Proletariat Blogging in the Heart of (UK) Predatory Capitalism! Exploring the Interface between Matter and Perception, Chinese Buddhism, Daoism, Hakka Ethnography, and All Aspects of Radical Politics, History, Psychology and Philosophy – 全世界无产者联合起来!
The reputation of the former Head Monk of the famous Shaolin Temple – Shi Yongxin – literally collapsed overnight! The trouble he has caused has not been limited only to himself! After Shi Yongxin got into trouble, his brother – Liu Yingbiao – quite literally disappeared from public view – with the media reporting that he has gone “missing”.
This is because the Vatican (an “Independent” State) is the only country in Europe to still maintain diplomatic relations with “Taiwan” – and view Taiwan as the “Republic of China” (ROC). The Vatican does NOT recognise the “People’s Republic of China” – as the Roman Catholic Church has a long history of supporting fascism and opposing “Socialism”. The Catholic Church supported Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, provided priests to bless the Nazi and fascist troops invading the USSR, helped thousands of Nazi War Criminals escape Europe after the war, and is fully supportive of Neo-Nazi Ukraine today. The chatter on Chinese-language website in the PRC is of the opinion that Shi Yongxin was up to no good – and this feeds into his “defection” stories, etc. Indeed, it is believed that this might well be a Vatican-inspired intrigue designed to strengthen US foreign policy, bolster the image of Taiwan, and damage the PRC.
Years ago, when I first accessed the internet, I used to argue with young Americans (and some UK and EU people) that the gongfu they were learning for vast amounts of money in China and the West – was not real and product of youth-orientated (Western-derived) gymnastics. They were so brain-washed they thought the lay-men who taught them in robes were real Shaolin monks! Furthermore, they said that our gongfu was “old fashioned” and “out of date”! Many of the ethnic Chinese “teachers” were greedy and money-orientated – seeing spirituality as “weak”. I stopped arguing as I did not want to be seen as attacking the CPC – which I would never do. In return, I was asked to appear on Chinese TV and explain my connection to China – but I politely refused. The last thing I wanted was further exposure and hundreds of people asking for instruction. It is important to live humbly and simply – and not for show. It is best to disappear and not be seen. If in doubt, keep out of sight.
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!
In Japan, a Buddhist monk or nun can get married, produce children, eat meat, and drink alcohol. In other words, these people are lay-people in robes – but are practicing dishonesty. A group of Chinese Ch’an monks had been following the Vinaya Discipline when they travelled to Japan to spread the Ch’an Dharma – but returned with Japanese wives and children – and wearing lay-clothing – eating meat and drinking alcohol. In front of Xu Yun – these “monks” petitioned the post-1949 government of China to permanently abolish the Ch’an requirement for monks and nuns to be celibate and vegetarian. Xu Yun is said to have loudly slapped the table – stating that the Chinese government should do the exact opposite – that is, integrate the Vinaya Discipline into the fabric of China’s secular law. If a man or woman wants to be an ordained Buddhist monk or nun, then it should be a legal requirement – punishable by secular law – if they fail to uphold the rules and regulations of the lifestyle they have chosen to follow. Being a Buddhist monastic is a “job” that requires a strict form of lifestyle.
Around August 1953, Ch’an Master Xu Yun (1840-1959) attended a meeting in Beijing of hundreds of representatives of the various Buddhist groups from around China
SANGHA KOMMUNE (SSR) 