Lzh Mg Bi Vb Pc 3Malicious Talebearing

Source Status

This entry is identified through descriptive information: code Lzh Mg Bi Vb Pc 3, belonging to the Sectarian Canon · Parallels, in the Vinaya Parallels — Chinese collection. The Vietnamese title is “Nói lời đâm thọc ác ý,” the English title is “Malicious Talebearing,” and the Pali title is recorded as Pesuñña. The data has a source link, but does not provide the full text for comparison. Therefore, this section is an AI interpretation based on the descriptive information and the truncated ending of the Vietnamese text, not a translation of the original scripture.

The old ending shows that the content was understood in the direction of divisive speech: intentionally carrying words, harming relationships, and creating discord. However, from the data the context of promulgation, persons involved, wording of the rule, or specific conditions for offense cannot yet be determined. Statements about the number of conditions constituting the fault need to be checked against the full text before being used as scholarly conclusions.

Context

In the Buddha’s teaching, speech is a very important field of practice. Practitioners not only avoid harsh speech or false speech, but must also avoid divisive speech. A monastic community living together needs trust, listening, and harmony. Even a single statement made with the intention of malicious talebearing can break a relationship that has been built over a long time.

The title “Malicious Talebearing” shows that the focus is not simply transmitting information from one person to another. The issue is malicious intent: using speech to make two sides grow distant, suspect one another, or oppose one another. The English title “Malicious Talebearing” also emphasizes carrying stories with an unwholesome mind. The Pali name Pesuñña is usually understood as divisive speech, but in this entry the text must still be compared in order to determine the precise scope.

The Vinaya context shows that the harmony of the Sangha cannot rely only on a shared ideal. It needs to be protected by specific limits on bodily, verbal, and mental conduct. Within this, verbal karma is an area easily taken lightly, because words pass quickly. But precisely because speech passes quickly, it can cause harm before the speaker recognizes the consequences.

Content That Can Be Determined From the Descriptive Information

From the code “Pc 3,” this entry lies in a group of rules related to offenses requiring confession according to Vinaya classification, but the details need verification. The Vietnamese, English, and Pali titles all point to malicious talebearing, malicious carrying of reports, or speech transmitted in order to divide. This is the content that can be determined most securely from the descriptive information.

The truncated ending raised three elements: there is intentional transmission of speech, an intention to damage relationships, and a result of creating discord. Although one should not affirm these three elements as the official legal formula without comparison, they correctly reflect the ethical interpretive direction of the title. Speech becomes dangerous not only because its content is true or false, but because of the purpose for which it is used. Even a truth spoken with a divisive mind can be unwholesome speech.

The content also shows that the harm of Pesuñña has two sides. Externally, it fractures the community: one person suspects another, one group becomes distant from another, and common work loses coordination. Internally, it pollutes the speaker’s mind: that person nourishes jealousy, competitiveness, delight in discord, or the feeling that one has the power to control the relationships of others through information.

One must avoid inferring that every form of reporting a fault is malicious talebearing. In the life of practice, it may at times be necessary to report an event in order to protect discipline or prevent harm. The difference lies in the mind and purpose: speaking in order to heal and handle a matter according to the Dharma is different from speaking to stir up division.

Meaning for Practice

This entry reminds practitioners to be careful with the power of speech. Malicious talebearing is often disguised as “letting you know,” “I’m only telling the truth,” or “so that you can be careful.” But if beneath it lies the mind that wants others to lose goodwill toward one another, that speech is no longer right speech. Right speech requires not only truth, but also good intention, proper timing, and orientation toward benefit.

In practice, divisive speech arises from many roots: jealousy, resentment, the need for attention, or the wish to draw others into one’s faction. When the mind has not been tamed, people easily use information as a kind of power. Knowing someone else’s story, carrying it to a third person, and then observing the change in the relationship is a very subtle form of satisfaction. The Buddha’s Vinaya blocks this because it runs contrary to the path of cutting off attachment to self.

For the Sangha, harmony is a precious treasure. Harmony does not mean that everyone always agrees, but that disagreement can occur with respect and direct speech in accordance with the Dharma. Malicious talebearing destroys that capacity, because it takes the issue behind the back of the person concerned. Instead of dialogue, it creates a network of suspicion. Instead of correcting a fault, it spreads the fault into a story of factions.

For lay practitioners, this lesson is very practical. In families, workplaces, online communities, or Dharma centers, malicious talebearing can spread quickly and become difficult to withdraw. Before speaking about someone who is absent, a practitioner should ask: Is this speech necessary? Is it true? Is it spoken with a wholesome mind? Will it help the two sides understand each other better? If the answer is unclear, silence may be the deeper practice.

Comparative Note

The full text needs to be compared in order to determine how Pesuñña is defined in this entry, what the conditions for offense are, whether true and false speech are distinguished, and which cases are not offenses. The formula of three conditions or any required result should not be affirmed without textual evidence.

When full data is available, the relationship between the Pali title, the Chinese parallel, and the classification in Pc 3 should also be checked. Until comparison is made, the safe interpretation is this: the entry warns against speech used with malicious intent to divide, emphasizing right speech, a mind of harmony, and the responsibility to protect trust in the community of practice.