text:
Bodhidharma

Bodhidharma  was a semi-legendary Buddhist monk who lived during the 5th or 6th century CE. He is traditionally credited as the transmitter of Chan Buddhism to China, and is regarded as its first Chinese patriarch. According to a 17th-century apocryphal story found in a manual called Yijin Jing, he began the physical training of the monks of Shaolin Monastery that led to the creation of Shaolin kungfu. He is known as Dámó in China and as Daruma in Japan. His name means "dharma of awakening (bodhi)" in Sanskrit.

Little contemporary biographical information on Bodhidharma is extant, and subsequent accounts became layered with legend and unreliable details.

According to the principal Chinese sources, Bodhidharma came from the Western Regions, which typically refers to Central Asia but can also include the Indian subcontinent, and is described as either a "Persian Central Asian" or a "South Indian [...] the third son of a great Indian king."

Throughout Buddhist art, Bodhidharma is depicted as an ill-tempered, large-nosed, profusely-bearded, wide-eyed non-Chinese person. He is referred to as "The Blue-Eyed Barbarian" in Chan texts.

Aside from the Chinese accounts, several popular traditions also exist regarding Bodhidharma's origins.

The accounts also differ on the date of his arrival, with one early account claiming that he arrived during the Liu Song dynasty (420–479 CE) and later accounts dating his arrival to the Liang dynasty (502–557 CE). Bodhidharma was primarily active in the territory of the Northern Wei (386–534 CE). Modern scholarship dates him to about the early 5th century CE.

Bodhidharma's teachings and practice centered on meditation and the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra. The Anthology of the Patriarchal Hall (952) identifies Bodhidharma as the 28th Patriarch of Buddhism in an uninterrupted line that extends back to the Gautama Buddha himself.

Principal sources

There are two known extant accounts written by contemporaries of Bodhidharma. According to these sources, Bodhidharma came from the Western Regions, and is described as either a "Persian Central Asian" or a "South Indian [...] the third son of a great Indian king." Later sources draw on these two sources, adding additional details, including a change to being descended from a Brahmin king, which accords with the reign of the Pallavas, who "claim[ed] to belong to a brahmin lineage."

The Western Regions was a historical name specified in the Chinese chronicles between the 3rd century BC to the 8th century AD that referred to the regions west of Yumen Pass, most often Central Asia or sometimes, more specifically, the easternmost portion of it (e.g. Altishahr or the Tarim Basin in southern Xinjiang). Sometimes, it was used more generally to refer to other regions to the west of China as well, such as the Indian subcontinent (as in the novel Journey to the West).

The Record of the Buddhist Monasteries of Luoyang

The earliest text mentioning Bodhidharma is The Record of the Buddhist Monasteries of Luoyang ( Luòyáng Qiélánjì) which was compiled in 547 by Yang Xuanzhi (楊衒之), a writer and translator of Mahayana sutras into Chinese. Yang gave the following account: "At that time there was a monk of the Western Region named Bodhidharma, a Persian Central Asian. He traveled from the wild borderlands to China. Seeing the golden disks on the pole on top of Yǒngníng's stupa reflecting in the sun, the rays of light illuminating the surface of the clouds, the jewel-bells on the stupa blowing in the wind, the echoes reverberating beyond the heavens, he sang its praises. He exclaimed: 'Truly this is the work of spirits.' He said: 'I am 150 years old, and I have passed through numerous countries. There is virtually no country I have not visited. Even the distant Buddha-realms lack this.' He chanted homage and placed his palms together in salutation for days on end."

The account of Bodhidharma in the Luoyan Record does not particularly associate him with meditation, but rather depicts him as a thaumaturge capable of mystical feats. This may have played a role in his subsequent association with the martial arts and esoteric knowledge.

Tanlin – preface to the Two Entrances and Four Acts
The second account was written by Tanlin (曇林; 506–574). Tanlin's brief biography of the "Dharma Master" is found in his preface to the Long Scroll of the Treatise on the Two Entrances and Four Practices, a text traditionally attributed to Bodhidharma and the first text to identify him as South Indian: "The Dharma Master was a South Indian of the Western Region. He was the third son of a great Indian king. His ambition lay in the Mahayana path, and so he put aside his white layman's robe for the black robe of a monk […] Lamenting the decline of the true teaching in the outlands, he subsequently crossed distant mountains and seas, traveling about propagating the teaching in Han and Wei."

Tanlin's account was the first to mention that Bodhidharma attracted disciples, specifically mentioning Daoyu (道育) and Dazu Huike (慧可), the latter of whom would later figure very prominently in the Bodhidharma literature. Although Tanlin has traditionally been considered a disciple of Bodhidharma, it is more likely that he was a student of Huike.

Record of the Masters and Students of the Laṅka
The Record of the Masters and Students of the Laṅka (Léngqié Shīzī Jì 楞伽師資記), which survives both in Chinese and in Tibetan translation (although the surviving Tibetan translation is apparently of older provenance than the surviving Chinese version), states that Bodhidharma is not the first ancestor of Zen, but instead the second. This text instead claims that Guṇabhadra, the translator of the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, is the first ancestor in the lineage. It further states that Bodhidharma was his student. The Tibetan translation is estimated to have been made in the late eighth or early ninth century, indicating that the original Chinese text was written at some point before that.

Tanlin's preface has also been preserved in Jingjue's (683–750) Lengjie Shizi ji "Chronicle of the Laṅkāvatāra Masters", which dates from 713 to 716./ca. 715 He writes, "The teacher of the Dharma, who came from South India in the Western Regions, the third son of a great Brahman king.'"

"Further Biographies of Eminent Monks"

In the 7th-century historical work "Further Biographies of Eminent Monks" (續高僧傳 Xù gāosēng zhuàn), Daoxuan (道宣) possibly drew on Tanlin's preface as a basic source, but made several significant additions:

Firstly, Daoxuan adds more detail concerning Bodhidharma's origins, writing that he was of "South Indian Brahman stock" (南天竺婆羅門種 nán tiānzhú póluómén zhŏng).

Secondly, more detail is provided concerning Bodhidharma's journeys. Tanlin's original is imprecise about Bodhidharma's travels, saying only that he "crossed distant mountains and seas" before arriving in Wei. Daoxuan's account, however, implies "a specific itinerary": "He first arrived at Nan-yüeh during the Sung period. From there, he turned north and came to the Kingdom of Wei" This implies that Bodhidharma had travelled to China by sea and that he had crossed over the Yangtze.

Thirdly, Daoxuan suggests a date for Bodhidharma's arrival in China. He writes that Bodhidharma makes landfall in the time of the Song, thus making his arrival no later than the time of the Song's fall to the Southern Qi in 479.

Finally, Daoxuan provides information concerning Bodhidharma's death. Bodhidharma, he writes, died at the banks of the Luo River, where he was interred by his disciple Dazu Huike, possibly in a cave. According to Daoxuan's chronology, Bodhidharma's death must have occurred prior to 534, the date of the Northern Wei's fall, because Dazu Huike subsequently leaves Luoyang for Ye. Furthermore, citing the shore of the Luo River as the place of death might possibly suggest that Bodhidharma died in the mass executions at Heyin (河陰) in 528. Supporting this possibility is a report in the Chinese Buddhist canon stating that a Buddhist monk was among the victims at Héyīn.

Anthology of the Patriarchal Hall
In the Anthology of the Patriarchal Hall (祖堂集 Zǔtángjí) of 952, the elements of the traditional Bodhidharma story are in place. Bodhidharma is said to have been a disciple of Prajñātāra, thus establishing the latter as the 27th patriarch in India. After a three-year journey, Bodhidharma reached China in 527, during the Liang (as opposed to the Song in Daoxuan's text). The Anthology of the Patriarchal Hall includes Bodhidharma's encounter with Emperor Wu of Liang, which was first recorded around 758 in the appendix to a text by Shenhui (神會), a disciple of Huineng.

Finally, as opposed to Daoxuan's figure of "over 180 years," the Anthology of the Patriarchal Hall states that Bodhidharma died at the age of 150. He was then buried on Mount Xiong'er (熊耳山), to the west of Luoyang. However, three years after the burial, in the Pamir Mountains, Song Yun (宋雲)—an official of one of the later Wei kingdoms—encountered Bodhidharma, who claimed to be returning to India and was carrying a single sandal. Bodhidharma predicted the death of Song Yun's ruler, a prediction which was borne out upon the latter's return. Bodhidharma's tomb was then opened, and only a single sandal was found inside.

According to the Anthology of the Patriarchal Hall, Bodhidharma left the Liang court in 527 and relocated to Mount Song near Luoyang and the Shaolin Monastery, where he "faced a wall for nine years, not speaking for the entire time", his date of death can have been no earlier than 536. Moreover, his encounter with the Wei official indicates a date of death no later than 554, three years before the fall of the Western Wei.

Daoyuan – Transmission of the Lamp
Subsequent to the Anthology of the Patriarchal Hall, the only dated addition to the biography of Bodhidharma is in the Jingde Records of the Transmission of the Lamp (景德傳燈錄 Jĭngdé chuándēng lù, published 1004 CE), by Daoyuan (道原), in which it is stated that Bodhidharma's original name had been Bodhitāra but was changed by his master Prajñātāra. The same account is given by the Japanese master Keizan's 13th-century work of the same title.

Popular traditions
Several contemporary popular traditions also exist regarding Bodhidharma's origins. An Indian tradition regards Bodhidharma to be the third son of a Pallava king from Kanchipuram. This is consistent with the Southeast Asian traditions which also describe Bodhidharma as a former South Indian Tamil prince who had awakened his kundalini and renounced royal life to become a monk. The Tibetan version similarly characterises him as a dark-skinned siddha from South India. Conversely, the Japanese tradition generally regards Bodhidharma as a red-haired Persian.

Two Entrances and Four Practices
Bodhidharma is traditionally seen as introducing a Mahayana Buddhist practice of dhyana (meditation) in China. According to modern scholars, like the Japanese scholar of Chan Yanagida Seizan, generally hold that the Two Entrances and Four Practices (二入四行論) is the only extant work that can be attributed to Bodhidharma and as such, this is the main source for our knowledge of his teaching.

According to this text, Bodhidharma taught two "entrances" to the Dharma. The first is a subitist teaching that directly apprehends the ultimate principle or true nature of reality (buddha-nature). The second entrance deals with four practices: (1) accepting all our sufferings as the fruit of past karma, (2) accept our circumstances with equanimity, (3) to be without craving, and (4) to let go of wrong thoughts and practice the six perfections.

According to Yanagida Seizan, the first "entrance of principle", was subitist teaching which derives from the sudden enlightenment thought of Tao-sheng, while the four practices are a reworking of the "four foundations of mindfulness", which were popular in the late Six Dynasties period Buddhist meditation circles.

Wall-gazing
Tanlin, in the preface to Two Entrances and Four Practices, and Daoxuan, in the Further Biographies of Eminent Monks, mentions a practice of Bodhidharma's termed "wall-gazing" (壁觀 bìguān). Both Tanlin and Daoxuan associate this "wall-gazing" with "quieting [the] mind".

In the Two Entrances and Four Practices, the term "wall-gazing" is given as follows:

"Those who turn from delusion back to reality, who meditate on walls, the absence of self and other, the oneness of mortal and sage, and who remain unmoved even by scriptures are in complete and unspoken agreement with reason'."

Daoxuan states, "the merits of Mahāyāna wall-gazing are the highest". These are the first mentions in the historical record of what may be a type of meditation being ascribed to Bodhidharma. Exactly what sort of practice Bodhidharma's "wall-gazing" was remains uncertain. Nearly all accounts have treated it either as an undefined variety of meditation, as Daoxuan and Dumoulin, or as a variety of seated meditation akin to the zazen that later became a defining characteristic of Chan. The latter interpretation is particularly common among those working from a Chan standpoint.

There have also, however, been interpretations of "wall-gazing" as a non-meditative phenomenon.

The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra
There are early texts which explicitly associate Bodhidharma with the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra. Daoxuan, for example, in a late recension of his biography of Bodhidharma's successor Huike, has the sūtra as a basic and important element of the teachings passed down by Bodhidharma:

"In the beginning, Dhyana Master Bodhidharma took the four-roll Laṅkā Sūtra, handed it over to Huike, and said: 'When I examine the land of China, it is clear that there is only this sutra. If you rely on it to practice, you will be able to cross over the world.'"

Another early text, the "Record of the Masters and Disciples of the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra" of Jingjue (淨覺; 683–750), also mentions Bodhidharma in relation to this text. Jingjue's account also makes explicit mention of "sitting meditation" or zazen:

"For all those who sat in meditation, Master Bodhi[dharma] also offered expositions of the main portions of the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, which are collected in a volume of twelve or thirteen pages […] bearing the title of 'Teaching of [Bodhi-]Dharma'."

In other early texts, the school that would later become known as Chan Buddhism is sometimes referred to as the "Laṅkāvatāra school" (楞伽宗 Léngqié zōng).

The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, one of the Mahayana sutras, is a highly "difficult and obscure" text whose basic thrust is to emphasize "the inner enlightenment that does away with all duality and is raised above all distinctions". It is among the first and most important texts for East Asian Yogācāra.

According to Suzuki, one of the recurrent emphases in the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra is a lack of reliance on words to effectively express reality:

"If, Mahamati, you say that because of the reality of words the objects are, this talk lacks in sense. Words are not known in all the Buddha-lands; words, Mahamati, are an artificial creation. In some Buddha-lands ideas are indicated by looking steadily, in others by gestures, in still others by a frown, by the movement of the eyes, by laughing, by yawning, or by the clearing of the throat, or by recollection, or by trembling."

In contrast to the ineffectiveness of words, the sūtra instead stresses the importance of the "self-realization" that is "attained by noble wisdom" and, according to Suzuki, occurs "when one has an insight into reality as it is": "The truth is the state of self-realization and is beyond categories of discrimination". According to Suzuki, reflecting his own emphasis on kensho, the sūtra goes on to outline the ultimate effects of an experience of self-realization:

"[The bodhisattva] will become thoroughly conversant with the noble truth of self-realization, will become a perfect master of his own mind, will conduct himself without effort, will be like a gem reflecting a variety of colours, will be able to assume the body of transformation, will be able to enter into the subtle minds of all beings, and, because of his firm belief in the truth of Mind-only, will, by gradually ascending the stages, become established in Buddhahood."

Legends about Bodhidharma
Several stories about Bodhidharma have become popular legends, which are still being used in the Ch'an, Seon, and Zen-tradition.

Encounter with Emperor Wu of Liang
The Anthology of the Patriarchal Hall says that in 527, Bodhidharma visited Emperor Wu of Liang, a fervent patron of Buddhism: "Emperor Wu: 'How much karmic merit have I earned for ordaining Buddhist monks, building monasteries, having sutras copied, and commissioning Buddha images?' Bodhidharma: 'None. Good deeds done with worldly intent bring good karma, but no merit.' Emperor Wu: 'So what is the highest meaning of noble truth?' Bodhidharma: 'There is no noble truth, there is only emptiness.' Emperor Wu: 'Then, who is standing before me?' Bodhidharma: 'I know not, Your Majesty.'"

This encounter was included as the first kōan of the Blue Cliff Record.

Nine years of wall-gazing
Failing to make a favorable impression in South China, Bodhidharma is said to have travelled to the Shaolin Monastery. After either being refused entry or being ejected after a short time, he lived in a nearby cave, where he "faced a wall for nine years, not speaking for the entire time".

The biographical tradition is littered with apocryphal tales about Bodhidharma's life and circumstances. In one version of the story, he is said to have fallen asleep seven years into his nine years of wall-gazing. Becoming angry with himself, he cut off his eyelids to prevent it from happening again. According to the legend, as his eyelids hit the floor the first tea plants sprang up, and thereafter, tea would provide a stimulant to help keep students of Chan awake during zazen.

The most popular account relates that Bodhidharma was admitted into the Shaolin temple after nine years in the cave and taught there for some time. However, other versions report that he "passed away, seated upright"; or that he disappeared, leaving behind the Yijin Jing; or that his legs atrophied after nine years of sitting, which is why Daruma dolls have no legs.

Huike cuts off his arm
In one legend, Bodhidharma refused to resume teaching until his would-be student, Dazu Huike, who had kept vigil for weeks in the deep snow outside of the monastery, cut off his own left arm to demonstrate sincerity.

Skin, flesh, bone, marrow
Jingde Records of the Transmission of the Lamp (景德传灯录) of Daoyuan, presented to the emperor in 1004, records that Bodhidharma wished to return to India and called together his disciples: "Bodhidharma asked, 'Can each of you say something to demonstrate your understanding?' Dao Fu stepped forward and said, 'It is not bound by words and phrases, nor is it separate from words and phrases. This is the function of the Tao.' Bodhidharma: 'You have attained my skin.' The nun Zong Chi stepped up and said, 'It is like a glorious glimpse of the realm of Akshobhya Buddha. Seen once, it need not be seen again.' Bodhidharma; 'You have attained my flesh.' Dao Yu said, 'The four elements are all empty. The five skandhas are without actual existence. Not a single dharma can be grasped.' Bodhidharma: 'You have attained my bones.' Finally, Huike came forth, bowed deeply in silence and stood up straight. Bodhidharma said, 'You have attained my marrow.'" Bodhidharma passed on the symbolic robe and bowl of dharma succession to Dazu Huike and, some texts claim, a copy of the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra. Bodhidharma then either returned to India or died.

Bodhidharma at Shaolin

Some Chinese myths and legends describe Bodhidharma as being disturbed by the poor physical shape of the Shaolin monks, after which, he instructed them in techniques to maintain their physical condition as well as teaching meditation. He is said to have taught a series of external exercises called the Eighteen Arhat Hands and an internal practice called the Sinew Metamorphosis Classic. In addition, after his departure from the temple, two manuscripts by Bodhidharma were said to have been discovered inside the temple: the Yijin Jing and the Xisui Jing. Copies and translations of the Yijin Jing survive to the modern day. The Xisui Jing has been lost.

Travels in Southeast Asia
According to Southeast Asian folklore, Bodhidharma travelled from Jambudvipa by sea to Palembang, Indonesia. Passing through Sumatra, Java, Bali, and Malaysia, he eventually entered China through Nanyue. In his travels through the region, Bodhidharma is said to have transmitted his knowledge of the Mahayana doctrine and the martial arts. Malay legend holds that he introduced forms to silat.

Vajrayana tradition links Bodhidharma with the 11th-century south Indian monk Dampa Sangye who travelled extensively to Tibet and China spreading tantric teachings.

Appearance after his death
Three years after Bodhidharma's death, Ambassador Song Yun of northern Wei is said to have seen him walking while holding a shoe at the Pamir Mountains. Song asked Bodhidharma where he was going, to which Bodhidharma replied, "I am going home". When asked why he was holding his shoe, Bodhidharma answered, "You will know when you reach Shaolin monastery. Don't mention that you saw me or you will meet with disaster". After arriving at the palace, Song told the emperor that he met Bodhidharma on the way. The emperor said Bodhidharma was already dead and buried and had Song arrested for lying. At Shaolin Monastery, the monks informed them that Bodhidharma was dead and had been buried in a hill behind the temple. The grave was exhumed and was found to contain a single shoe. The monks then said, "Master has gone back home" and prostrated three times: "For nine years, he had remained and nobody knew him; Carrying a shoe in hand he went home quietly, without ceremony."

Construction of lineages
The idea of a patriarchal lineage in Ch'an dates back to the epitaph for Faru (法如), a disciple of the 5th patriarch Hongren (弘忍). In the Long Scroll of the Treatise on the Two Entrances and Four Practices and the Continued Biographies of Eminent Monks, Daoyu and Dazu Huike are the only explicitly identified disciples of Bodhidharma. The epitaph gives a line of descent identifying Bodhidharma as the first patriarch.

In the 6th century, the biographies of famous monks were collected. From this genre, the typical Chan lineage was developed:

"These famous biographies were non-sectarian. The Ch'an biographical works, however, aimed to establish Ch'an as a legitimate school of Buddhism traceable to its Indian origins, and at the same time championed a particular form of Ch'an. Historical accuracy was of little concern to the compilers; old legends were repeated, new stories were invented and reiterated until they, too, became legends."

D. T. Suzuki contends that Chan's growth in popularity during the 7th and 8th centuries attracted criticism that it had "no authorized records of its direct transmission from the founder of Buddhism" and that Chan historians made Bodhidharma the 28th patriarch of Buddhism in response to such attacks.

Six patriarchs
The earliest lineages described the lineage from Bodhidharma into the 5th to 7th generation of patriarchs. Various records of different authors are known, which give a variation of transmission lines:

Continuous lineage from Gautama Buddha
Eventually, these descriptions of the lineage evolved into a continuous lineage from Śākyamuni Buddha to Bodhidharma. The idea of a line of descent from Śākyamuni Buddha is the basis for the distinctive lineage tradition of Chan Buddhism.

According to the Song of Enlightenment (證道歌 Zhèngdào gē) by Yongjia Xuanjue, one of the chief disciples of Huìnéng was Bodhidharma, the 28th Patriarch of Buddhism, in a line of descent from Gautama Buddha via his disciple Mahākāśyapa: Mahakashyapa was the first, leading the line of transmission; Twenty-eight Fathers followed him in the West; The Lamp was then brought over the sea to this country; And Bodhidharma became the First Father here His mantle, as we all know, passed over six Fathers, And by them many minds came to see the Light. The Transmission of the Light gives 28 patriarchs in this transmission:

Modern scholarship
Bodhidharma has been the subject of critical scientific research, which has shed new light on the traditional stories about Bodhidharma.

Biography as a hagiographic process
According to John McRae, Bodhidharma has been the subject of a hagiographic process which served the needs of Chan Buddhism. According to him, it is not possible to write an accurate biography of Bodhidharma:

"It is ultimately impossible to reconstruct any original or accurate biography of the man whose life serves as the original trace of his hagiography – where 'trace' is a term from Jacques Derrida meaning the beginningless beginning of a phenomenon, the imagined, but always intellectually unattainable, origin. Hence any such attempt by modern biographers to reconstruct a definitive account of Bodhidharma's life is both doomed to failure and potentially, no different in intent from the hagiographical efforts of premodern writers."

McRae's standpoint accords with Yanagida's standpoint: "Yanagida ascribes great historical value to the witness of the disciple Tanlin, but at the same time, acknowledges the presence of 'many puzzles in the biography of Bodhidharma'". Given the present state of the sources, he considers it impossible to compile a reliable account of Bodhidharma's life.

Several scholars have suggested that the composed image of Bodhidharma depended on the combination of supposed historical information on various historical figures over several centuries. Bodhidharma as a historical person may even never have actually existed.

Origins and place of birth
Dumoulin comments on the three principal sources. The Persian heritage is doubtful, according to Dumoulin: "In the Description of the Lo-yang temple, Bodhidharma is called a Persian. Given the ambiguity of geographical references in writings of this period, such a statement should not be taken too seriously." Dumoulin considers Tanlin's account of Bodhidharma being "the third son of a great Brahman king" to be a later addition, and finds the exact meaning of "South Indian Brahman stock" unclear: "And when Daoxuan speaks of origins from South Indian Brahman stock, it is not clear whether he is referring to roots in nobility or to India in general as the land of the Brahmans."

These Chinese sources lend themselves to make inferences about Bodhidharma's origins. "The third son of a Brahman king" has been speculated to mean "the third son of a Pallava king". Based on a specific pronunciation of the Chinese characters 香至 as Kang-zhi, meaning "fragrance extreme", Tsutomu Kambe identifies 香至 to be Kanchipuram, an old capital town in the state Tamil Nadu, India. According to Tsutomu Kambe, "Kanchi means 'a radiant jewel' or 'a luxury belt with jewels', and puram means a town or a state in the sense of earlier times. Thus, it is understood that the '香至-Kingdom' corresponds to the old capital 'Kanchipuram'."

Acharya Raghu, in his work 'Bodhidharma Retold', used a combination of multiple factors to identify Bodhidharma from the state of Andhra Pradesh in South India, specifically to the geography around Mt. Sailum or modern day Srisailam.

The Pakistani scholar Ahmad Hasan Dani speculated that according to popular accounts in Pakistan's northwest, Bodhidharma may be from the region around the Peshawar valley, or possibly around modern Afghanistan's eastern border with Pakistan.

Caste
In the context of the Indian caste system, the mention of "Brahman king" acquires a nuance. Broughton notes that "king" implies that Bodhidharma was of a caste of warriors and rulers. Brahman is, in western contexts, easily understood as Brahmana or Brahmin, which means priest.

Name
According to tradition, Bodhidharma was given this name by his teacher, known variously as Panyatara, Prajnatara, or Prajñādhara. His name prior to monkhood is said to have been Jayavarman.

Bodhidharma is associated with several other names, and is also known by the name Bodhitara. Faure notes that: "Bodhidharma's name appears sometimes truncated as Bodhi, or more often as Dharma (Ta-mo). In the first case, it may be confused with another of his rivals, Bodhiruci."

Tibetan sources give his name as "Bodhidharmottara" or "Dharmottara", that is, "Highest teaching (dharma) of enlightenment".

Abode in China
Buswell dates Bodhidharma's abode in China approximately at the early 5th century. Broughton dates Bodhidharma's presence in Luoyang to between 516 and 526, when the temple referred to—Yongning Temple (永寧寺), was at the height of its glory. Starting in 526, Yǒngníngsì suffered damage from a series of events, ultimately leading to its destruction in 534.

Shaolin boxing
The idea that Bodhidharma founded martial arts at the Shaolin Temple was spread in the 20th century. However, martial arts historians have shown this legend stems from a 17th-century qigong manual known as the Yijin Jing. The preface of this work says that Bodhidharma left behind the Yi Jin Jing, from which the monks obtained the fighting skills which made them gain some fame.

The authenticity of the Yijin Jing has been discredited by some historians, including Tang Hao, Xu Zhen, and Matsuda Ryuchi. According to Lin Boyuan, "This manuscript is full of errors, absurdities, and fantastic claims; it cannot be taken as a legitimate source."

The oldest available copy was published in 1827. The composition of the text itself has been dated to 1624. Even then, the association of Bodhidharma with martial arts only became widespread as a result of the 1904–1907 serialization of the novel The Travels of Lao Ts'an in Illustrated Fiction Magazine. According to Henning, the "story is clearly a twentieth-century invention," which "is confirmed by writings going back at least 250 years earlier, which mention both Bodhidharma and martial arts but make no connection between the two."

Cultural legacy

In the Zen kōan tradition, Bodhidharma is mentioned as a significant figure. In Dogen's 13th century kōan collection, the Shinji Shōbōgenzō, Bodhidharma is mentioned in fourteen different kōans. In The Gateless Gate by Wumen Huikai: "A monk asked Zhaozhou, “What is the meaning of the ancestral teacher's (i.e., Bodhidharma's) coming from the west?' Zhaozhou said, 'The cypress tree in front of the hall.'" In a short addendum from 1245 CE, the text refers to a motto attributed to Bodhidharma: "Bodhidharma coming from the west, unattached to any words, pointing directly to the mind of man, advocated seeing into one's nature and becoming Buddha." The legend of Dazu Huike and Bodhidharma is recounted in case no. 41 of The Gateless Gate.

Bodhidharma's image became the inspiration for Japanese Daruma dolls, which originated in Meiwa-era Takasaki as good luck charms. A Daruma Doll Festival (達磨市) is held at the Shorinzan Daruma Temple in Takasaki every year, celebrating the city as the birthplace of the Daruma doll. Over 400,000 attendants come to purchase new dolls. The Japanese version of the children's game statues is named "Daruma-san ga koronda" (達磨さんが転んだ).

A 1989 South Korean film, Why Has Bodhi-Dharma Left for the East?, derives its title from a kōan about Bodhidharma's legendary transmission of Chan Buddhism to China. The film screened at the 1989 Cannes Film Festival and was the first South Korean film to release theatrically in the United States. In 1994, the Hong Kong film Master of Zen (also known as Bodhidharma) adapted the legends of Bodhidharma's life into a martial arts drama film, partly inspired by the master's association with Shaolin Kung Fu. The 2011 Indian Tamil science fiction martial arts film 7aum Arivu features a descendant of Bodhidharma as a main character and its plot focuses on the ancient monk's legendary skills and knowledge. The film was ultimately criticized for its historical inaccuracies in its portrayal of Bodhidharma (such as the monk's age upon entering China) and inappropriate emphasis of Bodhidharma as a Tamilian. The controversy caused hunger strikes among Indian followers of Bodhidharma.

Attributed works
Modern scholars, such as the Japanese scholar of early Chan, Yanagida Seizan, agree that only one extant text can be attributed to Bodhidharma. This is the Two Entrances and Four Practices (二入四行論), also known as "Outline of Practice" (二種入 Er zhong ru), which is part of the larger "Bodhidharma Anthology" that also includes teachings from some of Bodhidharma's students, such as Huike and Dharma master Yuan.

There also exists a Dunhuang manuscript titled Treatise of Dhyana Master Bodhidharma (Tianzhu guo Putidamo chan shi lun 天竺國菩提達摩禪師論). According to McRae, this text "might be taken as a guide to the teachings of early Ch'an. The text is probably relatively early, although its putative date of compilation or transcription, 681, is not reliable. Unfortunately, its contents do not lend themselves to precise dating."

Later attributions
Throughout the history of Chan, various other works became attributed to Bodhidharma and modern scholars have studied these as well, attempting to understand their provenance.

Commonly attributed works include:
 * Treatise on the Destruction of Characteristics (《破相論》 Poxiang lun), also known as the Treatise on the Contemplation of the Mind (觀心論 Kuan-hsin lun), according to Yanagida, this is a work of Shenxiu.
 * The Wake-up Treatise or Treatise on Realizing the Nature《悟性論 Wu-hsing lun》, according to Yanagida, this is a later reformulation of ideas of the East mountain teachings and respond to Shenhui's criticisms of the school.
 * The Bloodstream Treatise (血脈論 Xuemai lun), according to Yanagida, this is a treatise by a member of the Oxhead school (7th-8th century) of Chan.
 * The Genealogical Treatise (Hsueh-mo lun), this is a "post-Platform Sutra and immediately pre-Ma-tsu text" according to Yanagida, which discusses the teaching that "does not posit words," and "seeing the nature and achieving buddhahood."
 * The Verses on the Heart Sutra, "a clearly apocryphal text" that introduces Yogacara ideas associated with Xuanzang's translations into Chan.

Pointing directly to one's mind
One of the fundamental Chán texts attributed to Bodhidharma is a four-line stanza whose first two verses echo the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra's disdain for words and whose second two verses stress the importance of the insight into reality achieved through "self-realization": "A special transmission outside the scriptures Not founded upon words and letters; By pointing directly to [one's] mind It lets one see into [one's own true] nature and [thus] attain Buddhahood."

The stanza, in fact, is not Bodhidharma's, but rather dates to the year 1108.

title: Bodhidharma


text:
Biconditional introduction

In propositional logic, biconditional introduction  is a valid rule of inference. It allows for one to infer a biconditional from two conditional statements. The rule makes it possible to introduce a biconditional statement into a logical proof. If $$P \to Q$$ is true, and if $$Q \to P$$ is true, then one may infer that $$P \leftrightarrow Q$$ is true. For example, from the statements "if I'm breathing, then I'm alive" and "if I'm alive, then I'm breathing", it can be inferred that "I'm breathing if and only if I'm alive". Biconditional introduction is the converse of biconditional elimination. The rule can be stated formally as:

 * $$\frac{P \to Q, Q \to P}{\therefore P \leftrightarrow Q}$$

where the rule is that wherever instances of "$$P \to Q$$" and "$$Q \to P$$" appear on lines of a proof, "$$P \leftrightarrow Q$$" can validly be placed on a subsequent line.

Formal notation
The biconditional introduction rule may be written in sequent notation:
 * $$(P \to Q), (Q \to P) \vdash (P \leftrightarrow Q)$$

where $$\vdash$$ is a metalogical symbol meaning that $$P \leftrightarrow Q$$ is a syntactic consequence when $$P \to Q$$ and $$Q \to P$$ are both in a proof;

or as the statement of a truth-functional tautology or theorem of propositional logic:

 * $$((P \to Q) \land (Q \to P)) \to (P \leftrightarrow Q)$$

where $$P$$, and $$Q$$ are propositions expressed in some formal system.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Biconditional introduction


text:
Biconditional elimination

Biconditional elimination is the name of two valid rules of inference of propositional logic. It allows for one to infer a conditional from a biconditional. If $$P \leftrightarrow Q$$ is true, then one may infer that $$P \to Q$$ is true, and also that $$Q \to P$$ is true. For example, if it's true that I'm breathing if and only if I'm alive, then it's true that if I'm breathing, I'm alive; likewise, it's true that if I'm alive, I'm breathing. The rules can be stated formally as:

 * $$\frac{P \leftrightarrow Q}{\therefore P \to Q}$$

and
 * $$\frac{P \leftrightarrow Q}{\therefore Q \to P}$$

where the rule is that wherever an instance of "$$P \leftrightarrow Q$$" appears on a line of a proof, either "$$P \to Q$$" or "$$Q \to P$$" can be placed on a subsequent line.

Formal notation
The biconditional elimination rule may be written in sequent notation:
 * $$(P \leftrightarrow Q) \vdash (P \to Q)$$

and
 * $$(P \leftrightarrow Q) \vdash (Q \to P)$$

where $$\vdash$$ is a metalogical symbol meaning that $$P \to Q$$, in the first case, and $$Q \to P$$ in the other are syntactic consequences of $$P \leftrightarrow Q$$ in some logical system;

or as the statement of a truth-functional tautology or theorem of propositional logic:

 * $$(P \leftrightarrow Q) \to (P \to Q)$$
 * $$(P \leftrightarrow Q) \to (Q \to P)$$

where $$P$$, and $$Q$$ are propositions expressed in some formal system.

title: Biconditional elimination


text:
User:Bignose/Wikipedia markup

''[context: I edited Wikipedia FAQ so the sections were structured with header markup. User:LMS responded in talk:Wikipedia FAQ, and the following discussion ensued.]''

Augh! My eyes! :-) Please change it back to the way it was, or make the headings much smaller. --User:LMS

 * If you mean "make the headings shorter", I agree, full-blown questions don't make very good candidates for a heading tag; the heading should perhaps be a topic phrase instead of a full question, with the question included as a paragraph.

 * If, on the other hand, you mean "make the font sizes smaller", here we meet the problem of separating content from presentation. The heading markup I added had no information about font sizes or other presentation details, only structural information.  The presentation of headings at different levels is up to your browser, not the author of the Wikipedia article.  Different heading levels are useful for structuring the content correctly; when they are chosen for the presentation effect they have in *some* browsers, are we becoming layout mechanics rather than encyclopedia editors?

 * -- Bignose

We need to make font sizes smaller. You're using H1. We basically never use that header in Wikipedia articles, because it dominates text. The point you make, that "The heading markup I added had no information about font sizes or other presentation details, only structural information" ignores the fact that H1 is, after all, usually displayed in most browsers in enormous type. I mean, I don't actually care very much (notice, no references to rodent posteriors!) about the fact that H1-H6 are "structural" and not "presentational." I know that. :-) I care about presentation at this point, and I'm sure you do too.  The structure that H1-H6 provides is pretty much meaningless in the context of Wikipedia anyway; we just aren't using those tags except as a quick way to increase font size.

So, it would be nice if you'd change it back to the way KQ had it.

I just went ahead and restored KQ's last version. --User:LMS

 * You make a false assumption; my edit did not use any of the HTML header tags, it used Wiki's heading markup (with equal signs). This is more than a quibble; it shows that my intention was to mark a header, not to change the font size.

 * As a repository of human knowledge, I hope it is a goal of Wikipedia to have as wide an audience as possible. If "we" includes the set of editors on Wikipedia, we are not all "using those tags ... as a quick way to increase font size".  Those of us who consider accessibility are using structural markup to mark structure.  The top-level heading tag <h1> is appropriate for marking a section of a document.  It is not appropriate for changing the font size, or achieving any particular presentation effect, because that makes assumptions about how the content will be presented.

 * Presentation tags used to simulate structure are at least highly irritating to people who have chosen how they like their text to appear; at worst they are useless in media (such as braille readers, PDA devices, text consoles, text-to-speech converters) which cannot use the information sensibly. Structural tags make the intended context clear, and can be interpreted appropriately in any media.  -- Bignose

Heading level 1 should be reserved for the article title. Sections of the article should be marked with H2s. Wikipedia's code for interpreting "==" should enforce this. --User:Lee Daniel Crocker

 * That seems reasonable; I've now adopted that convention on Wikipedia. -- Bignose

It's by now a completely hackneyed (and obviously true) point to make, that structural markup in HTML are so often misused as to be meaningless. This is one reason why so many people hate HTML. But if correctness depends on convention, and the original hoped-for HTML convention just didn't take, then we shouldn't feel constrained to follow that convention ourselves--certainly when it means that articles are marked up in headings that appear too large in most browsers. I think appearances for the 99% of our audience are more important than adherence to a more or less outmoded way of indicating structure, even one that (I'll take your word for it) does somehow make a difference for handhelds, for example.

Originally, Nupedia had grand ambitions of extensively marking up articles using XML. We've now reexamined our priorities; it's a heck of a lot more important to us simply to create content, to the detriment of our structural and semantic markup ambitions.

I think that, eventually, Wikipedia articles are going to be fantastic, and when we've settled on some more finalized, professional versions of many articles, we will be marking up articles very extensively using XML. There's basically no point in our caring too much at this point about structural and semantic markup; when we do start caring, we'll do it right. So, as I said, at this point, I think it's a lot more important that we present "pretty" articles.

I think even H2 looks too big in the way most people have Explorer and Navigator set up, personally. I always use H3 for section headings.

-- User:LMS

 * I think you are speaking from a position of ignorance on how "outmoded" the notion of structure versus presentation is. The web is currently dominated by the desktop browser with a large screen, but this is rapidly being challenged by portable devices and Internet appliances; also, government mandates on accessibility to information are forcing many sites to consider non-majority users in their markup.

 * As you say, creating content is the important thing, perhaps the most important thing for most of the life of Wikipedia. I'm saying that this means we should not be using markup for presentation effects at all; if we set a precedent for doing so, it is much more difficult to strip it all out later than it is to add structure to less-structured content.

 * Please, let presentation be in the control of the user. Any effort we expend on "prettifying" the articles will work for some people, fail for some people, please some people, irritate other people, make the information much less accessible to some people, and become quickly outdated as people access our content with more diverse devices.

 * The content is king.

-- Bignose

OK, let's get specific: other than using h1-h6 tags, how do you propose to let presentation be in the control of the user?

Whether we use H1 tags or H3 tags :-), the presentation still won't be in the control of the user. It will depend on the combination of our markup and how their devices interpret it.  It's incumbent upon us to do right by the majority of our users, in any case.  No? --User:LMS

I too use H3 tags. Using structural markup places the presentation in control of the user because the user can always load a stylesheet into the browser. --User:Damian Yerrick

 * See also : User:Bignose/Ben Finney

Type face is important for readability. Many browsers default to Times Roman or equivalent. Using a simple style sheet, all the text in Wikipedia (including table cells) can be made Arial/Helvetica by default. David 21:12 Nov 12, 2002 (UTC)

title: User:Bignose/Wikipedia markup


text:
Talk:Buddhism

Do you think it is fair to call buddism an Indian religion?
Why do we mark buddism as an Indian religion? Unlike Judaism, for example, anybody can convert into buddism regardless of their nationality, so it's definitely not a national religion. Christianity, for example, was created in the Roman empire on the land of the modern Palestine ond Israel, but we donot call it Roman or Palestinian religion, so I think it's unfair to mark Buddism as an Indian religion only because of its origins Кокушев Сергей (talk) 05:58, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

 * That's simply the convention. Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!  08:54, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
 * We do in fact refer to the Roman Catholic Church and Oriental Orthodoxy. Tryin to make a change :-/ 13:21, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Well since it orginated in INDIA, we should mark it as a Indian religion . 103.181.40.101 (talk) 14:39, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It's originated from nepal. Siddharth Gautam Buddha was from Nepal. 113.199.247.27 (talk) 18:10, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It is not an Indian religion. Period! 174.93.233.113 (talk) 19:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I also agree with that we can't mark Buddhism as a Indian Religion. I think it's needed to be changed. IDB.S (talk) 12:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Too bad. It's an Indian religion. wound theology  ◈  17:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Vrddhi form
To Zoozoor... I thought the vrddhi form (bauddha) referred to the followers of the buddha. (So the followers of the "buddha" would be the "bauddhas," just as the followers of the "jina" would be the "jainas.") Are you sure "bauddha dharma" fits here? Mark Froelich (talk) 01:06, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

 * I would like some more information on this as well. wound theology  ◈  06:12, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I was basing my usage on the Hindi form, where they use both Bauddha and Buddha.
 * However, according to the example of Jainism, the faith is referred to as "Jain Dharma", as in the dharma of Jains, so i assume that this would be similar for the dharma of Buddhists ("Bauddha Dharma").
 * Honestly, I'm not sure which one fits best in Sanskrit. Zoozoor (talk) 17:40, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, if you're not sure about it, I'd suggest we'd change it back to "Buddha Dharma." Even though the term is obviously derived from Sanskrit, I wonder if it might be considered an English term now. "Buddha" and "dharma" are both terms found in the Merriam-Webster dictionary. Nevertheless, I'm open to other opinions. I would cite hits on the two versions ("buddha dharma" vs. "bauddha dharma") in Google, but interpreting Google results can be tricky. (Google isn't always right.)  Cheers! Mark Froelich (talk) 23:20, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Would you be open to mentioning "Bauddha Dharma" in the explanatory footnote? Zoozoor (talk) 23:37, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't be averse to it. But I couldn't write the footnote, as I'm unfamiliar with the term. Mark Froelich (talk) 06:56, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Alright, the changes are complete. We will stick with Buddha Dharma, and I've placed my alternative in explanatory footnote "b." I will seek a good source to back it up.
 * If that works for everyone, then I declare this Resolved.
 * Thank you, Mark Froelich and Wound Theology, for bringing us to a consensus. Let me know if any further changes are needed. Zoozoor (talk) 20:42, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Origins in India vs. Indian subcontinent
Greetings! Regarding this revert - your edit summary was a bit unclear. Are you objecting to not attributing the origins of Buddhism to what is now the Republic of India, or to the phrasing "Indian subcontinent" as opposed to something like "South Asia"? From what I can tell from the article, the geography of origin seems to span modern boundaries? -- Beland (talk) 18:09, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

 * Buddhism is an Indian religion (that is the term, after all) and revising it to "religion of the Indian subcontinent" is less accurate as most Buddhists today live outside of it. wound theology  ◈  00:42, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The article Indian religions defines that term as "the religions that originated in the Indian subcontinent". I was attempting to refer to the origin only, as I think the original statement was. I was just trying to clarify "Indian" shouldn't be interpreted as referring to the modern Republic of India, which would be even more inaccurate for present-day demographics. Sounds like that's not clear, so maybe we should just say exactly what we mean: "religion originating in the Indian subcontinent"? -- Beland (talk) 06:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * No one calls them "religions originating in the Indian subcontinent," though. They call them Indian religions. wound theology  ◈  06:59, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Who exactly are "they"? Wikipedia is written for a general audience, and either avoids or explains jargon and confusing or ambiguous terminology. We could write something like "a religion originating on the Indian subcontinent, known by __ as one of the Indian religions" or "commonly known as" or whatnot. Or "is an Indian religion (having originated on the Indian subcontinent)" or similar. -- Beland (talk) 15:43, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Having received no reply from you, I put in the last-proposed phrasing above, but I see you've reverted it with the edit summary "superfluous". Perhaps this clarification is unnecessary for subject-matter experts, but for a general audience seems important because the phrase "Indian religion" is ambiguous. As evidenced by complaints about its inaccuracy, many readers interpret "Indian" to refer to the Republic of India (which it does not) or interpret it to mean that Buddhism is mostly practiced in India (which it is not). -- Beland (talk) 22:54, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * A lack of reply is not a certificate of . The current wording reflects the long-standing consensus, wait for more input from other editors before adding in contentious edits. wound theology  ◈  08:25, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Could you point me to the previous discussion or edits which decided against clarifying the meaning of "Indian religion" so I know who to consult for their opinion? Or alternatively, could you explain your position? I'm in the dark about where we differ; do you doubt that some readers are interpreting this phrase differently than the definition in Indian religions? -- Beland (talk) 20:08, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * People who complain about Buddhism being called an "Indian religion" are not confused as to what that term means -- they're participating in nationalist internet arguments about whether or not the Buddha was born in Nepal or India. Scholarly consensus is that he was born in modern-day Nepal but taught primarily in India. Buddhism is an Indian religion, originating in India (whether understood as the subcontinent as a whole or as the territory of the modern-day Republic of India). People will continue to argue about whether the Buddha was Indian or Nepali regardless. wound theology  ◈  01:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * There have also been complaints have been that it should not be called an Indian religion because it's mostly not practiced in India, by either definition.
 * Yes, people are being nationalistic, but is the claim that the religion originated only on the territory of the Republic of India supported by sources in the article? The Buddha's life seems to have both spanned India and Nepal. It seems unclear that there is a specific day or year in which it's obvious that the religion was created, and thus it's difficult to know where the Buddha was at that time and thus where to ascribe "credit". Given how long ago it was and the available sources, it seems many of the geographic and chronological details are uncertain or disputed. -- Beland (talk) 21:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * There have also been complaints have been that it should not be called an Indian religion because it's mostly not practiced in India, by either definition. These people should take up their misgivings with the scholarly literature, not us. [I]s the claim that the religion originated only on the territory of the Republic of India supported by sources in the article? No one is making this claim. The Buddha was born in modern-day Nepal and preached mainly in the modern-day Republic of India. Both Nepal and (the Republic of) India, as well as Pakistan and Bangladesh, are on the Indian subcontinent. The Buddha was born in the Sakya Republic on the Indo-Gangetic plain spanning both modern-day India and Nepal in an era long before modern nationalism, and indeed ancient India was a loose collection of different polities connected more by economics and long-ranging social networks rather than a national or ethnic identity. If you on adding (what I consider to be) superfluous information already explained in the text, then I would not object to an explanatory note with something like: The Buddha founded his order in the Sakya Republic on the Indo-Gangetic plain, spanning both modern-day India and Nepal.  wound theology  ◈  06:28, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The disconnect that generates complaints about geography of practice is that readers don't know that Wikipedia is using the term "Indian religion" in a specific academic sense that refers to origin, rather than one of several possible other interpretations. I'll add your proposed explanatory footnote. -- Beland (talk) 20:12, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I couldn't find anything in the article that verifies the claim "The Buddha founded his order in the Sakya Republic". Did I miss something or did you have a citation for that? Shakya seems to be the right link target; Sakya describes a school of Buddhism, not a republic. -- Beland (talk) 20:54, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Sakya is the Pali form of Shakya. Yes, the target is wrong. It is well-attested that Shakyamuni Buddha was born and lived first in the Shakya Republic. I say "founded his order" but that's not entirely accurate -- Vulture Peak was in Magadha and this is where he is traditionally held to have first preached. However he began his ascetic journey in the Shakya Republic according to the sutras (or suttas, more likely in this case.) If not the Sakya Republic, then Magadha; the Buddha was born in the S[h]akya Republic spanning India and Nepal and first preached in Magadha or what have you. wound theology  ◈  03:19, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * OK, can you give a citation for whatever it is that you think is an accurate statement? Secondary sources are preferred, because religious texts aren't necessarily historically accurate, and obviously don't know anything about modern geography. -- Beland (talk) 15:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * has removed the incorrect claim and attached some references to that explanatory footnote. Though the quotes from the references seem to verify the use of the term "Indian religion" and not the geography of modern countries where early teaching happened. -- Beland (talk) 17:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The lede should follow the body, and the fact that Buddhism originated where it did is discussed elsewhere on the page. There's no need for references. wound theology  ◈  06:13, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I did a search of the article and did not find any mention of "Vulture Peak" or "Magadha". The section on the life of the Buddha only mentions the tradition that he attained enlightenment at Bodh Gaya; I don't see anything about the geography of teaching. I do see mention of the Shakya Republic as birthplace, but unless I missed something (maybe this information was removed at some point?) we would still need something added to the article to verify the claim "first preached in Magadha". -- Beland (talk) 18:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

The term Indian religion is linked, so readers can easily find an explaanation. And it is indeed a common term; not sure if a direct explanation is necessary. But we've done without a direct explanation for ages. Joshua Jonathan -  Let's talk!  06:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

 * I'm a college-educated American, I took a world religions class in high school, I have a dozen books on religion on my desk, and I wasn't familiar with this term. It might be more well known among people who study Eastern religions or who live in Asia, but for a general audience, I don't think most English Wikipedia readers are going to know the technical meaning. Longevity doesn't seem to be a guarantee of optimality, given that the term has been the subject of complaints. -- Beland (talk) 15:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

“Regading” typo in intro
I cannot fix this because the article has been locked 86.31.1.85 (talk) 02:19, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Done, thanks JimRenge (talk) 03:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Books are an unreliable source.
The authors of cited books have no experience with Buddhism. If you want to know about Buddhism, ask the Fourteenth Dalai Lama of the Sovereign Nation Tibet. He is the foremost living authority on Buddhism. He objects to the epithet religion, rather referring to Buddhism as a Mind Science. The book authors parrot incorrect notions from before airplanes made trips to Tibet possible. Now that the communist infestation of the once-proud nation China invaded and occupied the sovereign nation Tibet, committing daily genocide with impunity, forcing the Dalai Lama into exile, he has traveled to the US to give teachings memorized by Lineage Lamas and handed down via rote memorization for millennia, His talks and teachings have become accessible. DalaiLama.com contains videos of many of those talks (in English) and teachings (memorized in Tibetan) which repudiate most of the written books, especially those written before 1970. This article quotes none of the Dalai Lama's books. It is therefore incorrect, misleading, and blatantly false. Throw out this article and start over by reading and citing the Dalai Lama's books and public talks. That will go a long way to counteract the lies and falsehoods perpetrated by His sworn enemies, the Chinese Communists, who sends agents to kill him, and the ignorance displayed in the article's citations. Hpfeil (talk) 23:40, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The authors of cited books have no experience with Buddhism doesn't appear to be accurate by any means. What you're describing is Tibetan Buddhism, which is a specific form of Buddhism, and this article covers Buddhism as a whole, not just Tibetan Buddhism. - Aoidh (talk) 23:56, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Bu
Buddhism is not Indian religion it's a Nepali Buddhist religion. 113.199.247.27 (talk) 18:06, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Can we get an image for the lead?
Since the articles for Christianity and Islam have images in the lead sections, can we also get one for this article? Moodgenerator (talk) 04:04, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

 * Just threw one on, used the Kamakura Daibutsu as it is one of the most famous Buddhist images globally and most representative of the major lay practice. wound theology  ◈  07:27, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Buddhism


text:
Base pair

A base pair (bp) is a fundamental unit of double-stranded nucleic acids consisting of two nucleobases bound to each other by hydrogen bonds. They form the building blocks of the DNA double helix and contribute to the folded structure of both DNA and RNA. Dictated by specific hydrogen bonding patterns, "Watson–Crick" (or "Watson–Crick–Franklin") base pairs (guanine–cytosine and adenine–thymine) allow the DNA helix to maintain a regular helical structure that is subtly dependent on its nucleotide sequence. The complementary nature of this based-paired structure provides a redundant copy of the genetic information encoded within each strand of DNA. The regular structure and data redundancy provided by the DNA double helix make DNA well suited to the storage of genetic information, while base-pairing between DNA and incoming nucleotides provides the mechanism through which DNA polymerase replicates DNA and RNA polymerase transcribes DNA into RNA. Many DNA-binding proteins can recognize specific base-pairing patterns that identify particular regulatory regions of genes.

Intramolecular base pairs can occur within single-stranded nucleic acids. This is particularly important in RNA molecules (e.g., transfer RNA), where Watson–Crick base pairs (guanine–cytosine and adenine–uracil) permit the formation of short double-stranded helices, and a wide variety of non–Watson–Crick interactions (e.g., G–U or A–A) allow RNAs to fold into a vast range of specific three-dimensional structures. In addition, base-pairing between transfer RNA (tRNA) and messenger RNA (mRNA) forms the basis for the molecular recognition events that result in the nucleotide sequence of mRNA becoming translated into the amino acid sequence of proteins via the genetic code.

The size of an individual gene or an organism's entire genome is often measured in base pairs because DNA is usually double-stranded. Hence, the number of total base pairs is equal to the number of nucleotides in one of the strands (with the exception of non-coding single-stranded regions of telomeres). The haploid human genome (23 chromosomes) is estimated to be about 3.2 billion bases long and to contain 20,000–25,000 distinct protein-coding genes. A kilobase (kb) is a unit of measurement in molecular biology equal to 1000 base pairs of DNA or RNA. The total number of DNA base pairs on Earth is estimated at 5.0 with a weight of 50 billion tonnes. In comparison, the total mass of the biosphere has been estimated to be as much as 4 TtC (trillion tons of carbon).

Hydrogen bonding and stability
Top, a G.C base pair with three hydrogen bonds. Bottom, an A.T base pair with two hydrogen bonds. Non-covalent hydrogen bonds between the bases are shown as dashed lines. The wiggly lines stand for the connection to the pentose sugar and point in the direction of the minor groove.

Hydrogen bonding is the chemical interaction that underlies the base-pairing rules described above. Appropriate geometrical correspondence of hydrogen bond donors and acceptors allows only the "right" pairs to form stably. DNA with high GC-content is more stable than DNA with low GC-content. Crucially, however, stacking interactions are primarily responsible for stabilising the double-helical structure; Watson-Crick base pairing's contribution to global structural stability is minimal, but its role in the specificity underlying complementarity is, by contrast, of maximal importance as this underlies the template-dependent processes of the central dogma (e.g. DNA replication).

The bigger nucleobases, adenine and guanine, are members of a class of double-ringed chemical structures called purines; the smaller nucleobases, cytosine and thymine (and uracil), are members of a class of single-ringed chemical structures called pyrimidines. Purines are complementary only with pyrimidines: pyrimidine–pyrimidine pairings are energetically unfavorable because the molecules are too far apart for hydrogen bonding to be established; purine–purine pairings are energetically unfavorable because the molecules are too close, leading to overlap repulsion. Purine–pyrimidine base-pairing of AT or GC or UA (in RNA) results in proper duplex structure. The only other purine–pyrimidine pairings would be AC and GT and UG (in RNA); these pairings are mismatches because the patterns of hydrogen donors and acceptors do not correspond. The GU pairing, with two hydrogen bonds, does occur fairly often in RNA (see wobble base pair).

Paired DNA and RNA molecules are comparatively stable at room temperature, but the two nucleotide strands will separate above a melting point that is determined by the length of the molecules, the extent of mispairing (if any), and the GC content. Higher GC content results in higher melting temperatures; it is, therefore, unsurprising that the genomes of extremophile organisms such as Thermus thermophilus are particularly GC-rich. On the converse, regions of a genome that need to separate frequently — for example, the promoter regions for often-transcribed genes — are comparatively GC-poor (for example, see TATA box). GC content and melting temperature must also be taken into account when designing primers for PCR reactions.

Examples
The following DNA sequences illustrate pair double-stranded patterns. By convention, the top strand is written from the 5′-end to the 3′-end; thus, the bottom strand is written 3′ to 5′.

 * A base-paired DNA sequence:
 * ATCGATTGAGCTCTAGCG
 * TAGCTAACTCGAGATCGC

 * The corresponding RNA sequence, in which uracil is substituted for thymine in the RNA strand:
 * AUCGAUUGAGCUCUAGCG
 * UAGCUAACUCGAGAUCGC

Base analogs and intercalators
Chemical analogs of nucleotides can take the place of proper nucleotides and establish non-canonical base-pairing, leading to errors (mostly point mutations) in DNA replication and DNA transcription. This is due to their isosteric chemistry. One common mutagenic base analog is 5-bromouracil, which resembles thymine but can base-pair to guanine in its enol form.

Other chemicals, known as DNA intercalators, fit into the gap between adjacent bases on a single strand and induce frameshift mutations by "masquerading" as a base, causing the DNA replication machinery to skip or insert additional nucleotides at the intercalated site. Most intercalators are large polyaromatic compounds and are known or suspected carcinogens. Examples include ethidium bromide and acridine.

Mismatch repair
Mismatched base pairs can be generated by errors of DNA replication and as intermediates during homologous recombination. The process of mismatch repair ordinarily must recognize and correctly repair a small number of base mispairs within a long sequence of normal DNA base pairs. To repair mismatches formed during DNA replication, several distinctive repair processes have evolved to distinguish between the template strand and the newly formed strand so that only the newly inserted incorrect nucleotide is removed (in order to avoid generating a mutation). The proteins employed in mismatch repair during DNA replication, and the clinical significance of defects in this process are described in the article DNA mismatch repair. The process of mispair correction during recombination is described in the article gene conversion.

Length measurements
The following abbreviations are commonly used to describe the length of a D/RNA molecule:
 * bp = base pair—one bp corresponds to approximately 3.4 Å (340 pm)  of length along the strand, and to roughly 618 or 643 daltons for DNA and RNA respectively.
 * kb (= kbp) = kilo–base-pair = 1,000 bp
 * Mb (= Mbp) = mega–base-pair = 1,000,000 bp
 * Gb (= Gbp) = giga–base-pair = 1,000,000,000 bp

For single-stranded DNA/RNA, units of nucleotides are used—abbreviated nt (or knt, Mnt, Gnt)—as they are not paired. To distinguish between units of computer storage and bases, kbp, Mbp, Gbp, etc. may be used for base pairs.

The centimorgan is also often used to imply distance along a chromosome, but the number of base pairs it corresponds to varies widely. In the human genome, the centimorgan is about 1 million base pairs.

Unnatural base pair (UBP)
An unnatural base pair (UBP) is a designed subunit (or nucleobase) of DNA which is created in a laboratory and does not occur in nature. DNA sequences have been described which use newly created nucleobases to form a third base pair, in addition to the two base pairs found in nature, A-T (adenine – thymine) and G-C (guanine – cytosine). A few research groups have been searching for a third base pair for DNA, including teams led by Steven A. Benner, Philippe Marliere, Floyd E. Romesberg and Ichiro Hirao. Some new base pairs based on alternative hydrogen bonding, hydrophobic interactions and metal coordination have been reported.

In 1989 Steven Benner (then working at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich) and his team led with modified forms of cytosine and guanine into DNA molecules in vitro. The nucleotides, which encoded RNA and proteins, were successfully replicated in vitro. Since then, Benner's team has been trying to engineer cells that can make foreign bases from scratch, obviating the need for a feedstock.

In 2002, Ichiro Hirao's group in Japan developed an unnatural base pair between 2-amino-8-(2-thienyl)purine (s) and pyridine-2-one (y) that functions in transcription and translation, for the site-specific incorporation of non-standard amino acids into proteins. In 2006, they created 7-(2-thienyl)imidazo[4,5-b]pyridine (Ds) and pyrrole-2-carbaldehyde (Pa) as a third base pair for replication and transcription. Afterward, Ds and 4-[3-(6-aminohexanamido)-1-propynyl]-2-nitropyrrole (Px) was discovered as a high fidelity pair in PCR amplification. In 2013, they applied the Ds-Px pair to DNA aptamer generation by in vitro selection (SELEX) and demonstrated the genetic alphabet expansion significantly augment DNA aptamer affinities to target proteins.

In 2012, a group of American scientists led by Floyd Romesberg, a chemical biologist at the Scripps Research Institute in San Diego, California, published that his team designed an unnatural base pair (UBP). The two new artificial nucleotides or Unnatural Base Pair (UBP) were named d5SICS and dNaM. More technically, these artificial nucleotides bearing hydrophobic nucleobases, feature two fused aromatic rings that form a (d5SICS–dNaM) complex or base pair in DNA. His team designed a variety of in vitro or "test tube" templates containing the unnatural base pair and they confirmed that it was efficiently replicated with high fidelity in virtually all sequence contexts using the modern standard in vitro techniques, namely PCR amplification of DNA and PCR-based applications. Their results show that for PCR and PCR-based applications, the d5SICS–dNaM unnatural base pair is functionally equivalent to a natural base pair, and when combined with the other two natural base pairs used by all organisms, A–T and G–C, they provide a fully functional and expanded six-letter "genetic alphabet".

In 2014 the same team from the Scripps Research Institute reported that they synthesized a stretch of circular DNA known as a plasmid containing natural T-A and C-G base pairs along with the best-performing UBP Romesberg's laboratory had designed and inserted it into cells of the common bacterium E. coli that successfully replicated the unnatural base pairs through multiple generations. The transfection did not hamper the growth of the E. coli cells and showed no sign of losing its unnatural base pairs to its natural DNA repair mechanisms. This is the first known example of a living organism passing along an expanded genetic code to subsequent generations. Romesberg said he and his colleagues created 300 variants to refine the design of nucleotides that would be stable enough and would be replicated as easily as the natural ones when the cells divide. This was in part achieved by the addition of a supportive algal gene that expresses a nucleotide triphosphate transporter which efficiently imports the triphosphates of both d5SICSTP and dNaMTP into E. coli bacteria. Then, the natural bacterial replication pathways use them to accurately replicate a plasmid containing d5SICS–dNaM. Other researchers were surprised that the bacteria replicated these human-made DNA subunits.

The successful incorporation of a third base pair is a significant breakthrough toward the goal of greatly expanding the number of amino acids which can be encoded by DNA, from the existing 20 amino acids to a theoretically possible 172, thereby expanding the potential for living organisms to produce novel proteins. The artificial strings of DNA do not encode for anything yet, but scientists speculate they could be designed to manufacture new proteins which could have industrial or pharmaceutical uses. Experts said the synthetic DNA incorporating the unnatural base pair raises the possibility of life forms based on a different DNA code.

Non-canonical base pairing
In addition to the canonical pairing, some conditions can also favour base-pairing with alternative base orientation, and number and geometry of hydrogen bonds. These pairings are accompanied by alterations to the local backbone shape.

The most common of these is the wobble base pairing that occurs between tRNAs and mRNAs at the third base position of many codons during transcription and during the charging of tRNAs by some tRNA synthetases. They have also been observed in the secondary structures of some RNA sequences.

Additionally, Hoogsteen base pairing (typically written as A•U/T and G•C) can exist in some DNA sequences (e.g. CA and TA dinucleotides) in dynamic equilibrium with standard Watson–Crick pairing. They have also been observed in some protein–DNA complexes.

In addition to these alternative base pairings, a wide range of base-base hydrogen bonding is observed in RNA secondary and tertiary structure. These bonds are often necessary for the precise, complex shape of an RNA, as well as its binding to interaction partners.

title: Base pair