Lzh Dg Bu Pm 2 Ss 4Encouraging Someone to Serve One’s Desires

Encouraging Someone to Serve One’s Desires

Attakāmpāricariya
Comparative Vinaya — Chinese | No.: Lzh Dg Bu Pm 2 Ss 4

---

Source Status

This is an AI-generated commentary compiled by Inti Dharma, not a translation of the original canonical text. The source text belongs to the Chinese Comparative Vinaya, within the tradition of Comparative Sectarian Buddhist Scriptures, and at present the full text has not been directly accessed and compared in this database. Therefore, everything presented below is based only on the provided descriptive information, including the sequence number, Vietnamese title, English title, and original term, together with general understanding of the scope, genre, and purpose of corresponding rules in traditional Buddhist Vinaya. Students should consult the original text or an authenticated translation for precise reference.

---

Background

The Chinese Comparative Vinaya is a scholarly comparative work that gathers and compares training rules from various Buddhist schools, schools that formed after the division of the Sangha in the first centuries after the Buddha’s nirvana. The aim of this kind of work is to clarify similarities and differences in how different traditions present, classify, and explain the same disciplinary act.

The original term Attakāmpāricariya comes from Pāli and may be analyzed as: atta (self, oneself), kāma (desire, sensual or bodily desire), and pāricariya (service, attendance, acts of serving or indulging). Taken together, the term refers to conduct involving inciting, requesting, or arranging for another person to serve one’s own desires, a violation of the conduct of a renunciant, especially serious when it involves exploiting a dependent relationship within the Sangha.

This rule lies in item 4 of the second group (Ss 4, Pm 2), within the rules for bhikkhus (Bu), suggesting that it is a training rule belonging to the group regulating speech or communication that is seductive or inciting, usually classified as an offense lighter than pārājika but still requiring confession or handling through Sangha procedure.

---

Content Identifiable from the Descriptive Information

Based on the title and original term, this rule concerns the conduct of a bhikkhu who uses speech or action to incite, suggest, or request another person, often a layperson or someone in a dependent relationship, to perform an act serving his bodily desire.

The focus of the rule is not necessarily only sexual conduct in the narrow sense, but may include any form of incitement intended to satisfy kāma, that is, desires belonging to the senses, through the intervention, coordination, or arrangement of a third party. This shows that Buddhist discipline is concerned not only with direct action, but also with intention, inciting speech, and the exploitation of authority or status within the Sangha to satisfy personal needs.

The comparative nature of this collection implies that this rule is recorded and compared across multiple schools, confirming that this was a common concern in the Buddhist Vinaya tradition, regardless of textual or linguistic differences among the schools.

---

Meaning for Practice and Study

This rule carries a deep message for both renunciants and laypeople:

First, it reminds us that discipline is measured not only by bodily action but also by speech and intention. A renunciant may not directly violate the rule against sexual conduct, but if he uses words to incite another person to do it for his benefit, an offense still arises and needs to be examined.

Second, the rule reflects the spirit of protecting the dignity and freedom of others. Encouraging someone to serve one’s desire is a form of exploitation, whether subtle or obvious, and any exploitation in a religious relationship weakens trust and the purity of the Sangha.

Third, it emphasizes that practitioners need continually to observe their inner motives, especially when speech or action may affect another person. The subtlety of kāma requires continuous alertness, because desire often conceals itself in many indirect forms.

For laypeople, this rule is a reminder that one should recognize and refuse situations of being incited by someone with religious authority, and understand that a true teacher never uses his position to satisfy personal desire.

---

Comparative Note

The full text of this rule in the Chinese Comparative Vinaya has not been directly compared against an accessible original source. Researchers wishing to study further should consult Vinaya collections of surviving sectarian traditions in Chinese, Pāli, and Tibetan, as well as specialized comparative Vinaya studies, in order to confirm the scope, degree of offense, and required method of confession prescribed for this training rule, Attakāmpāricariya.