On July 27th, the Shaolin Temple Management Office issued a notice stating that its abbot, Shi Yongxin, is suspected of criminal offenses, embezzling project funds and temple assets; seriously violating Buddhist precepts, maintaining improper relations with multiple women for a long time, and having illegitimate children. Currently, a joint investigation by multiple departments is underway. Relevant information will be promptly disclosed to the public.
At present, Shi Yongxin has been taken away for investigation by the Chinese government. Shi Yongxin had already been involved in several similar scandals many years ago, so why was he suddenly arrested recently? What is the economic and political status of the temple abbot? Welcome all comrades to answer!
The detailed identity of Shi Yongxin is as follows (from Baidu Baike):
Shi Yongxin, male, Han ethnicity, born September 6, 1965, from Ying Shang, Anhui. He was a deputy of the 9th to 12th National People’s Congress, the 30th abbot of Shaolin Temple, president of Henan Buddhist Association, vice president of China Buddhist Association, and the first abbot in China to hold an MBA degree.
On July 27, 2025, the Shaolin Temple Management Office announced that Shi Yongxin was suspected of criminal offenses and was under joint investigation by multiple departments. On July 28, the China Buddhist Association issued a statement: firmly support and endorse the lawful handling decision regarding Shi Yongxin, and agree to revoke his precepts.
I have some ideas myself. First, regarding Shi Yongxin’s class status, I think he can at least be considered a private bourgeoisie (not sure if it counts as monopoly). Shi Yongxin’s decades at Shaolin Temple are basically the decades of so-called “commercialization of Shaolin Temple,” and he even attempted to expand into real estate domestically and internationally multiple times. Shi Yongxin himself definitely profited greatly from this process and lived an indulgent life similar to that of the bourgeoisie.
Then, this incident was exposed once ten years ago, probably due to chaotic private life and misappropriation of the temple’s private property, but at that time, the person was not removed. I think there are two factors. It was 2015, a period when the mid-reform era had passed the high-growth phase following the 2008 economic crisis. Even with such intense public opinion pressure, Shi Yongxin, as a representative figure, could ensure continuous profit growth. Replacing the figurehead would affect profitability (this is mostly a guess; I feel further investigation into the public opinion at that time and the operation status of Shaolin Temple then is needed). Another factor is that the bourgeoisie actually does not believe in these strict rules and disciplines; these issues are quite normal to the bourgeoisie, so they wouldn’t remove someone for violating them.
And today, the person was removed, but I feel it doesn’t seem to be the result of a mass movement, because it was like suddenly exposing this person’s disappearance, and then two or three days later, announcing that he was removed. It feels more like an internal bourgeoisie struggle. Currently, the contradictions between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat are very sharp, which has led to intensified conflicts within the bourgeoisie. So, they used the excuse of strict rules and disciplines to remove this person.
I also have the same feelings. This person has now been caught, and like those corrupt officials exposed in the past, it should be the result of struggles within the bourgeoisie. However, since we do not have specific materials, it is unknown which faction of bureaucratic monopoly bourgeoisie behind Shi Yongxin is connected to.
After contemplating China’s ancient history, in fact, it cannot be viewed in isolation; these abbot masters of the temples should be seen as abstract figures beyond the usual economic and political spheres. In a class society, everyone is inevitably subordinate to a certain class. So, what class should these abbot masters belong to? I looked into ancient Chinese history and found that these so-called monks’ leaders actually controlled a great deal of land and treated the entire monastery as a manor, relying on manor-like economies (and often even extralegal coercion) to exploit the novice monks, lower-ranking monks, and impoverished farmers around the temple.
Today, these temple estate owners and their predecessors are quite similar. For example, Shi Yongxin, who nominally is the abbot of Shaolin Temple, operates Shaolin in a manner similar to capitalist monopolistic companies. He himself has billions of dollars in wealth (only what has been publicly exposed, not counting various undisclosed assets), and he also has deep connections with Chinese government officials. We should clearly point out that in terms of economic and political status, he belongs to the monopoly bourgeoisie group. He lives as a member of China’s ruling class. His exposure and arrest are, frankly, the result of internal struggles within the ruling class and also a form of class struggle, and should not be simply and abstractly regarded as being arrested merely due to corruption, misconduct, or improper personal relationships. After all, for the bourgeoisie, corruption and improper personal relationships are as normal as drinking water.
The abbot and the monastery head of the temple should also be considered part of the monopolistic bourgeoisie. After all, I have seen the information below; the Shaolin Temple they control has extended its reach into various fields, from food production to pharmaceuticals. As for him personally, it’s definitely not because of some scandal involving men and women getting caught; ultimately, it should be the result of internal struggles within the bourgeoisie. No bourgeoisie group is free from scandals involving relationships, and being caught for such reasons is definitely just an excuse.
