English
Ur ro, that is the meaning of saying so. Is it not the case that a śrāmaṇera does not have disciples? If so, how does it become a fault to say "not mine"? It is true, but it is done so following the scriptures. In the scriptures, mentioning disciples is in terms of the elders, therefore śrāmaṇeras have the same upādhyāya and those who act as teachers, etc. It should be understood that it becomes a fault to steal these. That fault should also be distinguished according to the intention. If, in this way, with regard to these, the thought arises, "I will take possession of offerings, etc.," then it will lead to downfall. Or, if one wishes that these do not become obstacles to ordination, then it is for the sake of others, therefore it does not become a fault, just like liberating the wife of Anāthapiṇḍada, etc. If that is the case, then why did the Blessed One say that it leads to downfall? It is according to the intention, and the basis of the intention is just what was said before. "Animal wealth," etc., is to show what kind of fault is incurred if one steals grain, etc., possessed by animals. The owner of the animal is the animal owner, and the animal owner is a person. The owner of the animal's wealth is also the owner of the animal's wealth, because it is like adorning them with ornaments, etc., as if they were children. Because the thought of raising them is truly present and related, therefore whoever is the owner of the animal is also the owner of the animal's wealth. The word "ni" means "because." "Also" is a conjunction. "For the sake of obtaining," etc., all of these that will be explained, are implicitly showing that it is only because of the collection of causes that a fault is incurred. Because if the wealth has two owners, then if the thought arises, "I will steal these ornaments that should be made," the fault will become smaller. Or, if the thought arises, "I will steal a person," then the fault will be incurred as it is. Specifically excluding the object of great attachment, it is said, "food." Because it is to be eaten, food is edible.