Enjoy the world

"Allowing evil will bring evil to oneself; causing disaster will lead to disaster. This is not a good deed, this is not a good category. Those who cause disaster will punish them together, and those who cause disaster will banish them together. If they are not banished, they will be punished. This has been true since ancient times Resolved."

——This is Ding Qi's answer to Bai Shaoliu's hypothesis just now.

Lin Taiwei violated the common punishment, and the evidence was conclusive. Lu Gaogan broke it, and there was no doubt about it.

If Lu Gaoqian was threatened and forced by Lin Taiwei, worried about his own safety and did not dare to report Lin Taiwei, this is another situation.

This often happens in reality. When someone sees a gangster committing murder, he does not dare to stand up and stop him. When he discovers clues about the gangster's evil, he does not dare to report it to the police, for fear that the gangster will harm him.

But Lu Gaoqian does not belong to this situation, and he should not be this kind of person.

Lu Gaoqian is a Kunlun monk and a disciple of Yuanshuo sect, one of the thirteen major sects of Kunlun. By analogy with the above situation, he is equivalent to a civil servant "within the system", such as a police officer.

The situation at that time was that Lin Taiwei was injured after killing Hou Nianming. Even if he was not injured, Lu Gaoqian's cultivation level was much higher than him. Lin Dawei was not a threat to Lu Gaoqian at all, and Lu Gaoqian could completely stop him on the spot.

However, Lu Gaoqian let Lin Taiwei go and concealed it, allowing him to violate the common punishment.

When you have both responsibility and ability, you allow others to do evil and ignore it. If everyone does this, it will endanger everyone and it is a disaster.

If you allow evil, it will be evil; if you let disaster happen, you will go with it.

No matter what his motives were, Lu Gaoqian was simply not qualified to forgive Lin Taiwei. If the perpetrators are not even punished, how can people stop them?

It is not that this kind of thing has never happened in the world of spiritual practice since ancient times. The predecessors have long discussed it closely, and the punishment for this situation has also been decided: those who cause trouble will be punished together, and those who cause trouble will be expelled together.

Needless to say, there is no need to talk about mutual execution. There are several forms of so-called mutual expulsion. The most important one is to abolish cultivation and expel from the sect.

For Dacheng monks, their level of cultivation cannot be destroyed by others. They can be exiled from the world by declaring their own divine energy and magic power, or they can choose to close the barrier of life and death and never appear in the world again.

What if he is just an ordinary person without cultivation? This issue is outside the scope of discussion.

There is no doubt about how Lu Gaogan should be punished.

If Lu Gaoqian had let Lin Dawei go thirty years ago and deliberately concealed his evil deeds, but had done nothing else, the Kunlun Alliance would have expelled him after finding out. But in fact, Lu Gaogan was even more evil. He used this to suppress Lin Taiwei and drove her to continue to do evil, and they should be punished together!

Bai Shaoliu asked again: "Don't you hear that 'put down the butcher's knife and become a Buddha immediately'?"

Hua Zhenxing almost wanted to find a chair to sit down again. Can Bai Shaoliu ask such a question? Of course, this is not what he asked himself. It represents a point of view of some people, or it is based on the previous assumption.

This round of questioning has gone beyond the scope of joint punishment, and is not only talking about Lin Dawei and Lu Gaoqian, nor even just monks, but extends to wider world affairs.

Assuming that Lu Gaoqian let Lin Taiwei go, he had a reason for pity. Mrs. Lin cried bitterly and vowed to change her past, sincerely repent, and never do such a thing again.

The matter has already happened and is irreversible, so why risk Lin Taiwei's life again? If he changes his mind from now on, is it worth saving?

Ding Qi's answer was actually to sing a verse: "After punishment, you will ascend to immortality, and you will become a Buddha after being imprisoned. Put down the butcher knife, and please imprison yourself first. If you don't cross the sea of ​​suffering, there is no talk of Samadhi. If the Buddha does not go to hell, who will go to hell."

Hua Zhenxing suddenly became interested again and stood up straighter. Because of the sravaka wisdom in Teacher Ding’s words, he did not fully understand it given his cultivation and knowledge.

What does it mean to become an immortal after being punished and become a Buddha after being imprisoned? Hua Zhenxing just had a vague feeling, but couldn't figure it out.

Are these two monks debating scriptures? There were also Buddhist monks present, but neither Bai Shaoliu nor Teacher Ding were monks. They didn't seem to be debating the meaning of the scriptures, but just borrowing words.

Hua Zhenxing understood some of the other words.

Putting down the butcher's knife in ordinary people's understanding may mean that the murderer no longer kills. There are many reasons for this. For example, he is too old to lift the knife, the wind is too loud and he dare not anymore, he regrets that he no longer wants to kill, and the person he wanted to kill has already been killed. No more killing people.

But from the perspective of spiritual practice, neither of these situations means putting down the butcher's knife.

People are very familiar with a kind of Buddhist allusion, such as a certain great warlord who committed many murders and a great knight who was famous all over the world. One day, he suddenly got tired of the imperial power and the fighting in the world, and decided to convert to Buddhism...

This kind of story can also add some old material. The hero was awakened by a certain old monk's words, and he suddenly realized that from then on, there was one less butcher in the world and one more monk under the green lamp.

So here comes the question. The butcher is not evaluated here, only the behavior of the old monk is evaluated. Is he a good deed or an evil deed?

Sravaka wisdom is related to everyone’s cognition, so in the ears of Hua Zhenxing, Teacher Ding gave two examples. The first example was actually Jin Datou from the Feiso Gang Datou Gang.

Suppose that before the new alliance appeared, Jin Datou came to Dongguo for a trip, happened to walk into Jiulin Zen Temple in Wucheng, met three old monks, and was inspired by them to realize his past mistakes.

So Jin Datou became a monk in Jiulin Zen Monastery. His bald head was ready-made and did not need to be shaved, or he found a serious job in the local area, such as delivering couriers, part-time Buddhist chanting, and volunteering. In short, he never returned to the Datou Gang to be the leader...

The second example is a serial murderer from Dongguo. He went to Jiulin Temple, found three old monks, confessed his identity and crimes, expressed his willingness to repent, and hoped to hide in the temple. Then he was killed by the old monks. Taken in.

What is the difference between these two examples? The difference is not only whether order exists and whether procedural justice can be achieved? What is more important in the eyes of the monk is the reason why the old monk did this and the resulting results.

Let’s look at the first example first.

At that time, Feso Port was in a state of collapse of order, with countless gold heads openly existing. Jin Datou's purpose is not to escape punishment. No matter whether the old monk dissuades him or not, the officials of Jili Kingdom and Dongguo will not arrest him.

The old monks of Jiulin Chanyuan could not change the current situation of Jili Country, and the neighborhood of Feisuogang was not under their control. They just advised Jin Datou to change his ways, or at least stop doing evil things.

The stories of great warlords and great knights mentioned above basically fall into this situation. There is no order to punish them, otherwise they will go to jail if they should. The temple is not the place where they should come.

For the three old monks, this was a good deed within their power.

As for the second example, the old monk's purpose is to help fugitives avoid punishment, and his behavior is to harbor fugitives. This is an extremely standard evil behavior!

Of course, the three old monks should be taken away by the police station together. If this temple, which deliberately harbors fugitives, is not sealed, the police will be derelict in their duties!

If we talk about repentance, prison is more suitable for atonement; if we talk about praying to Buddha, hell is more suitable for chanting sutras. As for salvation, this is salvation, not only for the butcher, but also for the innocent people.

Some cheaters may want to ask again, what if the fugitive had no choice but to commit the crime, or was he wrongfully accused? This situation is not covered in this question.

Hearing this, Hua Zhenxing was a little confused. Teacher Ding kept asking questions, why did he always give questions to the old monks at Jiulin Temple in Wucheng? Is it to bully them for not being here today?

In fact, Bai Shaoliu's question represents how many people misinterpret metaphysical enlightenment as metaphysical sophistry, and misinterpret the delusions, malice, and ego that should be put aside into actual criminal behavior.

In fact, the very act of "putting down the butcher's knife" includes the act of facing one's guilt calmly. Hua Zhenxing understood, but was still a little surprised. What he wondered was, why would he ask about such a simple truth in this situation?

The discussion went smoothly at this point, with Bai Shaoliu and Teacher Ding answering questions one after another. Everyone present had different sravaka content, but no one interrupted.

At this time, someone suddenly said: "Leader Mei, fellow Taoists, I have something to say."

Following the call, the person speaking was Zhou Rong, the deacon of Zhenhua Sect, a female cultivator who was described as capable. In this Kunlun League investigation, she was also responsible for analyzing and summarizing various information. This should be related to her profession, as she is a lawyer in the secular world.

Ume Yeshi: "Fellow Taoist Zhou, please speak."

Zhou Rong: "Leader Mei mentioned yesterday the destruction of Dingfengtan. Let's not talk about Lu Mubai's subsequent actions. Before he started fighting with Shang Haiping, he actually did not touch Shang Haiping's family.

After he accidentally killed Shang Haiping, he did not touch Shang Haiping's family.

Let’s talk about what happened to Lin Taiwei this time. Let’s not talk about thirty years ago, but only what he did the day before yesterday. From beginning to end, Mrs. Lin did not really touch the families of fellow Taoists Shi Buquan and Shang Ni.

Can their words be undone before they are acted upon? Judging from this alone, should we all be killed together? "

Zhou Rong asked a very special question. She used Lu Mubai and Mrs. Lin as examples and pointed out a specific situation.

Judging from the facts, Lu Mubai did not touch Shang Haiping's family. Later, the Shang family was assassinated by Ling Jiwei, the great magician of Gambistine. This incident became the basis for Ling Jiwei to blackmail Lu Mubai.

As for Lin Taiwei, he only sent a text message containing the identity information of Shi Buquan's children and their grandmother and grandfather. In fact, he did not actually touch the family members of Shi Buquan and his wife.

Should people be punished for things they say but don’t do? Even if a punishment is imposed, is it necessary to implement it according to the standard of "the whole country must punish him together"?

In other words, if you are jointly hunted down by the Kunlun Alliance just for saying something nice, is the "sentencing" too severe?

Hua Zhenxing couldn't help but frown secretly when he heard this. This was a secret change of concept. How could anyone ask such a question in this situation? Patriarch Zhengyi should have made it very clear at the Zhengyi Sanshan Meeting 1,200 years ago.

But looking at today’s format, I still have to take it out and talk about it again!

Times are progressing, and the achievements of future generations will always be higher than those of their predecessors. But don’t forget that the progress of future generations is also based on the achievements of predecessors. The achievements of each era are not created by contemporary people from scratch.

With the development of the times, some things that do not meet the requirements of the times need to be eliminated and changes need to be made, but this does not mean that the achievements of previous generations have to be completely negated and the cornerstone of development has to be shaken.

The progress of the times is not inevitable. Where there is progress, there may be regression, and even decline, collapse and destruction.

For example, in Hua Zhenxing's eyes, the fact that Fang Wai Sect has replaced Yuan Shuo Sect and become one of the twenty-five executive sects of the Kunlun League is a kind of progress and even a major breakthrough change.

But what does it mean when someone brings up the topic of sharing the punishment?

Just listen to Mei Yeshi's answer: "Words are actions, and punishing them together means admonishing them. Otherwise, there is no need to set a warning. It is our responsibility to punish them together, not someone else's right."

Hua Zhenxing was introduced by Guangren to how Patriarch Zhengyi preached the common punishment. In comparison, Ume Yeshi's answer today did not have any outstanding features and seemed stable. Maybe it was because the occasion and audience were different.

Umenoishi first pointed out the concept that speech itself is a kind of behavior, not another thing independent of behavior.

The reason why many times we refer to "words and deeds" together and emphasize the difference between "how to say" and "how to do" is simply because speech is a unique behavior that sometimes cannot determine the outcome of the behavior.

People's wishes may not always come true, and what people say may not always come true. Even Dacheng Zhenren can't do it, even if they are sincere.

Speech is only part of the entire behavioral process and does not represent the entire behavior. But on the contrary, we cannot deny the fact that speech is also part of behavior.

Speech itself will also have consequences, and if there are consequences, you must bear responsibility.

Then Ume Yeshi emphasized that the main purpose of joint punishment is to establish precepts for words, focusing on this special behavior, and there is a premise that both parties to the behavior are monks.

It does not define the behavior between ordinary people, nor does it define the behavior between monks and ordinary people. It only establishes precepts between monks and monks.

The content of the common punishment is very simple, that is, no matter any conflict occurs between monks, they must not threaten each other's family members.

This is very clear, not even blackmail is allowed, let alone any harm. There is no concept of "the speaker has no fault" when punishing people together.

Why is it so strict? Because both parties involved are monks, there is no way to prevent or stop this kind of behavior. Once it occurs, it will cause serious consequences.

To give a very simple example, for example, A and B are competing for a magic weapon. A says to B: "If you don't give me the magic weapon, your whole family will get sick!" He doesn't even need to say I want to kill your whole family, just give him Just a hint.

How can B choose? Will he continue to fight for this magic weapon, or ensure the safety of his family?

If you choose the latter, you will be succumbing to the other party's threat; if you choose the former, you will face a moral dilemma and become a magic weapon regardless of the safety of your family.

If we look at the causes, in fact, A should not behave like this at all.

Someone said again, B can choose to fight A on the spot! But not everyone has the courage to fight, not to mention that B may not be A's opponent. Even if they are equally powerful, there is no guarantee that they will be able to kill A and prevent A from escaping.

Others may be clever and come up with a bad idea: If A says this, then B can also say the same. For example, A says that if B does not withdraw from the fight, he will kill B's whole family. B also says that if A dares to do this, he will also kill A's whole family.

Isn't there a worse suggestion in the world than playing a Prisoner's Dilemma between two extremely evil men? What's the worst outcome? All the relatives and family members of A and B suffer innocently?

Turning the question back again, even if according to the most ideal model, B's cultivation level is higher than that of A, and he immediately shoots A to death, then he still has to face Zhou Rong's question just now, why is B just saying hello? Just kill A?

Faced with this kind of questioning, how can B defend himself?

The information contained in Umenoishi's sravaka wisdom is much more complex than what is mentioned above.

For example, another possibility appeared in Hua Zhenxing's ears. For example, Fu Lingke went to Mei Yeshi and asked Mei Yeshi to kill Hua Zhenxing, otherwise he would kill Mei Yeshi's family.

This kind of thing is absurd and almost impossible to happen in reality. It is just a hypothesis.

With Mei Yeshi's cultivation level, he could definitely shoot Fu Lingke to death on the spot. But Fu Lingke also told Mei Yeshi that it was useless to shoot him to death. He still had accomplices who would take action immediately as long as he died.

So what should Umenoshi do? Should he choose to save the lives of his family or the life of Shinko?

If you think this way, you will actually fall into a thinking trap - the thinking trap drawn by Fu Lingke, but why should you follow the ideas drawn by this kind of person?

The reality is simple. Mei Yeshi has no right to harm Hua Zhenxing in order to protect his family. He only has the responsibility to stop Fu Lingke's behavior.

The words spoken by the monks must not be understood as the praise of ordinary people, because they are not ordinary people. They can do what they say. The higher the cultivation level, the more so. If they are Dacheng monks, they will do it even if they say it. made.

If he really wanted to do it, ordinary people wouldn't be able to guard against it.

Hua Zhenxing suddenly remembered a warning that Old Man Yang had given him. If a gangster points a gun at you, you should never bet on whether the other person's gun has bullets or whether his marksmanship is accurate enough.

This principle applies not only to the person who was pointed at by the gangster, but also to the police who rushed to the scene and the onlookers. The monk himself is equivalent to a gun. When he makes such a threat, it must not be regarded as oral pleasure.

The purpose of establishing common punishment is to get out of this thinking trap and try to keep all monks away from this dilemma. Its main significance is not to punish them afterwards.

If the purpose is only to punish the person afterward, then it is enough to simply take the precept of conduct, and there is no need to set up a special precept of joint punishment. Draw a red line in advance. This red line must not be touched. Whoever touches it will die and the whole world will be punished.

Umenoshi's words should be clear enough. But Zhou Rong still asked: "Leader Mei, I still have some doubts. Lu Mubai back then and Lin Taiwei the day before yesterday had already fallen into a certain death situation after their words were spoken but before they were implemented.

In such a situation, we can only fight with trapped beasts, kill people and silence them, or be restrained by others. There is no possibility of turning back. Isn't there a better solution to this matter?

The reason for saying this is that the common punishment has been established for thousands of years, and there are still people who violate it today, such as Lu Mubai and Lin Taiwei. These have been identified. How many have not been identified?

Therefore, Lu Mubai was controlled by Ling Jiwei, and Lin Taiwei was controlled by Lu Gaogan, and then the disaster was even greater. The joint punishment did not prevent his behavior, but made him suffer even greater evil. How can we avoid it? "

Zhou Rong did not have a great level of cultivation, and of course she did not master spiritual thoughts, let alone the wisdom and magical powers of the more sravakas, so she spoke normally, but Hua Zhenxing was shocked when she heard her words.

What surprised Hua Zhenxing was not Zhou Rong's question itself, but that someone would say such a thing! This is like discussing the four arithmetic operations within one hundred in a college mathematics class, which inevitably gives people a sense of absurdity.

Perhaps because of his professional relationship, when seeing Zhou Rong, Hua Zhenxing inexplicably remembered the former Dong Zegang.

Zhou Rong tried to put forward a suggestion in the name of "how to better implement the common punishment commandment". In Hua Zhenxing's view, this is to blur the clear rules and increase the room for human manipulation.

Ume Yeshi just mentioned the debate between words and deeds, and Zhou Rong demonstrated it on the spot. Is the purpose of Zhou Rong's statement to better implement the common punishment? of course not!

Know your actions by words, see the cause and effect. From being punished for violating the common precepts, to being exempted from punishment under certain circumstances, it depends on how those in power operate whether they will be punished or not.

Zhou Rong also implicitly questioned the necessity of the common punishment. The common punishment has been in existence for more than a thousand years, but it has not stopped people today from continuing to violate the common punishment.

In this case, is it still necessary to have the common punishment precept?

Some opinions are not worth refuting, let alone should not be raised in this situation. Since ancient times, the law has prohibited the killing of innocent people, but people have committed crimes since ancient times and today.

You can easily come to the conclusion that the existence of laws prohibiting murder does not prevent the emergence of murderers in the world. But you cannot conclude from this that there is no need for laws against killing.

Because what is not happening is invisible to people. Because of the existence of joint executions, the behavior of threatening each other among monks has been greatly reduced, so that everyone has no worries. This has long been the consensus of the Kunlun cultivation community.

Zhou Rong probably also felt that this was inappropriate, so the conversation changed to - is it necessary to modify the precept of joint punishment?

She still used Lu Mubai as an example. Before he really caused serious consequences, he was already facing the situation of being punished by the whole world. On the contrary, he would be forced into a situation of life and death, or he would have to be restrained.

The implication is, are today's collective punishments too harsh? This question is even more confusing and truly represents the rhythm that some people want to lead.

At this time, someone suddenly chanted: "Drunk cows are trampling green seedlings. If you can't do it, there will be no heaven. It's hard to find a way to reach the clouds with ten thousand gold, but it depends on a few pennies from the farmer!"

From what I heard, the person who spoke was Tao Ranke, the leader of the casual cultivators from Kunlun Wonderland and the most senior monk present.

Immediately afterwards, another person spoke up and said: "After Huanhou became terminally ill, he suspected that people in the world would seek medicine and moxibustion. He has learned the art of immortality in this life, so why do he see things and think obscenely?"

The person who answered the call was a Taoist priest, Yang Jidao, the master of Fanglong Temple. He can also be regarded as the proprietor of this place.

Nian Qiuye, a deacon of the Xiaoyao sect, also said: "In the spring, we sow wheat to make a living, and we wrap ourselves in weaving to keep out the cold winter. I see that all life is inevitable, and you said that the biggest problem is food and clothing."

Hua Zhenxing had never seen this scene before. Could it be Zhou Rong's words that ignited everyone's creative enthusiasm? In fact, the poems recited by these people are very special, called prophecy poems or verse poems.

Hua Zhenxing almost became interested, but in the end he didn't even open his mouth to compose a song. He had made up his mind to keep silent as much as possible today. Besides, he wasn't good at it, so he seemed to have to continue learning.

If Hua Zhenxing heard it correctly, these people seemed to be cursing?

The purpose of establishing the common punishment is to protect everyone present, so is the purpose of the questioner to protect those who have committed the common punishment?

Where should we focus our thoughts: to protect ourselves and our loved ones from harm; or to try our best to prevent those who try to harm us from being punished?

Lu Mubai committed a crime and had to be coerced by Ling Jiwei in order to survive. Mrs. Lin committed a crime and had to be coerced by Lu Gaogan in order to survive. Is this a matter of sharing the precept?

Everyone has to eat, and everyone will die. Whether you eat or not, you will inevitably die, so there is no need to eat, or should you simply attribute the cause of death to eating?

Now I just want to ask, would you like to have another monk threaten you with your family members? If the answer is "no", then a basic consensus has been reached on sharing the punishment.

If this consensus is not recognized, the Kunlun Alliance will no longer need to exist... This is probably what these people want to express.

Mei Yeshi did not sing the verses and recited the poems. After they finished reciting the poems, he asked without changing his expression: "Lu Gaoqian can be punished at this moment, and why should he be punished?"

This sentence is a self-question and answer, because Lu Gaoqian is not dead yet, and is still locked in the sword intention of Master He Feng, standing beside the clearing.

Ume Yeshi talks about the principles of discussion and execution of the Kunlun League, which are consistent with the principles of order and governance in the world.

Some people may only see voting, but voting itself has no substantive meaning. It is just a way of authorizing a certain order. The twenty-five sects present were responsible for the execution of the sect and had no right to directly decide the life or death of Lu Gaoqian.

This is like a tribe that lost something and the thief failed to catch it, so all the tribe members voted to decide who was the thief... This approach and result are meaningless and should not be done.

The principle of true order is that everyone first reaches a consensus that stealing is wrong and agrees on what kind of punishment it needs to be punished. So when theft occurs, first get evidence to prove that someone stole something.

After we have evidence and catch the thief, we will decide how to punish him according to the agreement of the tribe. If the agreement is not implemented in accordance with the agreement, then no matter whether it is forgiveness or heavy punishment, there will be no basis for it, and the agreement of the tribe will also lose its meaning.

On this occasion today, the basis for everyone's discussion is the consensus reached by the Kunlun Alliance. But what Zhou Rong asked just now went beyond this scope and turned into whether to overturn the consensus.

Zhou Rong still spoke: "Then I have one last question. Ruo Lu Mubai and Ruo Lin Taiwei have just spoken and the matter has not yet been completed. How can they be undone?"

Mei Yeshi: "Just now, Master Bai and Master Ding had a discussion, and they mentioned, 'Put down the butcher's knife and ask yourself to be imprisoned first'. Let go of the butcher's knife when it is time to put it down, there is still a glimmer of hope!"

He should admit his mistake on the spot, swear not to commit it, bear the thorn in the sect, and spread the word to Kunlun. This glimmer of hope has existed since ancient times, and there is no need to discuss it further. Now that someone has asked about it today, let’s make it clear. "

Hearing this, Hua Zhenxing suddenly understood why Bai Shaoliu and Ding Qi had just asked and answered like that. Why did they put down the butcher knife? It turns out that the story continues here!

Ume Yeshi formally answered the question raised by Zhou Rong, still taking Lu Mubai as an example.

Let’s start with the story about Lu Mubai’s violation of the common punishment. It was his daughter Zhuang Yangquan who married Kunlun monk Shang Haiping. As a result, Zhuang Yangquan hooked up with the foreign businessman Ling Jiwei and gave birth to a fat mixed-race child seven months after the marriage. boy.

In a rage, Shang Haiping smashed up his house and ran to confront Zhuang Yangquan, but Ling Jiwei actually jumped out to stop him. Shang Haiping could not hold back and beat Ling Jiwei. The injury was judged to be minor by the judicial department.

As a result, Shang Haiping was taken into the police station and almost faced criminal liability. Fortunately, he was fished out by his family.

The Shang family couldn't swallow this breath. They still had some influence in the local area, so they decided to send Zhuang Yangquan and Ling Jiwei in. Ling Jiwei's criminal evidence was difficult to collect, but Zhuang Yangquan's criminal evidence was still obtained, mainly involving economic crimes.

After hearing the news, Lu Mubai made a private appointment with Shang Haiping and asked him to let Zhuang Yangquan go. Shang Haiping said that he did not do this, but that his family could not just let it go.

Lu Mubai asked Shang Haiping to go back and stop his family, otherwise Lu Mubai would do it himself. As soon as these words came out, the expressions of both of them changed. Shang Haiping asked on the spot: "Master Lu, do you know the rule of sharing the death penalty?"

What Zhou Rong wanted to ask just now was what should Lu Mubai do in this situation?

Mei Yeshi gave a clear answer. At this time, Lu Mubai did still have a glimmer of hope. It was the verse that Ding Qi had just sung, "Put down the butcher's knife, please imprison yourself first."

Lu Mubai may be able to think of other ways to help his daughter, but he must not use this method to blackmail Shang Haiping.

He needs to frankly admit to Shang Haiping that he should not have issued such a threat just now, and swear that he will never do that, and then go back to inform the sect of the incident and inform the Kunlun Alliance.

In this case, the Kunlun Alliance will not kill him, and there is no need to mobilize the world to kill him. But the head of Lumu Bai Dingfengtan will definitely not be able to do it, and being grounded in front of the wall is probably the lightest punishment.

If Lu Mubai still wants to act in the human world, then his magical powers will be banned and he will not be able to use them again for life. The Kunlun League has long concluded this situation, and it is actually written in the sect rules of all major sects, including Dingfengtan.

Of course Lu Mubai knew this, and so did Zhou Rong, who asked the question just now.

Although this kind of punishment left a glimmer of hope, it seemed too harsh. But then I thought about it again, is it really that heavy? From the perspective of an ordinary person, there is actually no punishment. Lu Mubai can still be an ordinary person!

If Lu Mubai had chosen this way, he might not have died, and the Dingfengtan sect would not have been destroyed.

With this glimmer of hope, can Lu Mubai be prevented from taking risks? Actually not! Lu Mubai knew this, but still chose to attack Shang Haiping.

He may want to kill someone and silence him, or he may want to capture Shang Haiping and force him to keep the secret. In short, the difference between his thoughts is a dead end.

This matter was originally a trap set by Jim Malinaguez, the great magician of Gambistine under the pseudonym Ling Jiwei, and Lumubai stepped into the trap himself.

For more than 20 years, no one knew about this inside story because Lu Mubai, Ling Jiwei, and Shang Haiping were all dead. It wasn't until last month when Dan Zicheng, the top disciple of Sanmeng Sect, went to help Zhuang Yangquan move that he discovered the clues.

After Mei Yeshi finished speaking, He Feng spoke again: "At this point in the discussion, the fate has been clearly understood. The confusion has been solved today. If someone makes noise again in the future, they should join in the disaster. This is Kunlun's decision!"

Mei Yeshi then asked: "Do you have any objections to the execution of high-ranking officials in Lu?"

The representatives of the twenty-five execution sects present had no objections. Mei Yeshi looked at Lu Gaoqian again and said: "Master Lu, please make your own decision."

But Lu Gaoqian shook his head and said: "I am a poor man who does not make his own decision. Please be punished. Who are you waiting for to take action?"

Ume Yeshi stretched out his hand and held out an antique bronze mirror. Ding Qi hurriedly stepped forward and said: "Leader Mei used the Qingming Mirror to kill Lu Gaogan, which would harm Tianhe, so it is better for Fangwaimen to do it."

At this time, someone else said: "Director Hua was injured because of this, so let Director Hua kill him with his own hands!"

Hua Zhenxing was slightly startled, why is there anything about him here? But he made up his mind to pretend that he didn't hear it, and didn't even look over. However, Wang Fengshou, who was standing behind him, frowned slightly.

Of course Wang Fengshou didn't move or speak, but in Hua Zhenxing's soul image, he seemed to see Ambassador Wang taking out a small notebook and jotting down something. This is similar to psychological profiling, and can be regarded as a kind of psychic communication in a sense.

Before he finished speaking, there was a flash of sword light, and Lu Gaoqian suddenly withered to the ground. It turned out that Xian Hao walked out from Ding Qi and stabbed her without saying a word. By the time everyone reacted, she had already put away the sword and went back.

Of course Lu Gaoqian was much higher than Xian Hao in terms of cultivation, but at this moment he was restrained by the sword intention of Master He Feng and had no way to escape. Then there was a scene that stunned many people.

The sword that Xian Hao struck was very special. It was not so much the light of the sword as the trajectory of the sword swallowed up the light. The shadow swept Lu Gaoqian's figure without leaving any scars. Lu Gaoqian immediately withered to the ground and lost his life.

Under the gaze of everyone, they could see that his body was quickly drying up and cracking...and scattered into dust on the ground, leaving only his hairpins.

Many people were shocked, but Mei Yeshi remained calm. Xian Hao could still leave some residue when he used the knife. If he were allowed to use the Qing Ming Mirror, there wouldn't even be ashes left.

Mei Yeshi: "Lu Gaoqian has been executed! Everyone, please remember that the commandment to kill together must be executed together! It is Kunlun's responsibility to kill together, not our right!"

Having said this, Hua Zhenxing suddenly understood, and finally understood why the Kunlun League arranged for Zhou Rong to ask such a series of questions today, just to clarify the nature of the joint punishment.

The core of the joint punishment precept does not lie in stipulating that a certain behavior is prohibited, but in the word "share the punishment".

This is a responsibility that the Kunlun Alliance must bear, not a power that can be chosen. Some people question the common punishment. I am afraid that the purpose is to turn the responsibilities that must be borne into the power that can be chosen.

The safety of the magician's ordinary relatives and family members must not be threatened. There are similar provisions in the Code of Magicians of Gambiste, but the difference between it and the Kunlun Shared Execution Command lies in the word "shared execution".

It must be punished by the whole world. There is no such common agreement in Gambistine. It may be a problem of organization and execution ability, but more importantly, it is a different logical starting point.

If someone violates the Common Execution Commandment, they will be hunted down collectively by the Kunlun Alliance. The most important guarantee of strength is the twenty-five sects executing the sect. This is a collective responsibility and an unshirkable obligation for them.

There is an essential difference between having the right to deal with something and having the responsibility to deal with it.