up space" and "get the article archived again" and "will contribute to nothing except inflamed passions."

This thing is over. The lines pointing Bodhidharma non-existent in the very second para are gone.

No use squabbling when it's done. Time to live with it.

Freedom skies (send a message to Freedom skies) 09:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Dude. Take a chill pill. (talk) 23:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


Does anyone know the actual name for the reference source called "Ibid"? The reason I ask is because I created a page on the Great Anti-Buddhist Persecution a while ago and the source "Ibid" is also used in an online transcription of a book that I got the info from. However, only part of the book was transcribed and the bibliography was never listed. (Ghostexorcist 18:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC))

Ibid. is an abbreviation for the Latin term ibidem, meaning "the same place". In practice, it means the reference in question is the same as the previous reference; that is, if note 20 was "Johnson 1992, p. 27" and note 21 is "Ibid.", it means that note 21 is also referring the reader to "Johnson 1992, p. 27". —Saposcat 19:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. You learn something new everyday. (Ghostexorcist 19:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC))

The reed? ...

Hey all. I removed the bit about crossing the Yangtze on a reed from the Daoxuan bio section, inasmuch as it directly mentions neither reeds nor the Yangtze—the latter being Broughton's sensible and correct inference from Daoxuan's text—and I wore my eyes out checking the original text here. Anyone have any idea when the reed bit—surely an important part of the bio/legend—first entered the story? I have a feeling it's in the Anthology of the Patriarchal Hall, but I haven't found that text yet. Cheers, and thanks in advance for any assistance. —Saposcat 22:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Ha! Found it (secondarily, that is). According to Latter Days of the Law: Images of Chinese Buddhism, 850–1850, p. 395–396, the reed business first came up when someone in the 13th century altered the verse accompanying case 1 of the Blue Cliff Record, changing "Thus he escapes secretly across the river" to, effectively, "Thus he escapes by breaking off a reed and crossing the river". (If anyone's interested ... ) —Saposcat 05:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


If anyone wants to know, I really care less about Bodhidharma, Buddhabhadra, etc. What piqued my interest was the gesture of goodwill made by the Chinese government in 2002 to invite Jayendra Saraswati (Kanchi Shankaracharya) to China where the Chinese govt really treated Shankaracharyaji very well. This same shankaracharya was jailed by the Indian govt on a large sheet of political lies and anti-Hindu nonsense. Shankaracharya in the rediff interview noted bodhi and the times of india (a mainsream paper in India, very mainstream) was discussing a movie on him. JSTOR is academic. Also the category Buddhists and then Zen patriarchs is redundant. Zen patriarch implies buddhism, but I kept the cat in my last edit.Bakaman 03:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

The problem is not (necessarily) with the sources; it's with what they say (I can't speak about Zvelebil's article, however, since I can't access JSTOR). The rediff article has Saraswati hinting at one thing (Bodhidharma "went from Kanchipuram to China") and the interviewer, Srinivasan, saying another ("Bodhidharma was originally from Kodungalloor, Kerala"); that's not entirely a contradiction, since Srinivasan also notes that Bodhidharma "was ... a monk at Kanchipuram", but it also undermines the article's authority as a definitive source, because the ultimate conclusion could be that he was not from Kanchipuram but Kodungalloor, insofar as Saraswati only says Bodhidharma "went from Kanchipuram". As for the Times of India source, all we have here is a brief introduction to a play, with the authority thus being vested in an imaginative work (i.e., the play has to be set somewhere, as imaginative narratives must). I admit that "imaginative" is not "imaginary" ... however, it's also not reliable.
Moreover, the introductory paragraph as it originally stood does not entirely deny origins in Kanchipuram; it simply states that there is doubt as to the issue, which there most certainly is. In fact, the paragraph as it originally stood—which was accepted after a long battle of sorts on this very issue—is saying effectively the same thing that Bakasuprman's revision is, but without introducing fairly unreliable sources. For all of the above reasons, I'm going to change it back. Cheers. —Saposcat 05:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I think it's best and cleanest to just remove the highly speculative "Kanchipuram" from the intro entirely ... and I've done so. Cheers. —Saposcat 11:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

"Kanchipuram" seems to have come back in. The references do not point to any viewable material. This should be removed and article locked till the hype around the movie that discusses Bodhidharma ends. don thomas (talk) 19:23, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Actually, the account above is missing parts of the recorded legend, which reconcile the apparent disparity of where Bodhidharma was actually from. The kindgom of Kanchipuram was heavily flooded and many of the citizens were forced to relocate and many moved to Kerala (the two kindgoms probably shared an alliance). —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Stating that Bodhidharma is from Kanchipuram is highly speculative and misleading. Most accounts agree he may be from South India. Lets leave it at that please. There are no verified accounts stating that he's from Kanchipuram.

I particularly find the below line laughable. The kindgom of Kanchipuram was heavily flooded and many of the citizens were forced to relocate and many moved to Kerala. Is this the best one can come out with to prove a point? Are there any records of such a flood and ensuing mass migration into the region that is Kerala today? Did this happen round the time of Bodhidharma's life? If this happened eons before he was born then he is as good a Keralite than any. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:43, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

"The kindgom of Kanchipuram was heavily flooded and many of the citizens were forced to relocate and many moved to Kerala." While it is true that some parts of Kanchipuram was submerged (as in Mahabalipuram), its not true that people migrated to Kerala. Back then, there was'nt Kerala - it was also a Tamil kingdom ruled by the Cheras, one of the "moovendhars" (three kings, the other two being Cholas, based in Madurai and Pandyas, based in Kanchi). Later Kerala-Tamil mixed with Sanskrit and evolved a distinct identity. In India, we dont have extensive migration culture, as is the case with western societies. Thats why we have so many distinct sub-cultures. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:29, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Bodhidharma in Korean

The article states that in Korea, Bodhidharma is called "보리달마 (Boridalma)". Can this be verified in text? I have not once heard a Korean refer to Bodhidharma as the article claims. All Korean accounts I have witnessed have refered to him as simply "달마 (Dalma)". Even Korean monks, although they know of his Sanskrit name, call him "달마 (Dalma)". --Bentonia School 05:19, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

It's been months, no response, and I have not come across anything to support that Bodhidharma is referred to as 보리달마 in Korean. Therefore, I've changed the listing to what Koreans actually refer to him as - 달마. --Bentonia School 10:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Why was this reverted? No one countered my initial point; I waited a very long time, then changed it. Why change it back without indicating a citation that would show any mistake on my part? Is this what Wikipedia is? --Bentonia School 05:44, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
I can't say much about the revert (though the reverter—and you as well, incidentally—should have provided an edit summary), though it did seem perhaps slightly unfair (and yes, in large part Wikipedia is unfair, which is why I've more or less opted out of it).
Now, I don't know any Korean, and I know that Googling stuff is not necessarily reliable, but Googling "보리달마" does come up with 24,500 hits [15] (admittedly much less than Googling "달마" without the "보리" [16], but still perhaps significant). Problem is, since—as I said—I know no Korean, I can't immediately verify the reliability of any of the pages, though the ones that top the list seem fairly reliable at a glance. Any comments? —Saposcat 14:19, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
I too know no Korean, but clearly "dalma" is just the transliteration of the Sanskrit word "dharma" and "bori" of "bodhi". Also here are a few pages referring to Bodhidharma as Boridalma: [17] [18] [19]. But as for Koreans it is a transliterated word without meaning, it's possible that they shorten it as "Dalma". The webpages suggested a similar phenomenon with his name in China. --Knverma 21:49, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
In Chinese, Bodhidharma is often referred to as "Damo," an abbreviation of "Putidamo," and in Japan as "Daruma," an abbreviation of "Bodaidaruma" so it wouldn't surprise me in the least if Koreans did something similar. JFD 22:27, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I did a bit more research and found that yes Koreans sometimes refer to Bodhidharma as 보리달마, however it is a more common practice to refer to him as 달마; some people don't even know what I'm talking about when I say 보리달마. Even monks that I speak with refer to him as 달마. Braclets or other Buddhist trinkets that have representations of Bodhidharma on them all say 달마. I'm not content with keeping it as 보리달마, but majority rules, I suppose, truth or not. --Bentonia School 09:04, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Gazing at the Wall

Why exactly did Bodhidharma gaze at the wall in the cave for nine years? Was it to discover some sort of method of convincing the southern regions of China to accept Buddhism? The article is not clear on this. --Bentonia School 09:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

The reason the article is not clear is simple: nobody knows the answer. We certainly don't (and probably can't) know why it was done. In fact, we don't even know exactly what the "wall-gazing" (壁觀 bìguān) consisted of. —Saposcat 12:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
He gazed at the wall wakefully sitting, accepting truth as truth would come, contemplating the meaning of life, and dreaming up the perfect tea. See the bit about him falling asleep? The legend continues on saying that where they landed, two tea trees sprouted. Interesting tidbit, utter nonsense though.... -- 22:12, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Why did Bodhidharma come from the West?
If you're looking for pat answers, Zen hagiography is not the place to find them. JFD 11:40, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Bodhidharma and martial arts

The article seems like it isn't NPOV because its striving towards a position rather than just discussing different views and the historiography of those views. It seems like it's really trying to say that martial arts in China is indigenous and no one contributed to it from a foreign place. It seems clearly bigoted. Because it discredits information that supports the view that martial arts in China had a foreign influence, while it fails to apply that same logic to information that supports the view that martial arts in China is totally indigenous. For example, one author seems to be claiming that because a text has been discredited that means Bodhidharma could not have contributed to Shaolin Kung Fu. A Daoist priest forges the prefaces according to the information submitted by the author. The priest claims "the monks selfishly coveted it, practicing the skills therein, falling into heterodox ways, and losing the correct purpose of cultivating the Real." Why would a text used to discredit the monks be used by the monks themselves to define their history? The monks themselves are claiming the origin of martial arts from Bodhidharma, and the author claims that this has been from the forgery of the text. It seems spurious that anyone would take a myth denigrating them as fact when up till then they did not believe the myth. Arch7 (talk) 08:31, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree. It should also cover published material by individuals who believe he did contribute to asian martial arts. I know his connection to martial arts has been debunked (via study of the 17th century Yi Jin Jing), but the page needs to be balanced with the addition of said material. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 01:41, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I respect your knowledge of the subject, and trust your honesty.
It was Freedom skies' brazen POV-pushing and edit-warring that I took exception to.
JFD (talk) 04:21, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Zen's Chinese Heritage -- The Masters & Their Teachings (Wisdom Publications, 2000) by Andrew Ferguson states that there are no records linking Bodhidharma to martial arts until a millennium after his first appearance in historical evidence. --Nio-guardian (talk) 11:33, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ghostexorcist. It looks like you've added abundant documentation about the history of the Yi Jin Jing to this article -- an identical block of text also exists within the Asian_martial_arts_(origins) article. We're in agreement that Bodhidharma did not contribute significantly to self-defense techniques taught in the Shaolin line, and I can accept that modern academics don't agree with the legendary history of the Yi Jin Jing. Why aren't those simple statements sufficient for this article? It seems that accompanying them with further discussion of the Yi Jin Jing is unnecessary; if anywhere, that discussion should go into the Yi Jin Jing article.

You've also removed my statement explaining that the techniques Bodhidharma was supposed to have taught within the temple were focused on development, and not exclusively on self-defense technique (and that according to Shaolin practitioners, they formed an important part of the Shaolin system for developing the body). Is that because you don't agree with that statement, or for some other reason?

Thanks. Subverdor (talk) 03:37, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I've made some edits (mostly restoring my sentence "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."). I still believe that the following section would be better moved to the Yi Jin Jing article if it's going to exist at all, but I'm going to hold off on touching it until I can read more of the modern scholarship. -Subverdor (talk) 13:43, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Some information about Bodhidharma to be inserted

Austerlitz -- (talk) 14:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Please refer this official site of shaolin temple :;; — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vasupandian (talkcontribs) 10:26, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Outside China

First of all, regardless of any evidence and personal beliefs most accounts say that Bodhidharma is Indian and not Persian. Anyway I actually wanted to say that the information in this article seems restricted to Chinese legends. In the Malay archipelago, Bodhidharma is known as Dharuma and is believed to have been a south Indian Buddhist priest who travelled from Palembang in Indonesia northward into mainland Southeast Asia. I don't know if this has been written down anywhere besides contemporary accounts but it has been passed down orally. Morinae (talk) 10:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

It was briefly mentioned in the glossary of Silat Tua: The Malay Art Of Life —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Indian by most accounts

I wasn't trying to push any POV since I personally am not even sure if Bodhidharma existed. But the article says "most accounts agree that he was either a South Indian or Persian monk". This isn't true. Most accounts say that Bodhidharma was Indian. Even though he is sometimes said to have been Persian, he could have just as easily have been Tibetan or Central Asian. And none of this changes the fact that he is Indian according to most accounts. This article already mentions how Yang Xuanzhi wrote that Bodhidharma was Persian so there's no need to reiterate the fact unless I'm seeing someone else pushing a POV. If it must be noted that Bodhidharma was once said to be Persian, the aforementioned sentence should be rephrased.Morinae (talk) 09:32, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Seeing as no one has responded to this, I will do the same as before. It is not an opinion but a fact that most accounts say Bodhidharma was Indian. There has only been one source where he was referred to as a Persian and others say he might have been from areas like Xinjiang or Tibet. But these are in the minority. Pick up any book, ask anyone who has heard of Bodhidharma (especially in Asia) and they all say he was Indian. Whether this is true or not is beside the point. I don't think it's necessary to mention Bodhidharma's possible Persian origins in the first paragraph since it's already written in the article where it pertains to history. Any more than that and it just shows someone's POV that Bodhidharma must have been Persian. To prove this, a certain user changed the sentence to "most accounts agree that he was a Persian or South Indian" when it should have been the other way around. Morinae (talk) 11:24, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

If he was Persian or from Central Asia or Tibet, he would be Persian. because the Tibet was homeland of Parthians. According to the history, on those days there isn't exist any India as a on united country. P. Pajouhesh (talk) 19:17, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

His name/identity

  • [20] Here it is said that Bodhidharma was Kamalashila. "According to legendary accounts, Kamalashila paid seven visits to Tibet, and on one occasion was miraculously transported to China. In China he is known as Bodhidharma."
Austerlitz -- (talk) 13:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
  • [21] Here is said: "Bodhidharma's Buddhist Master, Prajnatara, was the 27th Patriarch of Indian Buddhism, taught Bodhidharma for many years, gave him Mind Transmission, made him the 28th Patriarch, and gave him the name Bodhidharma."
Austerlitz -- (talk) 13:40, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

His disciples

Here WOMEN IN ZEN BUDDHISM: Chinese Bhiksunis in the Ch'an Tradition it is said by Heng-Ching Shih : "The first `bhiksuni` mentioned in the Ch'an literature was a disciple of the First Patriarch of of Chinese Ch'an Bodhidharma, known as Tsung-chih." Tsung-chih As far as I identify the names of disciples given on the wikisite, she is not mentioned.

Austerlitz -- (talk) 15:13, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Heng-ching Shih also says: "Most of the records of the Ch'an Bhiksuni masters are found in the collections of biographies of the Ch'an masters, such as the Cheng-te ch'uan-teng lu, Hsu-ch'uan-teng lu (the Sequal of the Transmission of Lamp), Wu-teng-huei-yuan (the Collection of the Five Lamps), Wu-teng ch'uan shu (the Complete Collection of the Five Lamps), and many others." She says that the story about Bodhidharma testing the realization of four of his disciples -Tao-fu, Bhiksuni Tsung-chih, Tao-yu and Hui-k'o- before going back to India is to be found in the Ching-te chuan-teng lu.

In section Bodhidharma and his disciples the names of the disciples are: "Daofu, who attains Bodhidharma's skin; the nun Dharani,[57] who attains Bodhidharma's flesh; Daoyu, who attains Bodhidharma's bone; and Huike, who attains Bodhidharma's marrow." Tao-fu/Daofu, Taoyu/Daoyu, Hui-k'o/Huike sound similar, it is more difficult to identify "the nun Dharani" with "Bhiksuni Tsung-chih", at least for me. In footnote 57 the wikiauthor adds: "In the Jingde Records of the Transmission of the Lamp, Dharani repeats the words said by the nun Yuanji in the Two Entrances and Four Acts, possibly identifying the two with each other (Broughton 1999:132)."

Most probably the author by "Jingde Records of the Transmission of the Lamp" refers to the "Ching-te chuan-teng lu", informing us that there is another nun called Yuanji speaking the same words. But: where has he got the name "Dharani" from? I cannot see.

I would like to add the name of the woman monk given by Heng-ching Shih, referring to her work as a source, but, some wikipedia sites (some of the authors) do not accept that link. Some said, that it has been put on their "black list" or something like that. Why is it? I still do not understand.

As far as Bodhidharmas name is concerned: [22] in this german language source the names given are: "chin. P'u-t'i-ta-mo oder Tamo, jap. Bodaidaruma oder Daruma ". The name of his master is given as "Prajnadhara" instead of "Prajnatara".

Austerlitz -- (talk) 16:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Looking for Myoren etc.

  • [23] there is a story about Myoren being a monk and his elder sister whose name is not mentioned.
  • Our great matriarchs see "Great Zen Mother Ancestors", Zongchi:"(She is also known as Ts'ung-ch'ih, by her title, Soji, and as Myoren, her nun name.) [early-mid 500s]” (Tisdale) "
  • [24] page 4, Myoren, a mendicant monk
Austerlitz -- (talk) 14:42, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Revert! Revert! Too China-centric!

Hi everybody. People are starting to revert edits wholesale on the basis of the assertion that they are "unsourced" (even the ones that just cleaned up grammar and punctuation, presumably) and that the previous version of the article was "too China-Centric" when it discussed what happened to Bodhidharma in China.

I've made the section about Shaolin into a section about Shaolin again, and moved the other martial arts discussion to a specific section which is about Bodhidharma and non-Chinese martial arts. It seems better to discuss on the talk page what needs to happen from here, rather than communicating via hitting the "undo" button. See WP:RV, specifically:

Revert vandalism and other abusive edits upon sight but revert a good faith edit only after discussing the matter. A reversion can eliminate "good stuff," discourage other editors, and spark an edit war. So if you feel the edit is unsatisfactory, then try to improve it, if possible – reword rather than revert. Similarly, if only part of an edit is problematic then consider modifying only that part instead of reverting the whole edit – don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Subverdor (talk) 02:58, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Bodhidharma was Persian not Indian

Bodhidharma was from Central Asia not India, he has Persian roots as Central Asia is the home of the Persian people.