(Minghui.org) Laozi, an ancient sage in China, is commonly known as the founder of Taoism. His writing Tao Te Ching has inspired countless people across civilizations. But few people knew he was once involved in a lawsuit. To make things more absurd, the plaintiff was his own attendant.
According to Taiping Guangji (also known as Records of the Taiping Era) compiled during the Song Dynasty, Laozi had an attendant called Xu Jia. Instead of feeling fortunate to serve the great sage, Xu had his own concerns–unpaid wages by Laozi. According to the legend, Laozi had promised to pay Xu 100 coins a day. Having accompanied Laozi for 200 years, it would amount to 7.3 million coins. Rather than celebrating his longevity and unprecedented Taoist connection, Xu pondered: When on earth can I get my money?
An opportunity presented itself when Laozi and Xu traveled westward and arrived at Hangu Pass. Someone at the inn they stayed at claimed to be good at drafting letters and legal documents. Xu told his story and begged to have a legal document drafted to sue Laozi. Thrilled by the potential large settlement, this person finished the document in no time and promised to marry his own daughter off to Xu after winning the lawsuit.
Yin Xi, the head government official of Hangu Pass, had long sought to study Taoism but could not find a real master. While sitting in meditation the night before, he saw a purple aura coming from the east and knew a sage would come. Upon seeing Laozi, he kowtowed to the great sage with the hope of becoming his disciple. Yin Xi then discovered he had to rule on the lawsuit against the sage first.
Inside the court room, Laozi said that Xu would have died a long time ago without the Taoist talisman from the sage, and that upon arriving at their final destination, Xu would have received much more than what he had expected. Since Xu could not wait, Laozi said he would retrieve his Taoist talisman through Xu’s mouth.
After Laozi finished that sentence, a white light flew from Xu’s mouth and Xu collapsed instantly, transforming into an aged skeleton. The onlookers realized that Laozi’s talisman not only extended Xu’s life by 200 years but also paved his path to enlightenment, if only Xu could have walked to the end.
Did Laozi owe Xu money, or did Xu owe Laozi for all these blessings? It appears that money cannot buy longevity or spiritual enlightenment. Laozi could grant all this, but only if people were not shortsighted by greed.
After destroying five thousand years of traditional Chinese culture, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is now exhausting its resources to persecute Falun Gong practitioners for their belief in the virtues of Truthfulness-Compassion-Forbearance, which is rooted in traditional Chinese culture. Unfortunately, few international media outlets paid attention to this--until a lawsuit was filed against Shen Yun Performing Arts.
Shen Yun is known for illustrating the profound, authentic Chinese dynasties in an era before communism. So it’s hard to imagine that a former Fei Tian College student from Taiwan would sue the school or Shen Yun, though this happened shortly after her visit to mainland China.
But the student was not alone. Immediately after the lawsuit was filed, Nicole Hong, a reporter for The New York Times, published a piece attacking Shen Yun. The article depicted how hardworking Shen Yun performers were but asserted that they are being paid low wages.
But the article seems to have ignored a larger context–had the CCP not destroyed the five-thousand-year-long history of Chinese civilization, or had they not persecuted Falun Gong, Shen Yun Performing Arts would not exist. By attacking Shen Yun, isn’t The New York Times aiding and abetting a tyrannical regime?
The New York Times’ stance can likely be traced back to 2001, when its former publisher, Arthur Sulzberger Jr., and several editors met Jiang Zemin, the former CCP leader who launched the persecution of Falun Gong. Since then, the paper has repeatedly disseminated CCP propaganda maligning Falun Gong.
Students who study art usually make little money after graduation, except for a few successful individuals at the top of the pyramid. However, artists often have to supplement their income with other jobs to support themselves. Except for students from affluent backgrounds, most families cannot afford to support their children in pursuing the arts. Many families hope for their children to go into medicine, computer science, or business so they’ll be able to support themselves after graduation.
So why are Falun Gong practitioners willing to send their children to train at Fei Tian College? I think the reason is simple. Shen Yun is not here to make money, though it does sell tickets and merchandise in order to maintain its operations and pay basic wages. But Shen Yun's raison d'etre is for it performances to help audience members learn about traditional Chinese culture and how the CCP has been persecuting people for their faith in Truthfulness-Compassion-Forbearance.
The New York Times’s stated mission is to “seek the truth and help people understand the world.” But has the newspaper factually reported on the CCP and what it has done to China and the world?
There happen to be many kindhearted people who are able to see the valuable contributions of young Shen Yun performers and musicians. In fact, there are many other unsung heroes, such as the elderly Falun Gong practitioners who’ve been raising awareness of the persecution in front of Chinese Consulates year round, as well as younger practitioners who voluntarily promote Shen Yun in their communities on weekends and holidays.
And this is in spite of the fact that CCP agents have threatened venues, vandalized Shen Yun vehicles, and even assaulted Falun Gong practitioners who raise awareness of the persecution. All this has been exposed by Minghui correspondents, global reporters, and editors for the past 25 years. These efforts arise from their conscience and steadfast faith.
Nicole Hong (also known as Hong Qianqian), the lead author of The New York Times articles attacking Shen Yun, is the daughter of George Hong (also known as Hong Chaohui). George served as an an honorary overseas director of the Western Returned Scholars Association. This organization is affiliated with the CCP’s United Front Work Department, which is responsible for infiltrating governments outside China and collecting intelligence. When this relationship was exposed by international media, the CCP’s domestic media immediately deleted the relevant reports.
How many people today are making the same choice that Xu Jia did 2,500 years ago? Should media entities bow down to totalitarian regimes or strive to uphold higher principles?