English
"", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "english_translations": [ "English version:", "However, the Nirvana Sutra speaks of the Hinayana precepts. Bodhisattvas are not like that; any object belonging to another constitutes a grave offense. Generally, the possessions of the Three Jewels (Buddha, Dharma, Sangha) are difficult to manage, and establishing rules for what is permissible and forbidden is challenging. As the Mahāsaṃnipāta Sūtra says, the Buddha allows two types of people to manage them: an Arhat (one who has attained enlightenment) and a Srotaāpanna (one who has entered the stream). There are also two other types: one who upholds the precepts and has discernment, and one who fears sin and has a sense of shame.", "According to these teachings, the abbot said that although the rules of conduct are as described in the Hinayana Vinaya, if killing is beneficial, it should be done. The appearance of all Buddhas is for the purpose of promoting the Dharma, and the purpose of promoting the Dharma is for the sake of sentient beings. What can't be used to promote the Dharma and benefit sentient beings? Except for having a defiled mind and lacking benefit. However, the Hinayana precepts cannot be mixed and matched, not even by the Buddha, because it goes against the intention of giving.", "However, Bodhisattvas also use the possessions of the Buddha. As the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra says, Bodhisattvas first purify their possessions by giving them with pure intention to all the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas in the ten directions. When they see someone coming to ask for something, if it is unreasonable, they politely say, 'This belongs to someone else,' to send them away. If it is reasonable, they should think, 'There is nothing so small that the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas would not give it to sentient beings.' Knowing this, they take the purified object of giving and give it to the one who comes to ask, fulfilling their wishes.", "However, the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya says that food offered to the Buddha's stupa can be given to those who repair the stupa. The Mahīśāsaka Vinaya says that if a layperson enters a monastery and the monks do not give them food, they will become resentful; the Buddha said they should be given food. The Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya says that those who harm the monastery and those who benefit the monastery should both be given. The Sarvāstivāda Vinaya allows for the provision of kings, ministers, and thieves. Hinayana precepts are so narrow, yet they recognize benefit and harm; how much more so should Mahayana precepts not be fixed.", "Question: The Sarvāstivāda Vinaya says that stealing the Buddha's relics and offering them with a pure heart, thinking, 'For them, I am also a teacher; for me, they are also teachers,' is not an offense. But selling them is an offense. Why is stealing considered a grave offense in the law, since the Dharma is also a teacher?", "Answer: Respect for the Buddha can be expressed from afar; understanding of the Dharma arises through interaction. However, the Bodhisattva precepts recognize that the other person will not use it; stealing with a pure heart to learn should not be an offense. But if it is known that it will obstruct the other person's good deeds, stealing from the Buddha is also a grave offense.", "Question: The Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra and the Abhidharmakośa say that robbing the Sangha's possessions disrupts the harmony of the Sangha. Why does the Mahāsaṃnipāta Sūtra say that the sin of stealing from the Sangha exceeds the five heinous crimes (matricide, patricide, Arhat-slaying, wounding a Buddha, and creating schism in the Sangha)? The Vaipulya Sutra says that I can save those who commit the four grave offenses (killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, and lying) and the five heinous crimes, but I cannot save those who steal from the Sangha?", "Answer: The expectations are different. Disrupting the Sangha is only temporary and is directed at the present Sangha." ] } --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
。盗和合财普障三世常住僧道。非亲障圣故名同类。言劫贼物者。物已属彼。律不许夺。如律云。贼夺贼物。五分云。有比丘为贼所剥。争得衣物。然疑问佛。佛言不犯。菩萨不然。如瑜伽云。菩萨见有增上宰官上品暴恶于诸有情无慈逼恼。起怜愍心废增上位。见劫盗贼夺他财物若僧伽物率堵波物执为己有。利乐意乐随力逼夺。勿令受用受长夜苦。所夺财宝各还其本。乃至广说。菩萨如是虽不与取而无违犯生多功德。如五分云争衣比丘。若菩萨戒由悭财罪。若护彼罪生多功德。如是所说但有主物于无义利盗心取。乃至一草犯波罗夷。若于己物或无主物或于有主。迷谓无主。或虽有主不作盗心。不成盗故若于己物谓他而盗。或无主物谓有主物。传说。约心结重方便。彼物实非犯重境故。若于有主迷谓无主后知不还。或于人物谓非人物。或求余物余人物替。传说皆重。是犯境故。云何名为无主。物耶。如他弃等。善见论云。子作恶事。父母趁出。后父母死。其物无主。婆娑等云。二国中间伏藏等也。若尔百姓取山林等应盗王物。不尔。国王拟养彼故。声闻法中五钱方重。今欲简异言一针草。言菩萨下第四门也。孝顺慈悲名为佛性。菩萨由此异二乘故。生福者利益故。生乐者安乐故。而盗人物生彼烦恼故违利益。夺命缘故亦 现代汉语译本 盗取和合僧众的财物，普遍障碍三世常住的僧众修行。因为不是亲属，所以障碍圣道，因此被称为同类罪。说到抢劫贼人的财物，是因为财物已经属于他们，戒律不允许夺取。如同戒律所说：‘从贼人手中夺取贼赃。’《五分律》说：‘有比丘被盗贼抢劫，争夺回衣物。’然后疑问佛陀，佛陀说不犯戒。但菩萨不是这样。《瑜伽师地论》说：‘菩萨见到有权势的宰官，极其暴虐，对众生没有慈悲心，逼迫恼害他们，菩萨生起怜悯心，废除他的高位。见到强盗盗取他人财物，或者僧伽的财物，或者佛塔的财物，据为己有，为了利益和快乐众生，尽力逼迫夺取，不让他们受用，免受长夜的痛苦。所夺取的财宝，各自归还其原本的主人。’乃至广说。菩萨这样做，虽然是不予而取，但没有违犯戒律，反而产生很多功德。如同《五分律》中争夺衣物的比丘。如果受菩萨戒，因为吝啬财物而犯罪，如果为了保护他人免受罪恶，反而会产生很多功德。’像这样所说的，只是对于有主之物，因为没有意义和利益，以盗心去取，乃至一根草，都犯波罗夷罪（Parajika，断头罪）。如果是自己的财物，或者无主之物，或者对于有主之物，误以为是无主之物，或者虽然知道是有主之物，但不生起盗心，就不构成盗窃罪。如果是自己的财物，误认为是别人的财物而盗取，或者无主之物，误认为是有主之物，传说，根据心念的轻重来判断罪行的轻重，因为那件东西实际上不是犯重罪的对象。如果对于有主之物，误以为是无主之物，后来知道了也不归还，或者对于人所有的东西，认为是无生命的物品，或者想要其他的物品，却拿了其他的物品代替，传说都是重罪，因为这是犯戒的对象。什么叫做无主之物呢？如同他人丢弃的物品等。《善见律毗婆沙》说：‘儿子做了恶事，父母把他赶出去，后来父母死了，他的财物就成了无主之物。’《婆沙论》等说：‘两国中间的伏藏等也是无主之物。’如果这样，百姓取用山林等物，岂不是盗取国王的财物？不是的，因为国王是为了供养百姓才这样做的。在声闻法中，五钱才算重罪，现在为了区分不同，所以说一针一草。‘言菩萨下’是第四门的内容。孝顺慈悲叫做佛性（Buddha-nature）。菩萨因为具有佛性，所以不同于二乘（声闻和缘觉）。‘生福者’是为了利益众生，‘生乐者’是为了让众生安乐，而盗取他人的财物，会使他们产生烦恼，所以违背了利益众生的原则。夺取生命的原因也是如此。