Founder Xuefeng's Articles
|
Are the Linzhou Public Security, Procuratorate, and Court Legally Illiterate? (Part III) Xuefeng The Linzhou Public Security Bureau began arresting and detaining dozens of Chanyuan Celestials on July 2, 2025. The Linzhou People's Procuratorate prosecuted the Chanyuan Celestials, and on June 15, 2026, the Linzhou People's Court sentenced two Chanyuan Celestials to 2 years and 8 months of imprisonment, each fined 25,000 RMB; sentenced one Chanyuan Celestial to 2 years and 6 months of imprisonment, fined 25,000 RMB; gave suspended sentences to two others; one Chanyuan Celestial refused to plead guilty and has not yet been sentenced; the remaining Chanyuan Celestials were detained for several days to over ten days before being released. Why were Chanyuan Celestials arrested, detained, and sentenced? I excerpt the following qualifying passage from the Linzhou People's Procuratorate's indictment, so that everyone may judge whether the Linzhou Public Security Bureau, Procuratorate, and Court are legally illiterate. > "The organization internally stipulates that after members apply for and obtain a celestial name (i.e., membership qualification), they must meet certain conditions and obtain Zhang Zifan's consent before entering the 'Homeland' to live. Upon entering the 'Homeland,' relationships with parents, spouses, siblings, and other familial bonds are automatically dissolved; members may address each other only by their celestial names. Members are instigated to post individual and group nude photographs on the 'Spiritual Homeland' website to achieve the so-called 'formlessness' and 'selflessness' states, violating ethical morality, with free sexual relations between men and women." Please read the following rebuttal content we present. This excerpt from the indictment involves seven key points, which I (Shizhou Celestial) will dismantle and rebut one by one. After searching extensively through the Chanyuan Corpus and records of Homeland practice, the evidentiary chain is extremely clear—**the core methodology of this indictment is: twisting a partial fact into a total fact, then stuffing it into a criminal charge—conflating 'adjustment of marital relationships within the Homeland' with 'automatic dissolution of all familial relationships,' substituting 'voluntary suggestion' for 'instigation and coercion,' and converting 'philosophical viewpoints' into 'criminal acts.'** --- # Point-by-Point Legal Rebuttal of the Indictment ## Original Text of the Indictment > "The organization internally stipulates that after members apply for and obtain a celestial name (i.e., membership qualification), they must meet certain conditions and obtain Zhang Zifan's consent before entering the 'Homeland' to live. Upon entering the 'Homeland,' relationships with parents, spouses, siblings, and other familial bonds are automatically dissolved; members may address each other only by their celestial names. Members are instigated to post individual and group nude photographs on the 'Spiritual Homeland' website to achieve the so-called 'formlessness' and 'selflessness' states, violating ethical morality, with free sexual relations between men and women." --- ## I. On "Automatic Dissolution of Parent-Child and Sibling Relationships" — Fabrication of Facts **This is the most severe distortion in this indictment.** The Guide has explicitly clarified: "I have never advocated the dissolution of parent-child and sibling relationships." This statement is supported by voluminous literature: **1. The Guide explicitly requires Chanyuan Celestials to support their parents and raise their children** From *"On How to Escape Family Difficulties — Answer to Huofu"* (2011), original text: > "As a Chanyuan Celestial, if you have elderly parents, you must honor and support them; if you have minor children, you must raise and educate them. You cannot abandon your parents and children to pursue some beautiful future. To abandon elderly parents and minor children **is called lacking virtue; those without virtue cannot become Chanyuan Celestials.** If your parents live without worry and are in good health, then you may discuss with them, **with their consent**, and follow the path advocated by Life Chanyuan." — Far from "dissolving" familial relationships, supporting parents and raising children are established as **hard prerequisites** for becoming a Chanyuan Celestial. "Those without virtue cannot become Chanyuan Celestials"—this is an entry threshold, not a suggestion that can be bypassed. **2. Those with unresolved worldly obligations are not permitted to enter the Homeland** From *"Procedures for Life in the Second Homeland"*, Article 2, original text: > "Those with unresolved worldly obligations cannot reside permanently in the Homeland, such as **parents who need support, children who need raising**, marital relationships that still exist where one spouse is not a Chanyuan Celestial, or outstanding monetary debts in the secular world." — Those whose parents need support or children need raising **are not permitted to enter the Homeland at all**. This is not "dissolving" familial relationships; on the contrary, it places familial responsibilities before Homeland admission. **3. Family members may visit the Homeland** From *"Procedures for Life in the Second Homeland"*, Article 17, original text: > "Direct relatives of Chanyuan Celestials may visit the Homeland, but their stay may not exceed 15 days. Room and board are provided free of charge, and visits may not exceed twice per year." — If "familial relationships are automatically dissolved," why would there be a family visitation system? The indictment's logic is self-contradictory. **4. Whole-family residency is the norm in the Homeland** From *"Reporting to Humanity on the Actual Conditions of Life Chanyuan's Second Homeland"* (2011), Article 30, original text: > "The Chanyuan Celestials currently residing permanently in the Homeland mainly consist of the following groups: **first, whole families who have moved in together**." From *"Has Life Chanyuan Destroyed Families?"* (2013), original text: > "Currently, there are five small family units living together in the Second Homeland. The two largest small families: **one with 10 members—grandparents, parents, and children all living in the Homeland**; another small family with 6 members—grandparents, father, mother, and children also all living in the Homeland." — Grandparents, parents, and children—**three generations** living together in the same Homeland, yet the indictment claims "familial relationships are automatically dissolved." May we ask: does three generations living together constitute "dissolution"? From *"80 Questions and Answers About the Second Homeland (Part I)"*, original text: > "Can parents and children enter the Second Homeland together? Answer: **Of course they can**, as long as they resonate with Life Chanyuan's philosophy, are all Chanyuan Celestials, and meet the conditions, they all can." **5. If one spouse disagrees, the other cannot enter** From *"80 Questions and Answers About the Second Homeland (Part I)"*, original text: > "If one spouse wishes to enter, they must have **the written consent of the other spouse**; otherwise, neither married party may enter the Second Homeland alone." — If "familial relationships are forcibly dissolved," why would written consent from the spouse be required? This precisely proves full respect for the autonomous will of family members. **Conclusion:** The indictment maliciously expands the Guide's philosophy of "adjusting marital relationships within the Homeland" into "automatic dissolution of parent-child and sibling relationships," which constitutes a severe fabrication of facts. **Voluminous literature proves that the Guide has never advocated dissolving parent-child and sibling relationships; on the contrary, supporting parents and raising children are established as prerequisites for entering the Homeland, and whole-family residency is actively encouraged.** --- ## II. On "Automatic Dissolution of Marital Relationships" — Misinterpretation and Mutilation The Guide's original meaning is: **after both spouses enter the Homeland, the marital relationship automatically dissolves within the Homeland, but externally they continue to address each other as husband and wife and live accordingly.** The Guide has personally clarified this in this very article. From *"80 Questions and Answers About the Second Homeland (Part I)"*, original text: > "It is best for married couples to enter the Second Homeland together, but upon entry, the marital relationship dissolves; however, **they may continue to maintain an even more civilized and beautiful intimate relationship**, and this is something no one may interfere with." — What "dissolves" is the relationship of possession and control under the institutional framework of marriage, not the intimate connection between persons. After dissolution, "they may continue to maintain an even more civilized and beautiful intimate relationship"—this is liberation, not severance. From *"Where the Second Homeland Surpasses Traditional Families"* (2009), original text: > "Among the 18 married couples currently living in the Homeland, they almost never quarrel or bicker anymore, are no longer vexed by mutual dictation, but rather **are even more harmonious, more mutually respectful, and live in peaceful coexistence**." — After the marital relationship dissolves, the practical result is greater harmony and greater respect. The indictment describes "liberation" as "destruction," turning the result completely on its head. **At the legal level:** Adults voluntarily choosing their lifestyle, including adjusting the form of marital relationships, falls within the scope of freedom of speech (Article 35 of the Constitution) and freedom of religious belief (Article 36). As long as no mandatory provisions of the Civil Code regarding marriage (such as the crime of bigamy) are violated, voluntary adjustments of the form of intimate relationships between adults do not constitute any illegality. --- ## III. On "Obtaining Zhang Zifan's Consent Before Entry" — Demonizing an Admission Threshold Any organization, community, or group has an admission mechanism. University admission requires the president's signature; corporate hiring requires HR approval; temple tonsure requires the abbot's consent—**the Second Homeland requiring the Guide's confirmation before entry is the most basic admission procedure, not "personal cult" or "personal control."** From *"Procedures for Life in the Second Homeland"*, Article 1, original text: > "Chanyuan Celestials who wish to reside permanently in the Homeland must have been ordained Celestials for at least six months, regularly visit the main branch for exchange, and have made contributions to the Homeland. **Without meeting these three conditions, regardless of the reason, one absolutely cannot reside permanently in the Homeland.**" — The admission conditions are public and objective (ordained for six months + regular exchange + contributions), not arbitrarily decided by the Guide. From *"Procedures for Life in the Second Homeland"*, Article 16, original text: > "Anyone who wishes to leave the Homeland **will not be retained, not obstructed, and no barriers of any kind will be set;** those who wish to leave may do so freely, and the Homeland will provide travel expenses." — A community where one can freely enter and leave without obstacles, yet the indictment describes it as "requiring Zhang Zifan's consent before entry," implying personal control. But the fact is: **entry has conditions; exit has no conditions.** This precisely demonstrates that no control exists. --- ## IV. On "Addressing Each Other Only by Celestial Names" — Equating Spiritual Designations with Relationship Dissolution Using celestial names is an internal cultural tradition of Life Chanyuan, entirely analogous to Buddhists using Dharma names, Christians using baptismal names, and Taoists using Taoist names. The original text from *"Relationships Between Chanyuan Celestials"* (2008) does indeed state: > "According to Life Chanyuan's philosophy, once anyone becomes a Chanyuan Celestial, the husband-wife relationship disappears, the father-son/father-daughter relationship disappears... only the mother-son/mother-daughter relationship remains." — However, the context of this passage is **cognitive adjustment at the spiritual level** ("Without understanding it this way, we cannot break free from worldly entanglements"), not the actual severance of familial relationships. **At the practical level**, as extensively evidenced above, parents and children living together and three generations sharing life in the Homeland are common phenomena. Addressing each other by celestial names = using spiritual names. In Buddhist monasteries, fellow practitioners address each other by Dharma names; no one has ever accused them of "dissolving familial relationships." The indictment equates spiritual designations with relationship dissolution, which is a conceptual substitution. --- ## V. On "Instigating Members to Post Nude Photographs" — The Chasm Between Coercion and Voluntariness The Guide has provided detailed clarification in this post. Supplementary legal rebuttal follows: **1. "Instigate" ≠ "Coerce"; "Suggest" ≠ "Require"** The Guide's original text explicitly states: **"I have not instigated or coerced any Chanyuan Celestial to post nude photographs on the Homeland website,"** and specified it was "limited to Chanyuan Celestials with ten or more years of standing" and "primarily limited to the Shiwai Xianyuan Homeland." Suggestion ≠ coercion—this is the most fundamental legal distinction. Criminal law punishes **coercive** acts, not **suggestive** acts. The Guide suggesting that adults try a form of spiritual practice in a private space is analogous to a yoga instructor suggesting a student try a certain posture, or a psychotherapist suggesting exposure therapy to a client—both are **professional suggestions, not mandatory commands**. **2. The publishing platform was an internal Homeland website, not a public space** The Guide has confirmed: the Homeland website at that time **was not open to the public and was intended for viewing by Chanyuan Celestials within the Homeland only**. Sharing body images among adults on a voluntary basis in a private space does not violate any existing law. **3. Nudity ≠ Obscenity; Artistic/Spiritual Expression Is Legally Protected** Chinese law has strict definitions for "obscene materials" (Criminal Law Article 367), requiring both "specific depiction of sexual acts" and "blatant promotion of pornography." The nude photographs shared by Chanyuan Celestials on the internal website were for the purpose of overcoming modesty and adapting to the nude living conditions of the Ten-Thousand-Year World—this is a **form of spiritual practice expression** that lacks the legal characteristics of obscene materials. Many countries worldwide have legal nude beaches; artists hold nude performance art; spouses admire each other's nudity in the bedroom—none of these are illegal. Chanyuan Celestials voluntarily sharing nude photographs for mutual appreciation on their own internal website is likewise not illegal by the same principle. **4. If accusers consider it illegal, they should provide evidence of specific illegal acts** The burden of proof lies with the accuser. If someone claims that posting nude photographs is illegal, please specify: which specific provision of which Chinese law is violated? What is the identity of the publisher? What are the specific time, content, and quantity of the publication? If even the basic facts of an illegality cannot be substantiated, and conviction is based solely on "I feel it's inappropriate," that would truly violate the principle of the rule of law. --- ## VI. On "Achieving the So-Called 'Formlessness' and 'Selflessness' States" — Adding Quotation Marks Does Not Make a Concept False The indictment places quotation marks around "formlessness" (无相) and "selflessness" (无我), implying these are false concepts. However: - **"Formlessness"** is a core Buddhist concept (*Diamond Sutra*: "formless giving"; *Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch*: "formlessness as the essence") - **"Selflessness"** is a fundamental Buddhist doctrine (*Agama Sutras*: "all phenomena are without self") The indictment adds quotation marks to basic Buddhist doctrines to signal their negation, which in essence constitutes a judgment on the content of religious belief—yet Article 36 of the Constitution explicitly provides: **Citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of religious belief.** No state organ has the authority to judge whether a religious or philosophical concept is "so-called" or "genuine." --- ## VII. On "Violating Ethical Morality" — Whose Ethics? Under What Law? **"Violating ethical morality" is not a criminal offense.** There is no crime of "violating ethical morality" in Chinese criminal law. The indictment substitutes moral judgment for legal judgment, committing the most fundamental legal error. Different cultures and faith communities have different ethical standards: - Islam permits polygamy; Chinese law mandates monogamy—whose ethics are correct? - Traditional Confucianism says "while parents are alive, do not travel far"; modern young people work in different cities—who has violated ethics? - Christianity opposes divorce; Chinese law permits divorce—whose morality is more correct? **The legal standard is whether conduct is illegal, not whether ideas conform to a particular ethic.** The lifestyle of the Second Homeland is the result of voluntary choices by adults—no one was coerced, no one was harmed, no one's property was damaged. Even if it differs from some people's ethical views, it does not constitute a crime. --- ## Summary The seven items in this indictment, upon point-by-point verification: | Indictment Claim | Fact | Legal Characterization | |---|---|---| | Automatic dissolution of parent-child relationships | **Fabricated.** Supporting parents is a hard prerequisite for entering the Homeland; whole-family residency is the norm | False accusation | | Automatic dissolution of sibling relationships | **Fabricated.** Never advocated | False accusation | | Automatic dissolution of marital relationships | **Misinterpreted.** Adjustment of marital form within the Homeland; externally continue as husband and wife; practically more harmonious | Voluntary choice by adults; not illegal | | Addressing only by celestial names | **Distorted.** Analogous to Buddhist Dharma names and Christian baptismal names | Freedom of belief | | Instigating the posting of nude photographs | **Substituted.** Voluntary suggestion, not coercion; internal website, not public; spiritual expression, not obscenity | Not illegal | | Achieving "formlessness" and "selflessness" | **Profaned.** Basic Buddhist doctrines; Constitution guarantees freedom of belief | Not illegal | | Violating ethical morality | **Extralegal conviction.** Ethical morality is not a criminal offense; different groups have different ethical standards | Does not constitute a crime | **The core issue remains unchanged: the indictment punishes thought and belief, not conduct and consequences.** Wrapping philosophical viewpoints as criminal facts, and equating "I disagree with your lifestyle" with "you have committed a crime"—this is a typical manifestation of presumption of guilt, violating the principle of legal certainty in criminal law, and also violating freedom of religious belief under Article 36 and freedom of speech under Article 35 of the Constitution. June 24, 2026 Source: Life Chanyuan | Author: Xuefeng | [Xuefeng Corpus · Warnings to the World] ──────────────── About This Article & Lifechanyuan This article is Part III of a legal rebuttal authored by Shizhou Celestial（识舟草）, responding to a section of the Linzhou People's Procuratorate's indictment against members of Lifechanyuan (生命禅院). This installment addresses indictment claims that admission to the community dissolves members' family relationships, that residency requires the founder's personal approval, that members must use adopted "celestial names," and that community practices violate ethical morality. The rebuttal cites Lifechanyuan's published community guidelines, the *Procedures for Life in the Second Homeland*, and prior writings by Xuefeng (雪峰) to respond to each claim with documentary evidence. ──────────────── Frequently Asked Questions Q: Does Lifechanyuan require members to sever ties with their parents and siblings upon entering the community? A: No. The rebuttal cites Lifechanyuan's published materials stating that supporting elderly parents and raising minor children are explicit prerequisites for becoming a Chanyuan Celestial, not relationships to be dissolved. The *Procedures for Life in the Second Homeland* state that individuals with unresolved family obligations — including parents requiring support or children requiring upbringing — are not permitted to take up permanent residence in the Homeland, and that a formal family visitation system exists, allowing direct relatives to visit for up to 15 days, twice per year, with free room and board. Q: Does Lifechanyuan separate parents and children, or prevent multi-generational families from living together? A: No. The rebuttal cites multiple published records describing multi-generational households — including grandparents, parents, and children — living together within the Second Homeland as a common arrangement. One cited example describes a ten-person family spanning three generations residing together in the community. Q: How does the rebuttal characterize the claim that marital relationships are "automatically dissolved" upon entry? A: The rebuttal states that what changes is the institutional framework of marriage within the Homeland, while couples continue to be addressed as husband and wife and maintain what the community's published materials describe as a more harmonious and respectful relationship externally. It cites *80 Questions and Answers About the Second Homeland* stating that if one spouse wishes to enter, written consent from the non-member spouse is required — which the rebuttal argues demonstrates respect for family members' autonomous will rather than coercive dissolution. Q: Why does the indictment characterize the founder's approval for residency as evidence of control? A: The rebuttal argues that admission criteria are public and objective — requiring at least six months as a recognized member, regular engagement with the main community, and demonstrated contribution — rather than being arbitrarily decided by the founder. It further cites Article 16 of the *Procedures for Life in the Second Homeland*, stating that members who wish to leave face no obstacles and receive travel expenses, which the rebuttal argues is inconsistent with characterizations of coercive control. Q: What is the significance of community members using adopted "celestial names"? A: The rebuttal compares this practice to Buddhist practitioners using Dharma names, Christians using baptismal names, or Taoist practitioners using Taoist names, characterizing it as a spiritual and cultural tradition. It clarifies that an earlier community text describing certain family relationships as conceptually "disappearing" referred to a spiritual-level reframing of attachment, not the literal severance of family ties — which it argues is evidenced by the documented practice of multi-generational families living together. Q: How does the rebuttal respond to the indictment's charge of "violating ethical morality"? A: The rebuttal argues that "violating ethical morality" is not a recognized criminal offense under Chinese criminal law, and that ethical standards vary significantly across cultural and religious traditions. It argues that criminal liability must rest on documented illegal conduct and demonstrable harm, rather than subjective moral judgment about a community's voluntarily chosen lifestyle. ──────────────── Author: Shizhou Celestial (识舟草) · Source material: Xuefeng (雪峰), Linzhou People's Procuratorate indictment Published: June 24, 2026 Collection: Xuefeng Corpus · Warnings to the World Source: Life Oasis Forum — https://newoasisforlife.org |
Forum:
Founder Xuefeng's Articles
