Translator’s Note: I do not agree with the Death Penalty personally. However, many people I know – including left-wingers – do. China is trying to move away from the Death Penalty with a greater use of the “Suspended Death Penalty” – where the convicted must reform and demonstrate their worthiness to society if they want to keep on living. The US, of course, (check for yourself), has the worst Human Rights record in history regarding imprisonment, slave-labour, and executions, etc. It is probably no coincidence that the closest allies of the US also use the Death Penalty. Israel seldom uses the judicial Death Penalty – but it does not have to – as its Military routinely maims and murders unarmed civilians in its ongoing project to steal and occupy Palestinian land. The USSR immediately abolished the Death Penalty for Civil Crimes in 1918 – reserving the Death Penalty for only Political Crimes – but eventually abolished the Death Penalty for all crimes in 1948 under Stalin. It was the Trotskyite Khrushchev who (copying the US) introduced the Death Penalty for Civil Crimes in 1959. The problem Khrushchev had was that no Soviet-educated Jury would inflict the Death Penalty – as they had been taught that the Czarist Authorities routinely used “Death” as a means of controlling and oppressing the workers. Karl Marx, of course was opposed to all forms of Death Penalty. He quite rightly said that the State does not possess the right to harm an individual’s body in anyway – and I agree (doubly as a Buddhist). Lenin was of the opinion that Marx only meant that the Death Penalty should not be applied to the workers – but can be applied to class enemies. Why Lenin thought this – I am not sure. Lenin was a trained lawyer after-all – so perhaps he is seeing something I cannot in the work of Marx. Of course, I do accept that in the time of brutal war – executions might be required – even if I personally disagree. Sometimes we have to separate our personal beliefs (disentangle them from exterior circumstance) if life is to flow-on unhindered. This is why we require a strong moral foundation to our characters and judgement. We must avoid self-indulgence and wayward harshness. If it is proven “true” that Shi Yongxin was defecting to the US and was preparing to condemn the Communist Party of China on the White House lawn whilst Vance and Trump chuckle away – then i could well see an execution taking place. Surely a demonstration of bad-karma if ever I’ve seen it! ACW (29.7.2025)
2025-07-29 11:17 Published in: Henan Province
Shi Yongxin’s “escape” farce – when the rumours hit, a crisis of confidence was caused! Is an unconvincing statement of denial enough?
A “Police Report” suddenly set the internet ablaze – Shaolin Temple Abbot Shi Yongxin tried to defect to the United States taking “7 lovers, 21 children and 6 staff”, a total of 34 people with bags of cash – attempting to fly from Pudong Airport – but this criminal group was intercepted. This plot is bizarre and terrifying for many people who respect Buddhism and hold the Shaolin Temple in high regard. However, in less than 24 hours of this story hitting the net, the Kaifeng Municipal Public Security Bureau issued a stern refuting statement: “This Story is Fake! Please Do Not Spread It! “* This statement soon sobered-up the population – but the real story might be just as disturbing! Why can such an absurd script make such huge waves? The forged report was full of flaws – but it accurately hit the nerve of those who habitually expect bad things to happen. The identity contrast is architecture – the combination of “eminent monks” and “groups of lovers” and “many children” has full impact.
The number trap itself is alarming – “a team of 34”, “at least 21 children” and other specific numbers are presented as “real”. Authoritative disguise – the forged red official seal of the “Kaifeng City Public Security Bureau” was initially used as a means to get through to the public as an official statement that must be obayed and passed-on. Ironically, after the rumours were refuted, the fog of misinformation morphed into something far denser. President Trump had granted Shi Yongxin political asylum in the US – and he would be asked to attend a meeting in the White House with the 14th Dalai Lama (Pro-Tibetan Movement) and Li Hongzhi (Falan Gong Cult) – to issue a joint-statemet “condemning the Communist Party of China”! Knowing this, the Chinese Authorities stopped the aeroplane as it was taxiing down the runway to take-off!
The media road to verification was not of much help – as the Dengfeng Religious Bureau, Shaolin Temple, and Henan Provincial Buddhist Association were collectively “silent”. The Zhengzhou Buddhist Association stated, “Today is Sunday – the matter is not clear”. This announcement made the public even more confused – the truth can only be stated on working days? Even the staff on duty at the Henan Provincial Ethnic and Religious Affairs Committee could only respond, “We just heard the news – and are as confused as you.” This collective silence and lack of clarity is more disturbing than the rumours themselves.
Why did the rumours break out at this time?
The “Master Shi Yongxin” Weibo account has been suddenly suspended since July 24th. The account was updated almost daily before then, and the shutdown naturally sparked speculation. But if you check the official website of Shaolin Temple, Shi Yongxin’s introduction is prominently listed, and he is still presiding over a meeting of all monks in the news on July 7th. The separation between online rumours and official information is like two parallel worlds.
Looking closely at the content of the rumours, it is even more absurd!
How did he sire 21 children? This means that Shi Yongxin needs to have conceived a son every year – for more than 20 years whilst living under strict regulations and supervision. Seven lovers exist in the Pure Land of monastic Buddhism? The two lifestyle are as different as day and night. A team of 34 people accompanies Shi Yongxin through the Airport Security as if entering a no-man’s land? Such ideas are a challenge to common sense.
Shi Yongxin himself is not far from controversy.
In 2022, Shaolin Intangible Asset Management Company, which he holds 80% of the shares, made a high-profile entry into real estate, causing an uproar. Subsequently, the list of shareholders changed abruptly, Shi Yongxin and his brothers withdrew, and Shaolin Temple became the sole shareholder. As the legal representative of many Buddhist associations and branch Shaolin Temples, there are as many as 17 affiliated institutions under its name, which have long gone beyond the scope of traditional monks. This rumor directly points to his “private life” and “children”, which accurately grasps the public’s complex examination of this “cross-border” abbot.
The deepest scar of this farce is a rupture in trust.
The Police statement has been issued, so why is the idea of “no wind and no waves” (no smoke without fire) still resounding amongst the masses? This reflects a deep trust betrayal – when public figures are deeply involved in controversy – but lack a sufficient transparent responses – this how seeds of suspicion grow wildly. The rumour-mongers are well versed in the psychology of communication, and concocted this “explosive package” of “religious leader + young women and girls + group absconding”. The false report is full of loopholes, but it has spread throughout the world.
When an official statement still does not quell the uproar – we have to confront the core issues!
The celebrity halo is a double-edged sword, and while Shi Yongxin conveys Shaolin culture to the world, he also makes himself the focus of public opinion. The more diverse the identity, the more scrutiny the public will be. Repairing social credibility requires much more than a quick post-crisis debunking of rumours.
The next time a rumour hits, what do we rely on to establish the truth over the absurd?
When the bizarre script of “The Abbot’s Escape” can easily hijack public attention, this in itself may be a sign that everyone should be wary of – the dam of trust needs to be built with sincerity and transparency day in and day out (by properly following the Buddhist Rules). A cynical statement on paper is just the beginning. President Trump stating to CNN that he cannot “spell” – let alone “say” the name “Shi Yongxin” (an anti-Chinese racist statement) is not helpful. Trump is nervous of yet another sex scandal (such as “Epstein”) being associated with him and undermining his political support-base (the bourgeoisie and the capitalist system still oppresses the workers in the West).
Chinese Language Text:
释永信携34人潜逃被拦截？当地最新回应来了
2025-07-29 11:17 发布于：河南省
释永信“出逃”闹剧：当谣言撞上信任危机，一纸声明够用吗？
一张“警情通报”突然引爆全网——少林寺方丈释永信携“7名情人、21名子女及6名工作人员”，共34人于浦东机场试图“出逃”美国被拦截。这剧情，够离奇，也够惊悚。
然而不到24小时，开封市公安局亲自下场击碎泡沫：“假的！别传了！”*巴掌响亮，但喧嚣背后的真相，远比这则粗糙谣言更值得深挖。
讽刺的是，辟谣之后，迷雾反而更浓。
记者求证之路堪称魔幻现实：登封宗教局、少林寺、河南省佛协电话集体“沉默”。郑州市佛协一句“今天是星期天啊，不清楚”，让公众困惑更深——真相也需等工作日？连河南省民宗委值班人员也只能回应“刚看到，和你一样懵”。这份集体静默，比谣言本身更令人不安。
谣言为何此时爆发？
导火索或是“释永信师傅”微博自7月24日的突然停更。该账号此前几乎日更，停摆自然引发猜测。但若查看少林寺官网，释永信的介绍赫然在列，7月7日新闻中他还在主持全体僧人会议。网络传言与官方信息的割裂，宛如两个平行世界。
细看谣言内容，更显荒谬：
21个子女？这意味着释永信需在严苛清规下，持续二十余年每年生育一子且滴水不漏。7名情人存在于佛门净地？无异于天方夜谭。34人团队过机场安检如入无人之境？更是挑战常识。
释永信自身并非远离争议。
2022年，他持股80%的少林无形资产管理公司高调进军房地产，引发轩然大波。随后股东名单突变，释永信与其师兄弟退出，少林寺成为唯一股东。作为多家佛教协会及少林寺的法定代表人，其名下关联机构多达17家，早已超越传统出家人的范畴。此次谣言直指其“私生活”与“子女”，正是精准拿捏了公众对这位“跨界”方丈的复杂审视。
这场闹剧最深的伤痕，是信任的裂痕。
警方声明已出，为何“无风不起浪”的念头仍在蔓延？这折射出一种深层的信任透支——当公众人物深陷争议却缺乏足够透明回应时，怀疑的种子便会疯狂滋长。
造谣者深谙传播心理学，炮制出这盘“宗教领袖+桃色丑闻+集团潜逃”的“爆款套餐”。假通报漏洞百出，却险些瞒天过海。
当一纸官方声明仍难平息众声喧哗，我们不得不直面核心问题：
名人光环是把双刃剑，释永信将少林文化推向世界的同时，也使自己成为舆论的焦点。身份越多元，公众审视就越严苛。而社会公信力的修复，需要的远不止于危机后的快速辟谣。
下一次谣言来袭时，我们靠什么让真相跑赢荒诞？
当“方丈出逃”的离奇剧本能轻易劫持公共注意力，这本身或许就是一个值得所有人警惕的信号——信任的堤坝，需要日复一日的真诚与透明来筑牢。一纸声明，只是开始。
SANGHA KOMMUNE (SSR) 