Lzh Mg Bu Vb Pj 2Theft

– MAHĀSĀṂGHIKA VINAYA

– PĀRĀJIKA PRECEPTS

2. PRECEPT: THEFT

PART ONE OF THE PRECEPT ON THEFT

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Rājagṛha, as described in detail above… At that time, the Elder Daṇḍika (Sudinna), son of a potter, went about soliciting donations to build a large and magnificent monk's dwelling, splendidly adorned with carvings and engravings, the fragrant oil sprinkled upon a floor of lapis-lazuli color, and various foods and drinks arranged therein.

Now a certain elder bhikkhu came and asked Daṇḍika: "How old are you, Elder?" Daṇḍika replied: "I am of such-and-such an age." The visiting bhikkhu said: "You are young; I should be the one to stay in this room." Thereupon Daṇḍika yielded the room to the senior monk and went about soliciting funds to build a second dwelling. Again another elder bhikkhu arrived, and he yielded the room as before, then went and raised funds to build a third dwelling. This time yet another elder bhikkhu arrived, and he yielded the room just as he had done the two previous times.

At that point Daṇḍika reflected: "I have endured such hardship building these rooms, yet I have not been able to stay in any of them. Where shall I find timber and laborers to build yet another? I am tormented by rain, wind, heat, cold, mosquitoes, and flies.

No sooner do I complete a room than someone else is already lying in wait like a cat watching a mouse, and the moment it is finished, it is seized from me. What am I to do?" He then thought: "I am by nature a skilled craftsman and I have strength; I should build a room of fired brick upon the black rock beside the cave of the sages, fire it until it is fully baked, and live there." Having thought thus, Daṇḍika built a room of brick upon the black rock beside the cave of the sages, fired it until it was fully baked into a dwelling, carved it with decorations, and set doors in place.

All parts of the structure except the door panels, door bolts, and clothes rack were fired, and the color was a brilliant red like the udumbara flower.

At that time, after a rain the sky had cleared. The Blessed One was walking in meditation along the slope of Gṛdhrakūṭa Mountain. With the Buddha's eye, the Tathāgata sees everything, hears everything, and knows everything; for this reason, wishing to teach a sūtra so that the Vinaya might long endure, though already knowing, he nonetheless asked the bhikkhus: "Upon the black rock beside the cave of the sages, what is that thing that resembles the udumbara flower?"

The bhikkhus reported to the Buddha: "Blessed One, the bhikkhu Daṇḍika previously went out soliciting donations and built a monk's dwelling, carving and adorning it with extraordinary beauty, but when it was completed a senior monk came and took possession of it. He then built a second and a third, and each was likewise taken from him. Therefore he has now built a separate room of fired brick, beautiful as the udumbara flower, upon the black rock beside the cave of the sages."

At that time the Blessed One instructed Ānanda to bring his robe, and Ānanda immediately brought it to the Tathāgata. Thereupon the Blessed One put on his robe and walked to the black rock beside the cave of the sages. Since the Blessed One had perfectly accomplished the most sublime deportments of walking, standing, lying down, and sitting, they arose in him naturally without any deliberate effort.

Why was this so?—Because the merit of his natural and supremely excellent conduct surpassed even that of the heavenly beings and Brahmā kings, as fully described in the Sūtra on Deportment. Now the Blessed One, with his sublime deportment, proceeded to Daṇḍika's brick room. A divine spirit caused the door to open of itself; though the room was small and narrow, the Tathāgata entered it naturally, without finding it in the least cramped.

When the Tathāgata had entered Daṇḍika's room, he touched the wall with his golden hand and said to the bhikkhus: "Look how skillfully the bhikkhu Daṇḍika has adorned this room. This bhikkhu Daṇḍika, though he has gone forth from home life, has not yet tired of his former trade nor relinquished his skilled craftsmanship, and moreover has fired this room, thereby causing harm to living beings. Furthermore, this brick room is extremely cold when it is cold and extremely hot when it is hot; it can damage people's eyes and give rise to many illnesses.

Because of these disadvantages, you must demolish it, so that future bhikkhus do not imitate this kind of room. For in the future bhikkhus will say: 'During the Blessed One's lifetime, bhikkhus each built their own rooms to dwell in.' Therefore it must be torn down." Thereupon the bhikkhus demolished that room.

Having ordered the room demolished, the Blessed One returned to Gṛdhrakūṭa Mountain.

When the Elder Bhikkhu Daṇḍika returned from almsround in the village and saw that his room had been demolished, he asked the bhikkhus: "Who destroyed this room?"

At that moment a bhikkhu said to Daṇḍika: "You have received a very great benefit. Why so?—Because the Tathāgata himself condescended to visit this room; through this room you have received reflected merit. The Blessed One, knowing the right time, ordered this room demolished."

When Daṇḍika heard this, he was filled with extreme joy and for a full seven days forgot all hunger and thirst. But after those seven days he began to think: "Where shall I find timber to build a new room? Yajñadatta, the royal forestry officer of King Bimbisāra, is an old friend of mine; surely he will have timber." Thinking thus, he put on his ordinary robe, took his bowl, and went to the house of Yajñadatta, greeting him warmly: "You are well and of long life, are you not? I wish to build a room but have no timber yet; could you provide timber in support of this?"

The minister replied: "My household has no timber, and the king's timber supply is also exhausted. When wood is delivered, I will provide some for you."

Daṇḍika then said: "Do not say such a thing—how could the king's timber be exhausted?"

The minister replied: "Venerable Sir, if you do not believe me, please go and see for yourself."

Thereupon Daṇḍika went to the timber yard, where he saw five large logs, selected two of them, and brought them back to his dwelling. According to the established custom of former kings, every five days the king would make his rounds to inspect the storehouses, the vaults of gold and silver, the quarters of the palace attendants, the elephant and horse stables, the carriage houses, and then proceed to the place where the timber was stored. The king noticed that two logs were missing and asked Yajñadatta: "Why are two logs missing from the timber?"

Yajñadatta replied: "Your Majesty, everything is still there; nothing is missing."

In this manner the king made his rounds a second time and a third time, each time asking Yajñadatta why two logs were missing, but each time Yajñadatta reported to the king that everything was present and nothing was lacking. The king then became angry and said: "Have you burned my timber, or have you given it to an enemy state?"

He immediately ordered the relevant officials to arrest and bind Yajñadatta. While bound under arrest, Yajñadatta reflected: "Recently the Venerable Daṇḍika came to request timber but I told him there was none—could he have taken it?" He then sent a trusted person to ask Daṇḍika: "Venerable Sir, you came previously to request timber; did you take those two logs?"

The Venerable One replied: "Yes, I took them."

Yajñadatta then sent a messenger to inform the Venerable One: "Because I am responsible for the missing timber I have been arrested and imprisoned; please use whatever means are available to explain the matter and exonerate me from blame so that I may be released from prison soon."

Daṇḍika sent back word: "You need only report to the king that previously the bhikkhu Daṇḍika came to you requesting timber, or that he may have taken it, and request that an investigation be ordered."

The king then dispatched a messenger to summon Daṇḍika, and Daṇḍika came to the palace. The Elder Daṇḍika was by nature upright and of refined and dignified bearing, revered by gods and humans alike, so that the king was filled with joy the moment he saw him, and asked: "Venerable Daṇḍika, did you not take two of our logs?"

The Venerable One replied: "I did take them."

The king asked: "Venerable Sir, why would one who has gone forth from home life take what was not given?"

Daṇḍika said: "Your Majesty previously gave permission; it is not the case that no permission was given."

The king asked: "Who gave permission?"

He replied: "Your Majesty, who else?"

The king said: "Venerable Sir, we are the ruler of a kingdom and have many affairs to attend to, so we do not remember. Please remind us—in what manner was permission given?"

Dhaniya said: "Does Your Majesty not recall that when you first ascended the throne, the great ministers of the court assembled together, drew water from ponds, lakes, rivers, and streams, sprinkled it upon the shoots of trees and medicinal herbs, then poured that water into the tusk of a white elephant and let it flow over Your Majesty's head, elevating Your Majesty to the royal throne? At that time, it was from Your Majesty's own mouth that the proclamation was made: 'Now that We are king, all the trees and grasses, waters and mountains within the realm are given in charity to the śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas.' That is the king having given—it is not the case that he did not give."

The king said: "Venerable One! We gave the things in the realm that have no guardian, not those that have a guardian. How do you dare distort Our former words, making false arguments and slandering Us?"

Thereupon the king issued an order to release Yasodha. The brāhmaṇas and faithful laypeople throughout the realm were all filled with joy and said: "Excellent! The Venerable Dhaniya, through skillful means and wisdom, answered the great king and escaped punishment this day. Moreover, the king has issued an order for Yasodha to leave the prison in peace."

At that time, in the city of Rājagṛha, those who had no faith in the Buddha-Dharma were all resentful and said: "Why did this śramaṇa Dhaniya act so deviously, making false arguments to deceive the king in order to avoid punishment? We fear that from now on the trees in our own homes will be taken by him, and he will claim that the king had previously promised to give them. What is to be done? He is a man of corrupt conduct—what virtue does he possess?"

The bhikkhus then reported all these criticisms in full to the Blessed One. The Buddha immediately instructed them to summon the bhikkhu Dhaniya. When he had arrived, the Buddha asked: "Is it true that you took timber belonging to the king?"

He replied: "It is true that I took it."

The Buddha said: "You are one who has gone forth from the household life—why did you take something that was not given by another?"

Dhaniya replied: "Blessed One, the king had previously promised to give it—it is not the case that he had not promised."

The Buddha asked: "In what manner did the king give?"

Dhaniya replied: "When the king had just ascended the throne, he proclaimed with his own mouth: 'The waters and mountains, trees and grasses within the realm—We give them in charity to the śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas.' That is a promise to give—it is not the case that he did not promise."

The Buddha said: "You are a fool. The king gave things that have no guardian, not things that have a guardian. Now the king's timber had a guardian—why do you claim it was given? Dhaniya, have you not heard me, on many occasions and through many causes and conditions, reproaching the taking of what is not given, and praising the taking of what has been given? Why have you now taken what was not given? Dhaniya, this is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and is not what I have taught. This matter cannot bring about an increase in wholesome states."

The bhikkhus then addressed the Buddha: "Blessed One, why did the bhikkhu Dhaniya commit the offense of taking what was not given for the first time?"

The Buddha said to the bhikkhus: "This Dhaniya has not only committed the offense of taking what was not given for the first time on this day—in past lives as well he was the first to commit the offense of taking what was not given."

The bhikkhus addressed the Buddha: "Has such a thing truly occurred before?"

The Buddha said: "Indeed it has. In the past, when this world reached the end of the kalpa, all beings were born in the Heaven of Ābhāsvara. When the world was reconstituted, the devas of the Ābhāsvara Heaven descended once more to the world. At that time, the devas moved through the air, took the joy of meditative absorption as their nourishment, wandered here and there, lived in delight, were purely good, and the radiance of their bodies shone upon one another. There was no need for the light of the sun or the moon. At that time, beings had no day or night, no sun or moon, no months, years, or seasons. When the waters had just receded, the essence of the earth arose, sweet as the ambrosia of the heavens.

"At that time, there was one being who was coarse and greedy, attached to flavors, who tasted that earth-essence and found it fragrant and delicious, and whose mind became attached to it. The other beings, following this example, also tasted it and likewise found it delicious, so they all partook of it together. Having eaten, their bodies became heavy, they lost all their spiritual powers, and their radiance was extinguished. For this reason, the world came to have the sun and moon, darkness and light, months, years, and seasons.

"At that time, beings were neither male nor female; but having eaten the earth-essence for a long time, their forms and appearances came to differ. Those who ate much had coarse and ugly physical forms. Those who ate little had upright and comely physical forms.

At that time, those of comely appearance considered themselves superior to others, and seeing those of coarse and ugly appearance, they looked down upon them as inferior to themselves; relying on their comeliness, they gave rise to pride and arrogance. Because they gave rise to the offense of pride, the earth-essence disappeared. Then the earth produced a surface-film with a rich flavor, like pure honey.

At that time all the beings were alarmed and lamented: 'Why has the earth-essence suddenly disappeared?' And they proceeded to eat the surface-film of the earth together. Those who ate much had coarse and ugly forms, while those who ate little had upright and comely forms. Then the comely ones increased further in pride and arrogance.

For this reason, the surface-film of the earth disappeared again. When the surface-film of the earth had disappeared, the earth produced a kind of fungus with a flavor like rock sugar. Those who ate much became ugly, while those who ate little became beautiful; and again, as before, those of comely appearance gave rise to even greater pride.

Consequently, the earth-fungus suddenly disappeared as well, and the earth spontaneously brought forth glutinous rice. This glutinous rice, once taken, would replenish itself; it never increased or decreased. If taken in the morning, by evening it was there again; if taken in the evening, by morning it was there again.

"Bhikkhus, you should know that when the beings saw the surface-film of the earth disappear, they gave rise to grief and distress, like a person overcome and oppressed by sorrow. Although oppressed by grief, they did not recognize that the fault lay with themselves. Thereafter the beings consumed that naturally occurring glutinous rice.

Having eaten the glutinous rice for a long time, they gradually developed the forms of male and female, became attached to one another, gave rise to sexual desire, and became husbands and wives. The other beings, seeing this, were angered, struck them, threw stones at them, and cursed them: 'Why has there suddenly arisen in the world such an unlawful thing? This is not a lawful matter that leads to rebirth in the heavens.

From now on one must cultivate wholesome states in order to be reborn in the heavens.'

"The Buddha said to the bhikkhus: 'At that time, those beings who had done the unlawful thing felt shame and defilement, concealed themselves, and did not appear in public—for one day, two days, up to a month. For this reason, they constructed rooms and dwellings to conceal themselves and do this unlawful thing in private. At that time, beings thought to themselves: "Why should we toil the whole day long?

It would be better to take rice in the morning for the use of the whole following day." Then, the next day, when another being came to invite that person to go and gather rice together, the person replied: "Yesterday I already took the portion for today as well." The other said: "That is indeed a good idea." Then, following this example, one would take enough at one time for ten days, twenty days, one month, two months.

Because of the greed for hoarding, the glutinous rice produced husks and bran; wherever it was harvested in the morning, it would not grow back by evening.

"Thereupon the beings assembled together and said to one another: 'In former times we all flew freely through the air, taking the joy of meditative absorption as our nourishment, living in delight and peace. Then we ate the earth-essence, but at that time there were no evil states among beings. When evil states arose, the earth-essence disappeared and the surface-film of the earth arose. The surface-film of the earth arose with a fragrant and delicious flavor. Next the earth produced fungus, and then brought forth glutinous rice, which was still fragrant and delicious. Now we must establish an order of things—divide the rice fields into portions with boundaries and assign them to one another: this portion belongs to me, that portion belongs to you.'

"But at that time, one being thought thus: 'If I take only my own portion, it will soon be exhausted; I shall take a little of another's portion so that my own may last longer.' The other beings, seeing this being take what was not given, said to him: 'Why do you take what another has not given you? Do not do this again.' But that being continued to take and did not stop. When the others caught him taking in this way for the third time, they said: 'Why is there in the world a being who steals, even to a third time?

From now on, if you continue to steal, you must be punished.' Yet he still did not desist. When the others caught him, they struck him with rods and staves in great pain. Having been beaten, he cried out loudly: 'Why has this evil thing come to exist in the world, causing one being to strike another with a staff?' At that time, the one who had struck him threw down the staff and also cried out: 'Why has this evil thing come to exist in the world?

How is it that there is one who takes what another has not given, and the more he is spoken to, the more he does not know shame?' From that time on, three evil states appeared in the world, namely:

1. Taking what is not given.

2. Lying.

3. Striking another with a staff.

Those are the three evil qualities that arose earliest.

The Buddha then spoke to the monks: "The being who first took what was not given was none other than this very monk Dhaniya, the potter's son. This Dhaniya, who in past times was the first to take what was not given, has now, within my true Dharma, again been the first to take what was not given."

At that time the monks addressed the Buddha, saying: "Why was it that when monk Dhaniya, who is indebted to the Blessed One, wore the monastic robe, King Bimbisāra saw him and immediately released him?"

The Buddha taught: "Just so. Monks, not only has Dhaniya today escaped punishment by wearing my monastic robe, but in times past he likewise escaped disaster through relying on me. It was thus: At that time, on the shore of the great ocean there stood a tree called Vimbali, and in that tree dwelt a great Garuḍa — a golden-winged bird — whose wingspan extended one hundred and fifty yojanas.

The way of the Garuḍa is to feed upon dragons. When it wished to eat a dragon, it would first beat its wings powerfully over the sea, causing the waters to part on both sides, so that the dragon's body was exposed, whereupon it would seize and devour it. It is the tradition of the dragon folk, who fear the Garuḍa, to seek out monastic robes and hang them before the gates of their palaces.

When the bird sees a monastic robe, it arises with a mind of reverence and does not enter to seize the dragons within. Now at that time, the bird beat its wings over the sea and espied a dragon it wished to devour. The dragon was seized with great terror and, taking a monastic robe, draped it over its head and fled to the shore.

As it did so, it transformed into the form of a human being, and the Garuḍa transformed into the form of a brahmin, pursuing the dragon and shouting: 'Why do you not throw away the robe?' The dragon, fearing death, clutched the monastic robe tightly and would not let it go, even at the cost of its life.

At that time on a sea island there lived a sage, where flowers and fruits grew in abundance. The dragon, overcome with terror and having nowhere to take refuge, ran to the dwelling of the sage. This sage possessed great power and virtue, so that the Garuḍa dared not fly in, but from a distance addressed the sage in verse:

At that time the sage thought: 'Who is reciting those verses?' He rose and went out to look, and seeing that the dragon was being pursued by the Garuḍa, he answered the Garuḍa in verse:

Then the Garuḍa, by virtue of the sage's power, was freed from hunger and thirst. Thereupon the sage said to the Garuḍa: 'Because you broke the precepts, you bear this bird's body; now you wish again to take life, and you will surely fall into hell.' He then set forth in detail the ten unwholesome acts, down to wrong view, saying: 'For each of these one must fall into hell, into the realm of animals, into the realm of hungry ghosts, and into the realm of asuras. Now you should, together with this dragon, repent and reform, so that henceforth you will no longer harbor enmity toward one another.' They then repented. When the repentance was complete, each returned to its own place.

The Buddha then told the monks: "The sage of that time was none other than myself. The Garuḍa was King Bimbisāra, and the dragon was monk Dhaniya. This monk Dhaniya, in former times, escaped the calamity of the Garuḍa through my monastic robe, and today he has likewise escaped the calamity of the king through my monastic robe."

At that time the monks addressed the Buddha, saying: "Why was it that when King Bimbisāra saw monk Dhaniya, he immediately released him?"

The Buddha said to the monks: "Not only today, but it was ever thus in former times as well."

The monks addressed the Buddha: "Was it truly so in former times?"

The Buddha taught: "Just so. In times past there was a king who was skilled in guiding people and beings, causing them to depart from enmity and hatred. The five grains flourished, the people dwelt in peace and happiness, living with integrity and affection, benevolence and filial devotion, giving generously and observing the precepts. At that time in that kingdom there was an elephant hunter whose household was poor and destitute, and who had many children, who crowded around him demanding food and drink. His wife then said to him: 'Our home is as impoverished as this — why do you not work diligently?'

The hunter replied: 'What work would you have me do?'

His wife answered: 'Why do you not diligently pursue the occupation of your forefathers?'

The hunter then prepared provisions, took up his hunting equipment, and went to the Himalayan mountains. At the foot of the mountains there was a six-tusked white elephant of great wisdom, who reflected: 'For what reason do people wish to kill me? Is it because they wish to take my tusks that they would slay me?' Now this elephant, when its forebears had died, had gathered their tusks and stored them in one place; when its father died, it likewise took those tusks and stored them together with the others.

It then separated from the herd of elephants and wandered at ease in search of food. The hunter went hunting through the mountains and forests, and came at length to where the elephant was. When the elephant saw the hunter, it thought: 'Who is this man who has come here?

Could he not be a hunter come to kill me?' It raised its trunk as a gesture of beckoning to the hunter.

The hunter was one who understood well the signs of elephants, and he thought: 'If I do not go to it, it will surely harm me.' He therefore went to the elephant, and the elephant asked: 'What do you seek by coming here?' The hunter then stated his purpose. The elephant replied: 'If you do not come here again, I will provide you with what you need.' The hunter answered: 'If I receive what I need, I would not even want to leave my own door, let alone come all the way here.' The elephant then brought out the tusks of its forebears and gave them to the hunter.

The hunter received them and returned home rejoicing. But then he thought: 'If I use these tusks to provide food and clothing for my wife and children, they will not last long. I should find a secluded place to stay and enjoy them by myself.

If I remain in good health, I will have wife and children.' Then one morning, needing five coins, he took the elephant's tusks to a tavern.

When the tavern keeper saw him coming, he thought: 'Where has this man come from? Today I shall surely gain a little profit.' He then arranged the bedding and waited for the man carrying the tusks to arrive, and invited him to sit down. Taking advantage of his hunger and thirst, the tavern keeper plied him with wine until he was drunk, and when he was drunk, had him sign a record of debt — the wine given was very little, but the debt recorded was very great.

The next day, when he had sobered up, he again demanded wine, and the tavern keeper said: 'Why do you still make demands? It seems you do not yet understand — let us reckon the account together; if any money remains, I will give you wine.' But when the accounting was done, not a single coin remained. The man then thought: 'Where can I find money? I had better go back into the mountains and kill that elephant.'

He returned to the mountains and came to where the elephant dwelt. The elephant saw the hunter and asked: 'Why have you come here again?'

The hunter explained his purpose to the elephant. The elephant then asked: 'What has become of what I gave you before?'

He answered: 'Because I was foolish and fell into dissipation, I have spent it all.'

The elephant said: 'If you will no longer be dissolute, I will give to you.' The hunter replied: 'I have already repented of my past actions — how could I possibly repeat them? If the elephant gives to me once more, I will not leave my door.'

The elephant then brought out the tusks of its father and gave them to him. The hunter took the tusks back to the kingdom and squandered them entirely as before, and then thought: 'I must kill that elephant — this time I will go there without letting it see me.'

In the last month of spring, when the weather was hot, the elephant went down to a pond to bathe. After bathing it came ashore and was resting in the cool shade at the foot of a tree, before a company of elephants. The hunter then shot the elephant with a poison-tipped arrow, which struck it in the shoulder, and blood flowed into its eyes.

The elephant raised its head to see where the arrow had come from and immediately saw the hunter, whereupon from a distance it reproached him: 'You are a wicked and treacherous wretch, faithless at heart. I have the strength now to kill you, but out of reverence for the monastic robe I will not do so.' It then called to the hunter: 'Come quickly and cut off my tusks.' And it used its body to shield the hunter, preventing the other elephants from harming him.

At that time in the forest there was a deity, who recited a verse:

The Buddha said to the monks: "The lord elephant of that time was none other than King Bimbisāra of today. And the hunter of today is this very monk Dhaniya. King Bimbisāra, out of reverence for the monastic robe, forgave that hunter. Today likewise, because Dhaniya wears the monastic robe, he was not charged with an offense."

The monks then said to the Buddha:

—Blessed One, why is it that King Bimbisāra, upon seeing Dhaniya composed and dignified in deportment, did not give rise to an evil mind?

The Buddha said to the monks: "King Bimbisāra not only honors dignified deportment today and refrains from giving rise to an evil mind—he has done so since times past."

The monks said to the Buddha: "Blessed One, has it truly been so in the past?"

The Buddha taught:

—It is exactly so. In a past age there was a king who skillfully guided his people and all beings away from enmity and strife. In his kingdom the five grains flourished, the people lived in peace and happiness, conducting themselves with righteousness, gratitude, benevolence, filial piety, generosity, the keeping of precepts, and universal love for people and creatures alike.

The king possessed an elephant named Great Body, fierce and difficult to tame, whose fearsome reputation spread far and wide. At that time no enemy kingdom could withstand him; wherever a campaign was undertaken, the enemy forces were utterly routed. If anyone violated the law of the realm, this elephant was made to trample them to death with its feet.

Because the king had this elephant, he felt secure and without fear. (But one day) the elephant's enclosure broke, and the elephant ran off to the vicinity of a monastery, where it saw the monks composed and dignified in deportment, and heard the recitation of scripture: "Those who take life endure suffering; those who do not kill gain merit." Hearing these words of the scripture, the elephant's mind became gentle and compliant.

Now at that time a certain person had committed an offense deserving death, and the king ordered the responsible officials to have the elephant trample him to death. But the elephant only sniffed the condemned man three times with its trunk and had no intention of killing him. The supervising official then reported this to the king, saying: "The elephant, upon seeing the condemned man, merely sniffed him with its trunk and had absolutely no intent to kill."

The king, hearing this, was greatly troubled, and asked the official: "Is it truly as you say, that the elephant behaved in this manner?"

The official replied: "It is truly so."

The king then summoned his ministers to assemble and deliberate on the matter. When the ministers had gathered, the king said to them: "My kingship, which none can overcome, has depended entirely on this elephant. Now suddenly it has become like this—what is to be done?"

At that time the ministers summoned the elephant keeper and asked him: "Recently, when the enclosure broke, where did the elephant go?" The elephant keeper replied: "It went to the monastery." The ministers, being men of intelligence, surmised: "This elephant, having seen the monks, must have heard the Dharma teachings, and its mind became gentle and compliant, so that it no longer wishes to kill." They then instructed the elephant keeper to construct gambling houses, slaughterhouses, and a prison beside the elephant's enclosure, so that the elephant would dwell near those establishments.

Thereafter, when the elephant saw gamblers, it would open its eyes wide, wave its trunk, and cry out loudly; when it saw butchers slaughtering animals; when it saw jailers applying instruments of torture and restraint. Having seen all this, the elephant's evil mind arose once more, and so when the king cast a condemned man into the enclosure, the elephant trampled him to death. At that moment the heavenly beings spoke these verses:

The Buddha said to the monks:

—The great elephant of that time was none other than King Bimbisāra. In a former life, King Bimbisāra had once seen monks composed and dignified in deportment, and his heart gave rise to love and joy. Now, seeing Dhaniya composed and dignified in deportment, his heart is filled with joy, and so he did not call him to account for his offense.

At that time Dhaniya reflected: "I built the first room, but a senior monk came and seized it, driving me away. I went to a second room, then a third, and was driven away from those as well. Afterward I built a room of fired brick, and the Blessed One sent someone to demolish it.

Then I took timber belonging to the king and brought it to build a dwelling, and for this the Blessed One rebuked me at length. Truly all that toil and hardship has been in vain, and nothing has been accomplished! From now on I shall put an end to these laborious efforts, take refuge in the Sangha, and pass my days in whatever ease or hardship comes."

Thereupon Dhaniya cultivated the practice of non-involvement, applying himself day and night with sincere devotion to the cultivation of the path. He attained the various meditative absorptions, accomplished the fruit of the path, and realized the six supernormal powers, knowing within himself that he had attained realization, his heart filled with joy and exhilaration. Dhaniya spoke these verses of self-encouragement:

At that time the Buddha said to the monks:

—Go and have all the monks in the vicinity of Rājagṛha assemble here; even those who have already heard this must hear it again:

"If a monk takes what has not been given to him, he commits a Pārājika offense and may no longer dwell together with the Sangha."

Furthermore, when the Buddha was residing at Rājagṛha (as described in full above), there was a monk who, when the time came, put on his robe, took his bowl, and entered the city in search of rag-robes. But having searched throughout Rājagṛha without finding any, he went to the riverbank to search and also found none, and finally went to a place where clothes were being washed to look there. At that time a washerman, having finished washing the clothes, went to a secluded spot to converse with someone else.

The monk then went to where the clothes were spread out to dry. Another man standing nearby, upon seeing this, said to the washerman: "That wanderer over there intends to take your clothes." The washerman asked: "Of what order is that wanderer?"

The other replied: "He is a wanderer of the Śākya clan."

The washerman said: "Do not worry. A Śramaṇa of the Śākya clan will not take what has not been given." After a short while, the monk took the clothes. The other man again said to the washerman: "The Śramaṇa has taken your clothes."

The washerman answered as before: "Do not worry. A Śramaṇa of the Śākya clan will not take what has not been given."

At that moment the monk tucked those garments under his arm and walked away. The other man again said to the washerman: "The Śramaṇa of the Śākya clan has carried the clothes away."

The washerman went forward to look, and alas! The monk had indeed taken them and gone. He ran after him calling: "Venerable sir, venerable sir—those clothes belong to the king, to such-and-such a minister, to such-and-such an elder; every one of them has an owner. Please, venerable sir, do not take them away."

The monk deliberately carried them off and refused to put them back.

The washerman then shouted in anger: "You Śramaṇa of corrupt conduct! If you do not return the clothes to me, I will deal with you in such-and-such a manner!"

The monk carried the clothes back to his dwelling, opened the door, placed the clothes on the bed, closed the door, and sat in meditation.

At that time the washerman took five kinds of ashes and went into the Jetavana. Other monks who were walking in kinhin before the gate of the Jetavana monastery, or who were sitting quietly in contemplation, asked the washerman: "Why are you crying out so loudly?" The washerman replied: "I have lost my clothes today—why do you ask me why I am crying out for no reason?"

The monks asked: "Who took your clothes and carried them away?"

He replied: "A wanderer."

They then asked: "Of what order?"

He replied: "Of the Śākya clan."

The monks asked: "Where were they taken?"

The washerman replied: "Into this very room."

The monks went to that room, knocked on the door with their hands, and called: "Elder, please open the door."

But the monk within remained silent and did not respond. One young and vigorous monk then broke open the door and entered. The monk who had stolen the clothes felt ashamed and bowed his head in silence. Then the young monk went to the bed, took out all the garments, counted them, and asked the washerman whether the number matched what he had lost; the washerman confirmed it did, and they were returned to him. The monks then said to the washerman: "Among those who have gone forth there are many different kinds of people—just as the five fingers of a hand are not all equal, how could all those of different clans who have gone forth be the same? You are a good and kind-hearted man; please do not spread this to others. We will report this matter to the Blessed One."

At that point the washerman said: "The Śramaṇas of the Śākya clan have the power of kings, the power of brahmins and elders. Earlier I only feared losing all these garments; now that I have recovered them, what need is there to say anything more to anyone?"

At that time the monks reported the full circumstances of this matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha had that monk summoned, and he was brought before him. The Buddha then asked him: "Is it truly as has been said?"

The monk replied: "It is truly so, Blessed One."

The Buddha said to the monk: "Did you not hear me establish the precept against theft?"

The monk replied: "Blessed One! I knew that the Buddha had established this precept, but I thought it only prohibited theft in towns and villages, and did not know that it also prohibited theft in remote and desolate places."

The Buddha said: "You foolish one, what difference is there between taking what has not been given in a village and taking what has not been given in a desolate place? This is an act contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, contrary to the Buddha's teaching; it cannot be used to increase wholesome qualities."

The bhikkhus then addressed the Buddha: "Blessed One, why was that laundryman so untrusting that he was deceived by that bhikkhu?"

The Buddha said to the bhikkhus: "That laundryman was not only untrusting in this life; in past lives he was also untrusting."

The bhikkhus addressed the Buddha: "Blessed One, did that truly happen?" The Buddha said: "It was so. In a past life, two brahmins traveled to South India to study the scriptures and treatises of non-Buddhist schools. When their studies were complete, they set out on the return journey.

Along the way, they passed through a wilderness where goats grazed, and they saw two male goats butting each other in the middle of the road. It is the nature of goats in combat to advance and then retreat. The brahmin walking in front, being foolish and credulous, said to his companion behind him: 'Look at those two male goats — they are merely four-footed beasts, yet they know the etiquette of yielding.

Seeing that I am a brahmin who upholds precepts and is learned, they are slowly stepping aside to make way.' The companion walking behind said: 'Brahmin, do not be so careless as to naively believe that these goats bear goodwill toward you. This is not because they respect you and are stepping aside — it is because it is the nature of goats in combat to advance and then retreat.'

The one walking in front did not believe these words, and so was struck by the goats, sustaining wounds on both knees. He fell rolling on the ground, unconscious, his clothes and hat torn to shreds. At that moment a deity recited the following verse:

The Buddha said to the bhikkhus: "The brahmin walking in front at that time was none other than the man who lost his robe today. The brahmin walking behind at that time was the man who brought the news. The male goat at that time is now the bhikkhu who stole the robe. Because the man who lost the robe did not believe in the past, he was struck by the goat; now too, because he did not believe, he lost the robe again. In the past he did not believe the words of the one walking behind, and now, even though the message was conveyed sincerely, he again did not believe." Thereupon, the Buddha commanded all the bhikkhus dwelling in the vicinity of Śrāvastī to assemble, and those who had already heard were to hear again:

"If a bhikkhu, whether in a village or in a desolate place, takes by theft what has not been given, in an amount reaching the prescribed measure, he commits a pārājika offense and is not permitted to live together with the Sangha."

MAHĀSĀṂGHIKA VINAYA

End of Volume Two.

THE REMAINING PORTION ON THE PRECEPT OF THEFT

Furthermore, when the Buddha was residing at Rājagṛha, as explained in full above, the method of punishing offenders in the time of King Bimbisāra's ancestors was as follows:

—If someone committed theft, a slap on the head was administered as punishment; the offender would feel so ashamed it was as though he were about to die, and thereafter would not dare to reoffend.

In the time of the king's grandfather, the method of punishing thieves was as follows:

—If someone committed theft, he was made to stand in one place while ash was sprinkled around him; after a short time he was released. The thief would feel deeply ashamed, as though dead, and would not reoffend thereafter.

In the time of the king's father, the method of punishing thieves was as follows:

—If someone committed theft, he was expelled from the city; the thief would feel such shame it was no different from death, and would not dare to reoffend thereafter.

As for the method of punishment under King Bimbisāra:

—If someone committed theft, he was expelled from the kingdom, and this served as a deterrent.

At that time there was a thief who had been expelled seven times, yet he continued to return and rob and kill people in the various towns and settlements. At that time someone apprehended him, bound him, and brought him before the king, reporting to the king: "This thief has been expelled seven times, yet he has continued to return and rob and kill people in the towns and settlements. May Your Majesty impose severe punishment."

The king said to the minister: "Take this thief away and punish him according to his crime."

The minister then submitted: "Stay, stay, Your Majesty. Let Your Majesty punish him yourself; do not entrust this to your servant. How would your servant dare to act unilaterally and overstep Your Majesty? Your Majesty's commands are still held in respect; let the punishment proceed from Your Majesty, and it will endure long."

The king said: "Take him out and cut off his little finger."

The officials in charge immediately hurried the criminal out and cut off his little finger, fearing the king might come to regret the order. At that moment the king bit his own finger and found the pain unbearable; he immediately sent someone to convey his order to the minister: "Do not cut off his finger."

The minister replied to the king: "His finger has already been cut off."

The king was greatly remorseful and sorrowful, and thought to himself: "I am now the last of the righteous kings, not the first. Whoever is king must give thought to the people and all living beings; how can one who is king of men cut off the hands of men?"

Thereupon King Bimbisāra immediately ordered his carriage made ready in haste, and went to where the Blessed One was. Upon arriving, the king prostrated at the Buddha's feet, then sat to one side, and addressed the Buddha:

—Blessed One! The method of punishing offenders used by my ancestors was to slap them on the head. Gradually through successive reigns until my own, evil methods have increased day by day, while righteous governance has progressively declined. By good fortune I have become king, yet I have caused harm to a person's body. I reproach myself as without virtue, and feel the utmost shame and fear.

The Buddha asked: "Your Majesty, according to the laws of the kingdom, how much must one steal to be sentenced to death? How much must one steal to be expelled from the kingdom? How much must one steal for the punishment of flogging to be applied?"

At that time King Bimbisāra addressed the Buddha: "Blessed One, one keliśapāna is nineteen coins divided into four parts; if one steals one part — four and three-quarter coins — or more than one part, one is deserving of the death penalty."

At that time the Blessed One, in accordance with the Dharma, taught and instructed King Bimbisāra, bringing the king benefit and joy; all his remorse and distress were extinguished. The king then paid homage to the Buddha and took his leave.

Not long after the king had departed, the Blessed One went to where a large gathering of bhikkhus was assembled, spread his seat, and sat down. He then said to the bhikkhus: "Just now King Bimbisāra came to me, paid homage, and sat to one side, and addressed me: 'Blessed One, the method of punishment used by my ancestors was to slap offenders on the head, and this governance and instruction was passed down through successive reigns until my own.' I then asked the king: 'Your Majesty, how much must one steal to be deserving of death?

And how much must one steal to receive the punishment of flogging?' The king said: 'One keliśapāna is nineteen coins; dividing one keliśapāna into four parts, if one steals one part — four and three-quarter coins — or more than one part, one is deserving of the death penalty.' I then taught the Dharma in accordance with King Bimbisāra's situation, and after hearing the Dharma, the king was joyful and took his leave.

Bhikkhus, from this day forward you should know: nineteen ancient coins constitute one keliśapāna; dividing one keliśapāna into four parts, if one steals one part — four and three-quarter coins — or more than one part, one commits a pārājika offense."

At that time the bhikkhus addressed the Buddha: "Blessed One, why was King Bimbisāra so fearful of wrongdoing?"

The Buddha said to the bhikkhus: "King Bimbisāra was not only fearful of wrongdoing in this life; in past lives he was also fearful of wrongdoing."

The bhikkhus addressed the Buddha: "Blessed One, did that truly happen?"

The Buddha said: "It is indeed so! In a past age there was a city called Vārāṇasī, in the kingdom of Kāśī. At that time there was a king named Yaśas.

The people of that kingdom all made their living by various skilled crafts—music, singing, or adorning themselves with implements of gold, silver, jewels, garlands, and ornaments; or they trained elephants and horses and practiced various arts. Whatever they did, they excelled at it; there was nothing they were not skilled in, and they used these means as their livelihood. If anyone did not know any skilled craft, he was regarded as a fool.

Likewise, if anyone committed theft, he too was called a fool and dullard. At that time, a certain thief was discovered by the people, who bound him and brought him before the king, saying: "Your Majesty! This man has done a foolish act; we beseech Your Majesty to punish him." The king said: "Let it be, let it be—in this world some lose property and some steal; how could I add yet another evil deed?" Then the king reflected: "By what means shall I rectify the laws of the kingdom so that my ministers will not know of this matter and evil deeds will not arise?" The king thought further: "From ancient times until now, only now have there appeared foolish people.

Such fools do not yet number a thousand. I shall send an attendant to entrust this fool to a great minister and instruct him that when a full thousand fools have been gathered, he is to inform me, and I shall convene a great assembly." The great minister thereupon received the fool and confined him in a certain place. Shortly after, the king thought: "Has that fool starved to death?" and ordered the minister to bring the fool before him.

He reminded the minister: "You must take good care of this person and not let him fall ill. Bring him to live in my garden of No Sorrow, and provide him with the five kinds of sensual pleasures and music for his entertainment." The minister complied with the command and treated the fool in accordance with all that the king had enjoined.

At that time yet another fool heard that the king had caught a fool and settled him in the garden of No Sorrow, providing him with music and various amusements. He therefore went of his own accord to the great minister and said: "I am a fool." The minister, wishing to fulfill the king's command, brought him into the garden of No Sorrow. In this manner, before long, a thousand people had been gathered.

The minister then reported to the king: "The fools now number a thousand; whatever Your Majesty wishes to do, please act without delay." Upon hearing this report the king was greatly grieved and said to himself: "From of old until now it has taken a very long time for even one fool to appear—why is it that within such a short time a thousand people have gathered? Can it be that in these degenerate times evil deeds are increasing?" Thereupon the king commanded his officials to sweep and clean the garden, burn incense, hang banners and jeweled canopies, and prepare fine food and drink in the garden of No Sorrow.

His ministers duly carried out all the tasks the king had commanded. The king then journeyed with his officials and the eighteen groups of followers to the garden of No Sorrow. Upon arriving and taking his seat, the king asked his officials: "Where are the fools now?

Summon them all here." All the fools came together. The king saw that after their long sojourn in the garden the fools' clothes were filthy, their fingernails long, their hair disheveled, and he ordered his officials: "Lead these fools to bathe and wash, give them new garments, cut their hair and trim their nails, and then bring them here." When they had returned, the king bestowed upon them food and drink, gave them wealth and all manner of necessities, and then proclaimed: "Let each of you return home to provide for your parents, diligently attend to your household affairs, and steal no more." The fools, upon hearing the king's proclamation, were all joyful and respectfully complied.

Thereupon that king transmitted the royal throne to the crown prince, renounced the world, entered the mountains, and studied the teaching of the ancient sages. At that time the king recited these verses:

The Buddha said to the bhikkhus: "The king named Yaśas of that time was none other than King Bimbisāra of today. From ancient times until now, King Bimbisāra has always feared the retribution of wrongdoing, and today as king he continues to fear such retribution."

The bhikkhus then addressed the Buddha:

"Blessed One! Why did King Bimbisāra, having issued his command, repent of it in an instant?"

The Buddha said to the bhikkhus: "Not only today did King Bimbisāra issue a command and then repent; in past lives he also repented in the same way."

The bhikkhus addressed the Buddha: "Has such a thing truly occurred before?"

The Buddha said: "It is indeed so. In a past age there was a brahmin who had no wealth and made his living by begging. The wife of this brahmin bore no children, but in his household a nakula had given birth to one offspring. Because he had no child, this brahmin regarded the nakula's young as his own son, and likewise the nakula's young regarded the brahmin as its father.

At that time the brahmin would visit other people's homes, and whenever he received milk, butter, and meat pastries he would bring them home to the nakula. Later his wife suddenly became pregnant, and when the ten months were complete she gave birth to a son. She then reflected: 'Perhaps it is owing to the nakula's giving birth to such an auspicious offspring that I too have been given a child.' At that time the brahmin was about to go begging and said to his wife: 'If you go anywhere, you must take the child with you; be careful and do not leave him at home.' The brahmin's wife, having fed the child, went to a neighbor's house to borrow a mortar for pounding grain.

At that moment the child was sucking on a bowl of fragrant sesame paste, and a poisonous snake, catching the scent, came crawling toward him, opened its mouth, and was about to spit venom and kill the infant. The nakula thought: 'My father has gone out, my mother is also not at home, and yet this poisonous snake wishes to kill my younger brother.' And it recited this verse:

Thereupon the nakula killed the poisonous snake, cutting it into seven pieces, and then thought: 'Now I have killed the snake so that my younger brother may live; when my parents learn of this, they will surely praise and reward me.' It then smeared blood on its mouth and stood waiting outside the door, hoping that when its parents saw this they would be greatly pleased. At that time the brahmin was on his way home and from a distance caught sight of his wife at the neighbor's house. He became angry and scolded her: "I told you that if you went anywhere you were to take the child with you—why have you gone alone?"

Then, as he was about to enter the house, he saw blood in the nakula's mouth and thought to himself: 'While my wife and I were away, the nakula remained at home—has it seized and killed my child and eaten him?' He flew into a rage and said: 'What a waste that I raised this beast, only to have it harm me!' He then rushed forward and beat the nakula to death with a stick. He then stepped into the house and saw his son happily sucking his fingers and playing, and beside the child he saw the seven pieces of the poisonous snake's body.

Seeing this, he was overcome with grief and remorse, and reproached himself bitterly: 'This nakula was deeply devoted and had saved my child's life, yet I did not look carefully but beat it to death—how pitiable!' He then fell to the ground in a swoon. At that time a deity dwelling in the sky above recited these verses:

The Buddha said to the bhikkhus: "The brahmin of that time was none other than King Bimbisāra. In former times he acted rashly and afterward repented; today it is the same once more." Thereupon the Buddha instructed the bhikkhus dwelling around the city of Rājagṛha to all assemble together—and even those who had already heard were to hear it again—and he promulgated the following precept:

"If a bhikkhu, whether in a village or in a remote place, takes what has not been given to him, and is seized by the king and is either executed, imprisoned, or banished, and it is said of him: 'O son of a good family! You are a thief, are you not? You are a fool, are you not?'—a bhikkhu who steals in such a manner commits a pārājika offense and is no longer permitted to live together with the Saṅgha."

[The second precept (on theft) ends here.]

Explanation:

Bhikkhu: One who has received the full precepts, who has properly received the full precepts, who is of the full age of twenty, who is free from the various obstacles and impediments, who has received the precepts before ten preceptors (the ten masters) or more than ten, and who has undergone one motion and three announcements (karmavācanā). Such a one is called a bhikkhu.

Village (Skt. grāma; gathering place): A place surrounded by walls, or encircled by fences, riverbanks, or canals.

Village also has the meaning of: A tract of land for grazing buffalo, a playground for children, a carriage park, a resting place for buffalo, a place with four or more households and a woodpile—these are also called a village.

Open ground (empty land): Open ground is the area outside the boundary wall, outside the monastery, excluding the boundary of the village; everything else is open ground.

The boundary of a village: Not far from a dwelling, where the main road passes, is called the boundary of the village. For instance, the area outside a dyke, a ditch, or a fence—excluding the village boundary—everything else is open ground.

A tract of land for grazing buffalo: Located far beyond the boundary of the village's houses and dwellings—excluding the village boundary—everything else is open ground.

Children's playgrounds: Places situated very far from carriage parks—excluding the village boundary—everything else is open ground.

Carriage parks (vehicle encampment settlements): Carriage parks situated at a distance from the village—excluding the village boundary—everything else is open ground.

Resting places for buffalo (buffalo-sleeping settlements): Located far outside the houses and dwellings—excluding the village boundary—everything else is open ground.

A village with four houses and a woodpile: A place situated very far from the houses and dwellings—excluding the village boundary—everything else is open ground.

Not given: Whether male, or female, or a paṇḍaka who is neither male nor female, or a layperson, or one who has gone forth—if one takes with a thieving mind what has not been given, then according to the object taken, the objects fall into eight categories:

1. Timely medicine (medicine taken at the proper time)

2. Nightly medicine (medicine taken at night)

3. Seven-day medicine (medicine taken within seven days)

4. Lifetime medicine (medicine taken throughout one's life)

5. Personal belongings (objects carried on one's person)

6. Weighty objects (important valuables)

7. Impure objects (non-pure items)

8. Both pure and impure objects (items that are partly pure and partly impure)

These are called the eight objects.

Taking: Meaning to grasp an object and move it from its original place—this is called taking.

According to the theft: Unlike the sixteen cases of guardianship, for example, stealing a small sum of money from the king to buy melons to eat and being caught and executed by the king. Because the king has no fixed rule but acts according to his own will—sometimes stealing a small amount results in execution, sometimes stealing a great deal does not. As in the case where the Blessed One questioned King Bimbisāra about the law as follows: "Great King, in governing your kingdom, for theft of how much money does one incur the death penalty? How much for banishment? How much for flogging?"

King Bimbisāra replied to the Buddha: "Every 19 coins make one kārisāpana; one kārisāpana is divided into four parts—if one takes one part, or more than one part, the offence is worthy of death. Now, according to the degree of theft, let that be the standard."

King: Meaning a Kṣatriya, a Brahmin, an elder, or a layperson who has received appointment and rules as king.

Arrested by the king: The king orders men to arrest someone—whether they seize his hand or seize him elsewhere—this is called arrest.

Executed: To put an end to one's life is called execution.

Or imprisoned: Whether confined in a house, confined within a city, confined within a village, put in stocks, or placed in chains—this is called imprisonment.

Banished: Expelled from the village, expelled from the city, expelled from the country—this is called banishment.

Alas, O man: If a monk is rebuked with such words as: "You are a thief, you are a fool, you are an ignorant person," he commits the offence of Pārājika and may no longer live together with the Sangha.

Pārājika: Means that with regard to the Dharma and the Path, the mind falls back, deteriorates, and fails to attain the fruit of the Path. This is called Pārājika. So too with respect to the knowledge of exhaustion and the knowledge of non-arising—falling back and deteriorating with respect to those knowledges and failing to attain the fruit of the Path is called Pārājika.

Pārājika also has the meaning of: Falling back from and deteriorating with respect to the fruit of Nirvana, failing to realize it—this is called Pārājika.

Pārājika also has the meaning of: Transgressing the precept against theft, falling back and deteriorating—this is called Pārājika.

Pārājika further has the meaning of: Offences of transgression that cannot be confessed and repented—therefore they are called Pārājika.

Timely medicine: All roots of plants, all kinds of grain, all kinds of meat.

Roots: Medicinal roots, grass roots, lotus roots, bamboo roots, water taro roots, grape roots, onion roots—these are called roots.

Grain: Comprises seventeen kinds. They are:

1. Rice. 2. Red rice.

3. Wheat. 4. Barley.

5. Small beans. 6. Hū beans.

7. Large beans. 8. Lamp beans.

9. Non-glutinous rice. 10. Seedling rice.

11. Sesame. 12. Ginger.

13. Xà trí. 14. Ba tát đà.

15. Sedge seeds. 16. Chỉ na câu.

17. Câu đà bà.

These are called the seventeen kinds of grain.

Meat: The flesh of creatures on land and in water. What are the creatures in water?

—Creatures in water are: Fish, turtles, ḍiḍi, cila, sura, susura, susumāra. Such creatures living in water whose flesh may be eaten are called aquatic creatures.

What are the creatures on land?

—Creatures on land are: Two-footed, four-footed, footless, and many-footed creatures—all of these are called land creatures.

Food consisting of roots, seeds, and meat as described above all belongs to timely food (food taken at the proper time). Why?—Because it may be eaten only at the proper time and not at an improper time; therefore it is called timely food. If a monk with a thieving mind touches these timely medicines, he commits the offence of Dukkhaṭa. If he causes them to move, he commits the offence of Thullaccaya. If he displaces them from their original place and the amount is sufficient (five coins), he commits the offence of Pārājika.

Nightly medicine (medicine taken at night): Comprises 14 kinds of fruit juice as follows:

1. Āmra fruit juice. 2. Pear juice.

3. Pomegranate juice. 4. Diendali juice (?). 5. Grape juice. 6. Bārussa juice.

7. Kiṃkiṇa juice. 8. Banana juice.

9. Kejaḍi juice. 10. Kiṭṭhaphala juice. 11. Bū lung cừ juice. 12. Sugarcane juice.

13. Khāriḍa juice. 14. Khabalī juice.

These kinds of juice, if received in the early evening may be drunk in the early evening; if received at midnight may be drunk at midnight; if received at the end of the night may be drunk at the end of the night; or if received before a meal and kept to drink in the evening—these are called nightly medicines. If a monk with a thieving mind touches these nightly medicines, he commits the offence of Dukkhaṭa.

If he causes them to move, he commits the offence of Thullaccaya.

If he displaces them from their original place by a sufficient amount (as prescribed), he commits the offence of Pārājika.

Seven-day medicine: Milk, oil, honey, rock sugar, fat, fresh milk.

Milk: Various kinds of milk such as cow's milk, buffalo milk, goat's milk, antelope milk, camel's milk, and so forth.

Oil: Sesame oil, lettuce oil, yellowish-blue oil, aḍasi oil, tila oil, bilau oil, bichu-maṇḍa oil, kalaṃja oil, sāla oil, atimuktaka oil, maṇḍu oil, hempseed oil, and other such oils are called oil.

Honey: Such honeys as guṇḍā honey, poḍi honey, fly honey, ground-bee honey—all are called honey.

Solid sugar: Such as bandhā sugar, nāra sugar, mañja sugar, mahāvilī sugar, and so forth—these are called solid sugar.

Fat: Such as fish fat, bear fat, bi fat, susumāra fat, pig fat. These fats have no bones, no flesh, no blood, no foul smell, and are not a main food. If a sick monk receives them, he is permitted to use them for seven days. These are called fat.

Fresh milk: Such as the fresh milk of cows, goats, and so forth, properly filtered, not a main food—if unexpectedly received, one is permitted to drink it for seven days. These are called seven-day medicines.

If a monk with a thieving mind touches the seven-day medicines, he commits the offence of Dukkhaṭa.

If he causes the object to move, he commits the offence of Thullaccaya.

If he displaces it from its original place by a sufficient prescribed amount, he commits the offence of Pārājika.

Lifetime medicine: Harītakī, vibhītakī, āmalakī, the lốt plant, pepper, ginger, the long-life fruit, the peach, the star apple, the red bean fruit, the Pārasīka fruit, the banana (pannaṃ); the type with five small roots, the type with five large roots, all kinds of salt, all kinds of ash excepting eight kinds of ash, all kinds of earth excepting solid sugar and gravel. These medicines are not food.

If received fresh, a sick monk may keep and consume them for the rest of his life. These are called lifetime medicines.

If a monk with a thieving mind touches the lifetime medicines, he commits the offence of Dukkhaṭa.

If he causes them to move, he commits the offence of Thullaccaya.

If it moves from its original place, meeting the stipulated amount, one commits the offense of Pārājika.

—Personal belongings (vật tùy thân): The three robes, the sitting cloth, the rash-covering cloth, the rain robe, the bowl, the large kaṇḍa container, the small kaṇḍa container, the bowl bag, the bathing-kit bag, the water-strainer, the two kinds of belts, the razor, the bronze spoon, the small bowl, the needle case, the water vessel, the bathing ladle, the oil flask, the small flask, the staff, leather sandals, the umbrella, the fan, and other necessary requisites—these are called personal belongings. There are also personal belongings of laypeople, such as weapons, knives, sticks, clothing, and other necessary implements of white-robed persons, which are likewise called personal belongings.

If a bhikkhu, with a mind of theft, touches any of those objects, he commits the offense of Dukkaṭa.

If he causes them to move, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

If he moves them from their original place, meeting the stipulated amount, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

—Heavy objects (trọng vật): Such as beds, things used for lying upon, and other heavy items.

—Beds and things used for lying upon are: Beds for sleeping, beds for sitting, small blankets, large blankets, wooden blocks, sheets, pillows, and other heavy objects such as things made of bronze, of wood, of bamboo, of brick, and so forth.

—Things made of bronze are: Bronze vessels, bronze pots, bronze pans, bronze spoons, and other bronze implements—these are called bronze implements.

—Things made of wood and bamboo are: Wooden boxes, wooden flasks, wooden basins, wooden bowls, wooden ladles, bamboo baskets, bamboo mats, bamboo hampers, and all other objects made of wood and bamboo—these are called objects made of wood and bamboo.

—Objects made of earth: From large earthen jars down to small bowls used as lamps are all called objects made of earth and brick.

If a bhikkhu, arising a mind of theft, touches any of those heavy objects, he commits the offense of Dukkaṭa.

If he causes them to move, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

If he moves them from their original place, meeting the stipulated amount, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

—Impure objects (vật bất tịnh): Coins, gold, silver—because a bhikkhu is not permitted to touch them, they are called impure objects (objects that are not pure).

If a bhikkhu, arising a mind of theft, touches impure objects, he commits the offense of Dukkaṭa.

If he causes them to move, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

If he moves them from their original place, meeting the stipulated amount, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

—Objects that are both pure and impure: Pearls, lapis lazuli, gems, coral, crystal, mother-of-pearl, agate, jade. Because these precious objects may be touched but may not be worn upon the body, they are called objects that are both pure and impure.

If a bhikkhu, arising a mind of theft, touches objects that are both pure and impure, he commits the offense of Dukkaṭa.

If he causes them to move, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

If he moves them from their original place, meeting the stipulated amount, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

—There are also sixteen other categories of objects: Earth, objects within the earth, water, objects within water, boats, objects within boats, vehicles, objects upon vehicles, four-footed creatures, objects upon four-footed creatures, two-footed creatures, objects upon two-footed creatures, footless creatures, objects upon footless creatures, open space, and objects in open space.

1. What is earth?

—Gold mines, silver mines, copper mines, iron mines, tin mines, unrefined ore (?), gold-bearing stone, sulfurous stone, dust, red earth, white clay, and all the kinds of earth used by potters—all of these are called earth.

If a bhikkhu, arising a mind of theft, touches any of those kinds of earth, he commits the offense of Dukkaṭa.

If he causes them to move, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

If he moves them from their original place, meeting the stipulated amount, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

2. Objects within the earth: If people have buried various things in the ground, such as: coins, gold, silver, crystal, gems, pearls, mother-of-pearl, agate, jars of milk, jars of oil, jars of solid sugar, as well as medicinal trees, roots, branches, leaves, and fruits, and so forth—up to eight kinds of things concealed in the ground—these are called objects within the earth.

If a bhikkhu, arising a mind of theft, touches any of those objects within the earth, he commits the offense of Dukkaṭa.

If he causes them to move, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

If he moves them from their original place, meeting the stipulated amount, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

—Water: Water comprises ten kinds: River water, pond water, well water, deep marsh water inhabited by dragons, clear water, hot spring water, water free from disease, filtered rainwater, water in the sky, and flowing water. In some places water is very precious; in other places it is not precious—sometimes one coin buys four or five jars, or sometimes one must exchange all one's possessions to obtain a single jar; whereas near villages, towns, and cities where good water is available, one coin may obtain five or six jars.

Suppose a merchant must travel along distant and desolate roads—whether five yojanas, ten yojanas, or up to five hundred yojanas—with no water along the way. Those merchants must all carry water with them, either finding it themselves or purchasing it. At that time, one merchant has only a little water remaining, not enough for use; pressed by thirst, he thinks: "If I remain alive, I can earn money; but if I die of thirst, what use is money?" And so he exchanges all his possessions for a single jar of water.

At that time, a bhikkhu is traveling together with that merchant, and the merchant has been regularly providing water to the bhikkhu; but before they reach their destination the water is nearly exhausted. The merchant then says to the bhikkhu: "The road ahead is still long and the water is nearly gone. Therefore I offer this portion of water to the Venerable, and this other portion I will keep to drink." The bhikkhu must estimate the amount of water that the merchant has given and use only that.

If he arises a mind of theft and drinks more water than allotted, meeting the stipulated amount, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

If the stipulated amount has not yet been reached, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

If the merchant says: "The water I am providing is for the Venerable; please do not give it to others." However, if at that time there is an elderly, sick person tormented by thirst who comes to the bhikkhu begging for water, and out of compassion the bhikkhu wishes to provide water to that sick person and thinks: "Although the owner has spoken thus, this sick person is pitiable; I should now give him water." If the owner also has a compassionate mind, agrees, and raises no objection, then there is no offense.

If someone is transporting water by boat, and a bhikkhu, pressed by thirst, arises a mind of theft and touches the water in that person's boat, he commits the offense of Dukkaṭa.

If he uses a bowl or ladle to scoop that water but has not yet left the boat, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

If he has carried the water away and both his body and his robe have left the boat, meeting the stipulated amount, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

If a bhikkhu bores a hole in that person's water-storage vessel, he commits the offense of Dukkaṭa.

If he inserts a tube through the hole and drinks water, meeting the stipulated amount, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

If he drinks intermittently—now drinking, now stopping—then each mouthful incurs an offense of Thullaccaya.

If the water container was previously covered with a lid and a bhikkhu, arising a mind of theft, opens the lid, he commits the offense of Dukkaṭa.

While pouring out the water, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

When the pouring is complete and the stipulated amount is met, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

If while pouring the water he immediately gives rise to remorse, fearing a grave offense, and pours the water back into the vessel, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

If he intends to pull a boat away in order to steal water: when pulling the boat forward, as soon as the stern passes the point where the bow was, he commits the offense of Pārājika. Or if he pulls the boat backward, when the bow passes the point where the stern was; or if he pulls it to the right, when the left side of the boat passes the point where the right side was; or the reverse—he immediately commits the offense of Pārājika.

If the boat is small and easily moved, and a bhikkhu, arising a mind of theft, touches the boat, he commits the offense of Dukkaṭa.

If he causes it to move, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

If he moves it from its original place, meeting the stipulated amount, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

If someone has constructed an embankment to hold water (flowing into a field), the value of which each night is one coin or up to two, three, four, or five coins, and a bhikkhu, for the sake of the Buddha, the Dharma, or the Sangha, arises a mind of theft and breaches their embankment, he commits the offense of Dukkaṭa.

If the water flows into one's own field, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya. If the stipulated amount is met, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

If a bhikkhu does not wish to breach the embankment directly but uses a means of dragging bricks or wood across it, causing the embankment to break and the water to flow, then at the moment of dragging across he commits the offense of Dukkaṭa.

If the water flows into the field, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

Meeting the stipulated amount, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

If he uses a means of driving cattle, goats, or camels across and thereby damages the embankment, the same applies.

If a bhikkhu, with a mind of jealousy, breaches the embankment so that the water drains away, he commits the offense of Dukkaṭa.

If a monk is traveling through a wilderness with merchants, and someone says: "Tomorrow we will reach a place with water." At that time, a certain merchant is carrying water, and the monk, tormented by thirst, goes to ask him for some but is refused. The monk then becomes angry and scolds: "You wretched fellow! Why are you so miserly? You carry so much water yet dare not drink it yourself, nor give it to animals, nor to śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas — before long you will have to abandon it anyway, so what use is it?" The monk then smashes the merchant's water container. Because of his malicious mind, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense.

If someone stores water in a basin at their home, and the relatives or friends of a monk suffer a house fire, and the monk arises with the intention to steal that water to put out the fire — if he touches the water, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense.

If he causes the water basin to move, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If he pours enough water onto the fire to meet the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If he thinks to himself: "I will repay in full the amount of water I take," he does not offend.

If the owner's house is on fire and he uses the owner's own water to put out the fire, he does not offend. If there is a drought lasting ten or twenty years, and the water of a pond or well is under someone's guardianship, and a monk arises with the intention to steal it, bringing a container to fetch the water — if he touches the water, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense.

If he scoops the water, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If he carries the water away from the pond and the amount meets the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If a pond is situated within a walled garden and the gate is shut, and a monk arises with the intention to steal, using a tube from a distance to draw water to drink — if the water flows continuously without stopping and the amount meets the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If he drinks sip by sip and pauses between sips, each sip constitutes a separate Thullaccaya offense.

If water is in a well and a monk arises with the intention to steal it — when he draws the water, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense.

When he has drawn the water and poured it into a container, he commits a Thullaccaya offense. And when he carries the water away from the well and the amount meets the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

There are households of non-Buddhists who store water in jars. When their house catches fire, they are thrown into panic. At that moment a monk thinks: "These non-Buddhists are so wicked — they are always jealous of the Buddha-Dharma and slander the śramaṇas of the Śākya sons. Now disaster has befallen you." He then goes and uses a staff to smash their water jars. Because of his malicious mind and the destruction of another's property, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense.

There are various famous waters: in Campā there is the water of the Ganges River; in the city of Rājagṛha there is hot spring water; in the settlement of Pāṭaliputra there is the river Śona; in the country of Vārāṇasī there is the pond water frequented by the Buddha on his wanderings; in the country of Sāketa there is the Mantra Well water; in the city of Śrāvastī there is the Puṇḍarīka water; in the country of Mathurā there is the Yamunā water; in the country of Saṃkāśya there is the rock-honey water.

Nobles send people to fetch these various waters, and on the return journey they rest along the road. If a monk, driven by thirst, arises with the intention to steal and touches that water, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense. If he pours that water into his own vessel, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If the pouring is completed and the amount meets the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If while pouring he gives rise to remorse, fearing the gravity of the offense, and pours the water back into the original container, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

Nobles who go to enjoy themselves in ornamental gardens may have a pond built and perfumed oil blended into the water. If a monk arises with the intention to steal and takes that water, but the water itself is not of monetary value, then the offense is assessed according to the market value of the perfumed oil blended into it.

These are called the various kinds of water.

4. Objects in Water: These include the various things that grow in water, such as: the utpala, the padma, the kumuda, the puṇḍarīka, the saugandhika, lotus roots, and so forth, along with other objects that grow in water. If a monk arises with the intention to steal and touches these things growing in water, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense.

If he causes them to move, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place and the amount meets the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense. If he takes only a single flower whose value meets the prescribed measure, he likewise commits a Pārājika offense.

If the value has not yet reached the prescribed measure, each flower constitutes a separate Thullaccaya offense.

However, if one picks flowers and places them on the ground, one has not yet committed a Pārājika offense. Or if the bundle of flowers is large and heavy and cannot be lifted, even dragging it a short distance does not constitute a Pārājika offense. But if it has already been lifted off the ground, a Pārājika offense is committed. The same applies to other objects growing in water.

If nobles have flowers made of gold and silver, and boats fashioned in the shapes of various birds — teal, geese, mandarin ducks — placed in bathing pools and recreation areas, and a monk arises with the intention to steal and touches those objects, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense.

If he moves them, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place and the amount meets the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

Or if someone hides objects such as gold, silver, lapis lazuli, mother-of-pearl, agate, coral, amber, pearls, red gems, and eight other kinds beneath the water, and a monk arises with the intention to steal and touches those objects, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense.

If he moves them, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place and the amount meets the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

These are called objects in water.

5. Boats: Boats are of various kinds: the Vīkula boat, the Kūhāṭa boat, the Vargulī boat, the Viśikhā boat, the horse-faced boat, the elephant-faced boat, the goat-faced boat, the fish-faced boat; or boats of one to seven decks; or boats with partitions, or without partitions; or boats used to transport elephants, or to transport horses, or to carry goods, or to carry bricks and tiles, or to carry hides, or to carry metals — down to rafts that carry mats. If such boats and rafts are moored in one place and a monk arises with the intention to steal and touches them, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense.

If he moves them, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If he cuts the mooring rope but has not yet moved the boat from its original place, he commits a Thullaccaya offense. Or if the boat has moved from its original place but he has not yet cut the mooring rope, he likewise commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If he has both cut the mooring rope and moved the boat from its original place, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If his intention is to steal the boat and not the goods aboard it, but fearing detection he takes the goods along as well — even if he moves away from the original place, he has not yet committed a Pārājika offense.

But if he leaves the goods behind and takes only the boat, then upon moving away from the original place he immediately commits a Pārājika offense.

If his intention is to steal the goods and not the boat, but fearing discovery he takes the boat along as well, he has not yet committed a Pārājika offense.

But if he leaves the boat behind and takes only the goods away, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If he intends to steal both the boat and the goods, then the moment the boat moves from its original place he commits a Pārājika offense.

If he intends to sink the goods to the river bottom in order to steal them later, a Pārājika offense is committed at the moment the goods sink out of sight.

If a person has moored a boat at the riverbank and gone to sit and rest in a secluded spot, and a monk intends to steal the boat — at that moment another person tells the boat owner: "There is a renunciant who wants to steal your boat." The boat owner asks: "To what order does this renunciant belong?"

The reply: "He is a śramaṇa of the Śākya sons."

The boat owner says: "No need to worry — the śramaṇas of the Śākya sons do not take what is not given."

But at that moment the monk's body has already touched the boat. The other person again tells the boat owner: "That monk has already taken your boat." The boat owner then becomes doubtful — can it really be that a monk wishes to steal my boat? — and asks: "Venerable one, what are you doing?" At that point the monk remains silent and does not answer, but poles the boat away. The boat owner then gives chase, calling out: "Venerable one!

That boat belongs to the king, to a great minister, to a brāhmaṇa, to a householder — it is a boat set aside for meritorious purposes, a boat for ferrying people." He also threatens the monk, saying: "Wretch! If you take my boat, I will deal with you accordingly." Although the monk has poled the boat some distance away, if the boat owner does not think the boat is lost and the monk does not think he has obtained it, then a Pārājika offense has not yet been committed.

Conversely, if the boat owner thinks the boat is lost and the monk thinks he has obtained it, then a Pārājika offense is committed.

If a boat-owner has moored his boat at the riverbank, and a visiting bhikkhu comes and says to him: "Good sir (long-lived one), please ferry me across." The boat-owner replies: "There is only one person—how can I ferry you?" The bhikkhu says again: "Good sir, my mealtime has come; do not cause me to miss my meal. If you ferry me now, it is as though you are giving me food, bestowing joy upon me as an act of generosity.

I vow that in this life and in future lives we shall help one another." The boat-owner says again: "You have not a single coin—how can you speak of helping others? Your feet are like those of a starving crow, settling nowhere in particular—who will help you?" The bhikkhu then lowers his voice and pleads earnestly. The boat-owner asks again: "I can manage on my own.

Venerable sir, you are alone right now—how do you expect me to ferry you?" The bhikkhu replies: "Good sir! You need only hold the rudder; let me do the rowing." The boat-owner agrees and bids the bhikkhu board the vessel. When they reach the middle of the river, the bhikkhu seizes the oar and strikes the boat-owner, cursing him: "You vile and wicked man, how dare you humiliate a śramaṇa, a son of the Śākyas!" Having cursed him, he strikes the boat-owner again, inflicting severe wounds to his limbs, and then throws him into the water—this constitutes the offense of Thullaccaya.

If the boat-owner dies, and the bhikkhu had previously harbored an intention to kill, then he commits a Pārājika offense.

If he had no prior intention to kill, then he commits a Thullaccaya offense. At that time, if the bhikkhu steals the boat-owner's vessel, or steals his baggage, and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If it does not yet meet the prescribed amount, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If a bhikkhu with malicious intent sinks the other's boat, or destroys it, or sets it adrift—because he has caused damage and loss to another's property—he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense.

If a person wishes to make merit by using his boat to ferry people across, and a bhikkhu rows that boat across the river on his own, he must moor the boat at the bank so that those who come afterward may still use it. If the bhikkhu steals the boat or their baggage and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If he sinks it in the water, or destroys it, or sets it adrift, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense. When a bhikkhu has rowed the boat to the far shore, he must moor it at the bank in an open, accessible place so that those who come afterward may still use it; he must not moor it in a hidden place.

This is called the Boat.

6. Objects on a boat: The objects on a boat—such as gold, silver, pearls, money, amber, lapis lazuli, jade, coral, mother-of-pearl, red gems, kappāsa, and all manner of clothing, grain, and the eight categories of goods—whether covered or uncovered: if a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft and touches those objects, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense.

If he moves those objects, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

7. Vehicles: Whether a passenger carriage, a cargo wagon, a three-wheeled cart, a rickshaw, or even children's toy vehicles—these are called vehicles.

If a bhikkhu steals a two-wheeled vehicle and pushes it forward so that the rear of the vehicle passes beyond the front, and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense. Or if he pushes it backward so that the front passes beyond the rear, he commits a Pārājika offense. Or if he pushes it sideways so that the left wheel passes beyond the right, or the right beyond the left, he likewise commits a Pārājika offense.

Or if a bhikkhu breaks the vehicle apart and steals individual pieces of timber, and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense. If the prescribed amount is not yet met, he commits a Thullaccaya offense. Or if the vehicle is small enough to be carried away: if he touches it, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense; if he moves it, he commits a Thullaccaya offense; if he removes it from its original place and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

These are called the various types of vehicles.

8. Objects on a vehicle: These include lion-skin coverings, tiger-skin coverings, yellow kambala cloth (?), and other coverings of various kinds; all manner of cushioning materials; and all manner of ornamental fittings for the vehicle. These are called objects on a vehicle.

—All objects stored within a vehicle: these are gold, silver, lapis lazuli, mother-of-pearl, agate, pearls, jade, coral, amber, red gems, and so forth; clothing, food and drink, and the eight categories of goods—whether covered or uncovered. If a bhikkhu with a mind of theft touches those objects, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense. If he moves them, he commits a Thullaccaya offense. If he removes them from their original place and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

These are called the objects stored within a vehicle.

9. Four-footed animals: These are elephants, horses, camels, cattle, donkeys, mules, goats, and even rats, wolves, and so forth. If a bhikkhu wishes to steal an elephant and leads it away—when it has lifted one foot up to three feet—he commits a Thullaccaya offense. When it has lifted all four feet and moved from its original place, and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense. The same applies to horses, camels, and down to goats. If the animal is small enough to be carried on one's back or shoulders, then touching it constitutes a Dukkhaṭa offense; moving it constitutes a Thullaccaya offense; removing it from its original place, if the value meets the prescribed amount, constitutes a Pārājika offense.

These are called the four-footed animals.

10. Objects on four-footed animals: These are the implements and equipment used to outfit elephants, as well as the equipment for rats, wolves, and eight other kinds of animals—whether covered or uncovered. If a bhikkhu with a mind of theft touches those objects, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense; if he moves them, he commits a Thullaccaya offense; if he removes them from their original place and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

These are called the objects on four-footed animals.

11. Two-footed beings: These are humans and birds, and so forth. If a bhikkhu steals a person under another's authority—whether by enticing them away or by compelling them with a knife or staff—when that person lifts one foot, he commits a Thullaccaya offense. If both feet are lifted, he commits a Pārājika offense. If the person is small enough to be carried on the back or in the arms, then touching them constitutes a Dukkhaṭa offense; moving them constitutes a Thullaccaya offense; removing them from their original place, if the value meets the prescribed amount, constitutes a Pārājika offense. The same applies to birds.

These are called two-footed beings.

12. Objects on two-footed beings: These are the ornaments of women, the ornaments of men, and even the adornments worn on the body of a parrot.

—The ornaments of women: these are bracelets, bangles, clothing, and so forth.

—The ornaments of men: such as robes, jeweled headgear, necklaces, and so forth.

And even the adornments on parrots—such as gold, jade, and small bells attached to their necks and feet—and the eight other categories of goods, whether covered or uncovered. If a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft and touches the objects on these two-footed beings, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense. If he moves them, he commits a Thullaccaya offense. If he removes them from their original place and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

These are called the objects on two-footed beings.

13. Footless animals: These are snakes and serpents—whether they eat flowers, fruit, or flesh, or subsist on air alone—or snakes kept in a jar or a cage.

There was a bhikkhu who had formerly been a snake-keeper and later went forth into the monastic life. Wishing to steal another person's snake, he feared the owner might notice, and so he carried away the cage as well—this does not yet constitute a Pārājika offense. But if he catches the snake and leaves the cage behind, and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

However, if his intention was only to steal the cage and not the snake, but out of fear that the owner might notice he took the snake along as well, this does not yet constitute a Pārājika offense. If he leaves the snake and takes the cage, and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense. If he intends to steal both the cage and the snake, then when he carries both away from their original place and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If he steals a snake from a jar and the snake's tail has not yet emerged from the mouth of the jar, he has not yet committed a Pārājika offense. If both head and tail have fully emerged from the jar and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If out of anger he reproaches the owner, saying: "You wicked man, why do you cage living beings in this way!" and then opens the cage to let the snake crawl out—he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense.

If a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft and touches a footless animal, he commits a Dukkhaṭa offense.

If he moves it, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If he removes it from its original place and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

These are called the footless animals.

14. Objects upon footless creatures: These are gold, silver, pearls, mother-of-pearl, amber, coral, jade, lapis lazuli, red gems, and so forth up to the eight kinds of valuables, whether covered or uncovered. Because people fear these footless creatures, they dare not take the objects resting upon them. If a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft and touches these objects resting upon footless creatures, he commits a Vīti-offense.

If he moves those objects, he commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place in a sufficient amount to meet the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

These are called objects upon footless creatures.

15. Objects of intermediate space: These are the āmra tree, the jambu tree, the jambū tree, the pārijāta tree, the cippala tree, the dragon-flower tree, the auspicious tree, their fruits, and so forth up to all trees bearing flowers and fruit. If a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft and steals these trees, and when taking one tree it meets the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If it does not yet meet the prescribed measure, then according to the degree—such as uprooting saplings—he commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If he uproots a sapling and leaves it in one place, he has not yet committed a Pārājika offense.

If he carries it away beyond that piece of ground and the prescribed measure is met, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If the tree is heavy, and he drags it without it having left the ground even though he has moved a great distance, he has not yet committed a Pārājika offense.

If he takes it beyond the piece of ground, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft and touches objects in the intermediate space, he commits a Vīti-offense.

If he moves them, he commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place and the prescribed measure is met, he commits a Pārājika offense.

These are called objects of intermediate space.

16. Objects above intermediate space: These are āmra fruits (mangoes) and so forth up to auspicious fruits. If a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft and steals such fruits to eat them, and if eating one fruit meets the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If it does not yet meet the measure, then for each bite he commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If a bhikkhu touches the tree and a fruit falls to the ground, he has not yet committed a Pārājika offense.

If he picks up the fruit and carries it away, and the prescribed measure is met, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If two persons go together to steal fruit—one climbs the tree and plucks the fruit, throwing it down, while the other on the ground picks it up—they have not yet committed a Pārājika offense.

If the person who was in the tree has come down to the ground and carries the fruit away, and the prescribed measure is met, he commits a Pārājika offense. Stealing all other kinds of fruit is the same.

If at such places as the site of the Buddha's birth, the site of his attainment of enlightenment, the site of his turning of the Wheel of the Dharma, the site of the great assembly convened by the Venerable Ānanda, the great assembly convened by Rāhula, and the great assembly convened by Pañcavārṣika, rows of trees have been planted, and upon those trees various precious gems and the eight kinds of valuables have been adorned, whether covered or uncovered—if a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft and touches those precious objects, he commits a Vīti-offense.

If he moves them, he commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place and the prescribed measure is met, he commits a Pārājika offense.

These are called objects above intermediate space.

Regarding the sixteen categories of objects enumerated above: if a bhikkhu with a mind of theft touches them, he commits a Vīti-offense.

If he moves them, he commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place and the prescribed measure is met, he commits a Pārājika offense.

There are also thirteen cases of differentiation. These are:

1. Differentiation of objects.

2. Differentiation of location.

3. Differentiation of the indeterminate.

4. Differentiation of walls and partitions.

5. Differentiation of cages.

6. Differentiation of deposits.

7. Differentiation of miscellaneous matters.

8. Differentiation of directions.

9. Differentiation of marks.

10. Differentiation of stakes.

11. Differentiation of gardens.

12. Differentiation of theft.

13. Differentiation of taxes.

1. Differentiation of objects: Objects are of eight kinds:

a. Medicine to be taken at the proper time.

b. Medicine to be taken at night.

c. Medicine to be taken within seven days.

d. Medicine to be taken for life.

e. Personal belongings.

f. Heavy objects.

g. Impure objects.

h. Objects that are both pure and impure.

These are called the differentiated objects.

If a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft and touches those objects, he commits a Vīti-offense.

If he moves them, he commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place and the prescribed measure is met, he commits a Pārājika offense.

2. Differentiation of location: This refers to earth and objects within the earth; water and objects within the water; boats and objects on boats; vehicles and objects on vehicles; quadrupeds and objects on quadrupeds; bipeds and objects on bipeds; footless creatures and objects on footless creatures; intermediate space and objects in intermediate space.

These are called the differentiated locations.

If a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft and touches those objects, he commits a Vīti-offense.

If he moves them, he commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place and the prescribed measure is met, he commits a Pārājika offense.

3. Differentiation of the indeterminate: There are cases where one knows yet speaks falsely, incurring a Pācittiya offense. There are cases where one does not know yet speaks falsely, incurring a Pācittiya offense. Or one knows yet speaks falsely and incurs a Pārājika offense. Or one knows yet speaks falsely and incurs a Saṅghāvaśeṣa offense. Or one knows yet speaks falsely and incurs a Sthūlātyaya offense. Or one knows yet speaks falsely and incurs a Vīti-offense.

—Knowing yet speaking falsely, incurring a Pārājika offense: If a bhikkhu has not truly attained a state transcending ordinary human capacity yet says, "I have attained arhatship," this is knowing yet speaking falsely—not a Pācittiya offense, but a Pārājika offense.

—Knowing yet speaking falsely, incurring a Saṅghāvaśeṣa offense: If a bhikkhu groundlessly accuses another bhikkhu of committing a Pārājika offense, this is knowing yet speaking falsely—not a Pācittiya offense, but a Saṅghāvaśeṣa offense.

—Knowing yet speaking falsely, incurring a Sthūlātyaya offense: If a bhikkhu says, "I am an arhat," this is knowing yet speaking falsely—not a Pācittiya offense, but a Sthūlātyaya offense.

—Knowing yet speaking falsely, incurring a Vīti-offense: If a bhikkhu says of himself, "Am I an arhat?" this is knowing yet speaking falsely—not a Pācittiya offense, but a Vīti-offense.

—Knowing yet speaking falsely, incurring a Pācittiya offense: Apart from the cases above, all other instances of false speech fall under knowing yet speaking falsely, incurring a Pācittiya offense.

There are also cases: damaging plants and trees incurs a Pārājika offense. There are cases where damaging plants and trees incurs a Sthūlātyaya offense. There are cases where damaging plants and trees incurs a Pācittiya offense.

—Damaging plants and trees incurring a Pārājika offense: If plants, trees, flowers, and fruits are under someone's ownership and a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft intending to take them and in so doing damages them, and the prescribed measure is met, this is not a Pācittiya offense but a Pārājika offense.

—Damaging plants and trees incurring a Sthūlātyaya offense: If plants, trees, flowers, and fruits are under someone's ownership and a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft and steals them but the prescribed measure is not yet met, this is not a Pācittiya offense but a Sthūlātyaya offense.

—Damaging plants and trees incurring a Pācittiya offense: Damaging all plants and trees incurs a Pācittiya offense.

There are cases where eating at an improper time incurs a Pārājika offense. There are cases where eating at an improper time incurs a Sthūlātyaya offense. There are cases where eating at an improper time incurs a Pācittiya offense.

—Eating at an improper time incurring a Pārājika offense: If a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft, steals another's food, and then eats it at an improper time, and the prescribed measure is met, this is not a Pācittiya offense but a Pārājika offense.

—Eating at an improper time incurring a Sthūlātyaya offense: If a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft, takes another's food and eats it at an improper time, but the prescribed measure is not yet met, this is not a Pācittiya offense but a Sthūlātyaya offense.

—Eating at an improper time incurring a Pācittiya offense: If a bhikkhu receives food in a lawful manner but eats it at an improper time, he incurs a Pācittiya offense.

Drinking intoxicants does not incur only a Pācittiya offense; there are cases where drinking intoxicants incurs a Pārājika offense. There are cases where drinking intoxicants incurs a Sthūlātyaya offense. There are cases where drinking intoxicants incurs a Pācittiya offense.

—Drinking intoxicants incurring a Pārājika offense: If a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft, takes another's intoxicants and drinks them, and the prescribed measure is met, he commits a Pārājika offense.

—Drinking intoxicants incurring a Sthūlātyaya offense: If a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft, takes another's intoxicants and drinks them, but the prescribed measure is not yet met, he commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

—Drinking intoxicants incurring a Pācittiya offense: If a bhikkhu receives intoxicants in a lawful manner and drinks them, he commits a Pācittiya offense.

If a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft and touches the objects in the indeterminate differentiation, he commits a Vīti-offense.

If he moves them, he commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place and the prescribed measure is met, he commits a Pārājika offense.

These are called the objects of indeterminate differentiation.

4. Distinctions Regarding Enclosures: These include elephant stables, horse stables, camel stables, donkey stables, cattle pens, goat pens, vegetable gardens, mustard greens gardens, melon patches, sugarcane fields, and so forth. If a bhikkhu arises with a mind of theft and seizes another's elephant, and the elephant lifts one foot up to all four feet and moves toward the door of the stable, but its body has not yet passed through the doorway, he commits a Thullaccaya offense; when the body has passed through the doorway, he commits a Pārājika offense. The same applies to all other animals. If a bhikkhu arises with a mind of theft and attempts to seize another's goat, but the goat is frightened and runs away, and in anger he beats it to death, he commits a Pācittiya offense.

If a bhikkhu cuts the meat and throws it outside the fence, he has not yet committed a Pārājika; but when he himself has gone outside the fence and then carries the meat away from that area to the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

Or if he returns inside the pen and eats the meat to the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If two bhikkhus go to steal a goat, one remaining outside the fence and one inside, and the one inside cuts the meat and throws it outside the fence, a Pārājika has not yet been committed.

If that person then goes outside and carries the meat away from that area to the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu arises with a mind of theft and goes to pull up mustard greens by stealth, and pulling up a single plant reaches the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense. If the prescribed measure has not yet been reached, then with each plant pulled up, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If he pulls them up and piles them together, a Pārājika has not yet been committed; but when he carries them out of the garden, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If he pulls up large roots that cannot be carried away, and merely drags them a short distance, a Pārājika has not yet been committed.

When they have left the ground and the prescribed measure is reached, he commits a Pārājika offense. The same applies to all vegetables up to and including melons.

If a bhikkhu arises with a mind of theft and secretly cuts another's sugarcane, and eats it at the proper time — even one stalk reaching the prescribed measure — he commits a Pārājika offense.

If the prescribed measure has not yet been reached, then for each stalk he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If he cuts it and throws it outside the fence, he has not committed a Pārājika, but commits a Pācittiya offense.

If he goes outside the garden, carries it away, and the prescribed measure is reached, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu with a mind of theft craftily ties the sugarcane under his heel and drags it away, even dragging it some distance, a Pārājika has not yet been committed.

When it has left the area of ground and the prescribed measure is reached, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu inside the garden cuts sugarcane and throws it out to a bhikkhu standing outside the garden, a Pārājika has not yet been committed.

If that person then goes outside and carries the sugarcane away from the garden to the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If, while a bhikkhu is carrying the sugarcane away, it brushes against stalks and leaves of sugarcane but has not yet left the garden, a Pārājika has not yet been committed.

After having left the garden, he commits a Pārājika offense.

In summary, if a bhikkhu arises with a mind of theft and touches any of the aforementioned objects, he commits a Dukkaṭa offense.

If he moves them, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place to the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

---

5. Distinctions Regarding Cages: These include birds such as parrots and the like, and animals such as lions and the like.

If a bhikkhu arises with a mind of theft, intending only to steal the bird and not the cage, but fearing discovery he takes the entire cage away, a Pārājika has not yet been committed.

If he leaves the cage behind and takes the bird away to the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense. If he intends to steal the cage and not the bird, but fearing discovery he takes the bird along as well, a Pārājika has not yet been committed.

If he releases the bird and carries the cage away to the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If he intends to steal both the cage and the bird, and carries them away from their original place to the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu arises with a mind of theft, and while his hand is still inside the cage grasping the bird, he commits a Dukkaṭa offense.

When one foot of the bird has come out of the cage, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

When both feet have come out of the cage but the wings and tail have not yet passed the mouth of the cage, a Pārājika has not yet been committed.

When the bird has completely left the cage and the prescribed measure is reached, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu steals a lion and his hand is still inside the enclosure, he commits a Dukkaṭa offense.

If one foot of the lion has been pulled out, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

But when all four feet have come out of the enclosure yet the tail has not yet emerged, a Pārājika has not yet been committed.

When it has completely come out, he commits a Pārājika offense. The same applies to all other animals.

In summary, if a bhikkhu arises with a mind of theft and touches any object within such a cage or enclosure, he commits a Dukkaṭa offense.

If he moves them, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place to the prescribed measure, he commits a Pārājika offense.

---

6. Distinctions Regarding Entrusted Goods: If a preceptor, teacher, pupil, or friend entrusts an object — such as a bowl, a robe, or other belongings — to someone for safekeeping, and the keeper thinks: "The one who deposited this has gone far away, and it is not known what these deposited items are; therefore I shall make use of them," and thereupon arises with a mind of theft and takes that object — moving it from the ground up to the knee, from the knee back down to the ground, from the left shoulder to the right shoulder, or from the head down to the shoulder — each such movement, reaching the prescribed measure, constitutes a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu who has received a robe in trust then crosses a river, or wades through a pond, or passes through swirling water, or encounters rain, and fearing that it will become wet opens the bundle to inspect it, and seeing that the robe is fine, then thinks: "The one who deposited this has gone far away, and no one present knows about it; I should make use of this." Thereupon arising with a mind of theft and taking that object — moving it from the ground to the knee, from the knee back to the ground, from the left shoulder to the right shoulder, or from the shoulder to the head — each such movement, reaching the prescribed measure, constitutes a Pārājika offense.

A bhikkhu who has received goods in trust is traveling on the road, and sees another bhikkhu coming from a place where he previously resided. He asks that bhikkhu: "Venerable, from where have you come?"

The reply: "From such-and-such a place."

He asks: "Do you know that certain bhikkhu?"

The reply: "I do."

He then asks: "Is that bhikkhu well?"

The reply: "He has died" or "He has attained Nirvāṇa."

In that case, the robes and requisites of the deceased should belong to the present Saṅgha. However, if the bhikkhu holding the entrusted goods knows the Dharma yet acts deceitfully, thinking: "Why should I share with this bhikkhu?" — he then silently leaves that bhikkhu behind, goes to a place out of earshot, and says: "That bhikkhu So-and-so has passed away and attained Nirvāṇa. His robes, bowl, and other requisites should be divided among the bhikkhus of the present Saṅgha; but since there is no Saṅgha present, I must receive them myself." This bhikkhu, using a deceitful mind to monopolize those objects, commits a Dukkaṭa offense.

Or suppose the bhikkhu holding the entrusted goods wishes to cross a river by boat, and another bhikkhu comes from the other bank. He asks that bhikkhu: "Where have you come from?"

The reply: "From such-and-such a place."

He asks again: "Do you know that certain bhikkhu?"

The reply: "I do."

He asks again: "Is that bhikkhu well?"

The reply: "He has died and attained Nirvāṇa."

At that time, the robes and requisites of the deceased should belong to the present Saṅgha; but this bhikkhu, knowing the Dharma yet acting deceitfully, performs a kammavācā in order to monopolize the robes and requisites, and thereby commits a Dukkaṭa offense.

Or if the bhikkhu holding the entrusted goods, while his boat is in the middle of the river, encounters another bhikkhu coming from the other side, and asks: "Venerable, from where have you come?" — and so forth — up to performing a deceitful kammavācā with a fraudulent mind, he commits a Dukkaṭa offense.

Or suppose the bhikkhu holding the entrusted goods reaches the other bank, disembarks from the boat, and immediately meets another bhikkhu about to board the boat — and so forth — up to performing a deceitful kammavācā with a fraudulent mind, he commits a Dukkaṭa offense.

Or if the bhikkhu holding the entrusted goods has ascended from the bank and meets another bhikkhu coming from the other side, and asks: "Venerable, from where have you come?" The reply: "From such-and-such a place" — and so forth — up to performing a kammavācā with a deceitful mind, he commits a Dukkaṭa offense.

That bhikkhu may think: "At present there appear to be many people with the same name; how then can I reach that place?" Having arrived there, he inquires whether that certain bhikkhu is well, and learns that he has either died or attained Nirvāṇa. At that point, the robes and requisites naturally belong to the present Saṅgha. This bhikkhu, though knowing the Dharma, acts deceitfully and thinks: "Why should those robes be divided among many people?" He then calls aside a bhikkhu acquaintance outside the sīmā boundary and says: "Bhikkhu So-and-so has passed away and attained Nirvāṇa; his robes, bowl, and miscellaneous requisites should be divided among the present Saṅgha.

Right now the two of us are the ones present and should receive them." This manner of receiving constitutes a deceitful kammavācā, and he thereby commits a Dukkaṭa offense.

If this monk thinks: "Previously he told me to offer this robe to the stupa or to the Sangha, but now the master has passed away and entered nirvana," and thereupon brings the item back to its original place (the dwelling of the deceased monk), then there is no offense. This is called the distinction of deposited goods.

In summary, if a monk arouses a mind of theft and touches a deposited item, he commits a Vītī offense. When he moves it from its original place and the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, he commits a Pārājika offense.

7. The distinction of miscellaneous goods: As with those who raise and tend various animals such as elephants, horses, cattle, camels, donkeys, goats, and so forth—

— Elephants: There are many kinds of elephants: fine elephants, tamed ones, beautiful ones, strong ones, and swift ones.

If a monk arouses a mind of theft, seizes an elephant, mounts and rides it, then urges it eastward, but the elephant goes wild and runs south, west, or north, he has not yet committed a Pārājika. Or if he intends to lead the elephant southward but it goes wild and runs west, north, or east, he has not yet committed a Pārājika; the same applies if he intended to go west or north.

However, if he intends to steal the elephant by leading it eastward and the elephant does indeed go east, he commits a Pārājika; the same applies for south, west, and north.

If at the outset he has fixed no particular direction and goes wherever the elephant goes, then when the elephant lifts all four feet off the ground, he commits a Pārājika.

— Horses: There are many kinds of horses: tamed ones, beautiful ones, and swift ones.

If a monk arouses a mind of theft, seizes the horse, mounts it, and urges it eastward, but the horse goes wild and runs south, west, or north, he has not yet committed a Pārājika.

Likewise, for the directions south, west, and north, the same applies as stated above regarding the horse going in whichever direction. If no direction is fixed and he goes wherever the horse goes, then when the horse has lifted all four feet off the ground, he commits a Pārājika.

If a monk steals a fine horse and rides it away, and the horse's owner learns of this and mounts another horse to give chase, but the owner has not yet concluded that the horse is lost, and the monk does not consider that he has obtained it, then he has not yet committed a Pārājika.

If the owner considers the horse lost and the monk considers himself to have obtained it, then he commits a Pārājika.

If a monk arouses a mind of theft and uses bait or grass to lure another's horse and leads it to a place where it can no longer be seen or heard, he commits a Pārājika.

— Cattle: There are many kinds of cattle: tamed ones, with fine coats, beautiful coloring, and swift movement.

If a monk arouses a mind of theft and drives cattle eastward with a stick, the offenses and non-offenses are as stated in the case of the elephant. Furthermore, if the owner of the cattle learns of this and gives chase, yet the owner does not consider the cattle lost and the monk does not consider himself to have obtained them, he has not yet committed a Pārājika.

But if the owner considers them lost and the monk considers himself to have obtained them, then he commits a Pārājika.

If he arouses a mind of theft and uses bait or grass to lure another's cattle and leads them away, or uses a long rope to tie and lead them to a place where no one can see them any longer, he commits a Pārājika. The same applies to stealing camels, donkeys, and goats.

This is called the distinction of miscellaneous goods.

In summary, if a monk arouses a mind of theft and touches any of the above-mentioned goods, he commits a Vītī offense. When he moves them from their original place and the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, he commits a Pārājika offense.

8. The distinction of banners and pennants: At the places where the Buddha was born, attained enlightenment, turned the Wheel of the Dharma, where Ānanda held a great assembly, where Rāhula held a great assembly, and where Pañcavāsiṭṭha held a great assembly, various adornments are hung, such as banners, canopies, and various precious bells. If a monk arouses a mind of theft and steals a banner or pennant, and has only untied one end of the rope, he has not yet committed a Pārājika.

When both ends are untied and the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, he commits a Pārājika.

If a monk arouses a mind of theft and deceives others by claiming he is going to hang banners at various places, he has not yet committed a Pārājika.

When he has taken them and carries them away, and the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, he commits a Pārājika.

If a monk steals a garland of flowers and has only untied one end, he has not yet committed a Pārājika.

When both ends are untied and the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, he commits a Pārājika.

If two monks go to steal banners in a dark place where they cannot see each other, and each one unties one end and rolls it up, and they meet in the middle and one asks: "Who are you?" — and the one who is asked becomes frightened and abandons the banner and flees, then he commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If two monks encounter each other and each tells the other that he is stealing the banner, and then they both take it and carry it away, and the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, they both commit a Pārājika.

If many flags of many colors are tied together on one heavy rope, and each person unties one end so that the banner falls to the ground, but because it is too heavy to carry they drag it along — even if it is dragged far from its original place, they have not yet committed a Pārājika.

When it has been lifted off the ground, both commit a Pārājika.

If a monk thinks: "This is an ornament of the stupa; to take it would be a grave offense. I only need one two-colored piece." Then he takes it, and the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, he commits a Pārājika.

If he thinks: "I only need half a color," and takes it, but the amount does not yet reach the prescribed threshold, he commits a Sthūlātyaya offense. If the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, he commits a Pārājika.

If two monks steal flags in a dark place, neither knowing the other is there, and each unties one end and rolls it up, and meeting in the middle one asks: "Who are you?" — and they are both frightened and abandon the flag and flee, then they commit a Sthūlātyaya offense.

Another monk who at early dawn is circumambulating the stupa sees the flag lying on the ground, and thereupon arouses a mind of theft and takes it — if the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, he commits a Pārājika.

Someone adorns and makes offerings to the Bodhi tree with the seven kinds of precious things: gold, silver, pearls, various flower-garlands on golden strings, gold thread, golden hooks, hanging bells, and golden light that illuminates the whole mountain. If a monk arouses a mind of theft and takes any of these items, and the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, he commits a Pārājika.

Furthermore, the stupas of those outside the Dharma are also adorned with various brilliant silks as offerings. If a monk uses a mind of theft to take them, and the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, he commits a Pārājika.

If the wind blows these items to the ground, and the monk knows they are offerings belonging to the stupa, he should not take them. If they are blown far away by the wind and become soiled with dust, and he thinks they are discarded refuse and takes them, there is no offense. Or if in a Heavenly Shrine (a temple dedicated to devas) there are various robes and articles, and a monk arouses a mind of theft to take them, and the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, he commits a Pārājika.

If those items are blown far away by the wind and become soiled with dust, and he thinks they are discarded goods and takes them, there is no offense.

This is called the distinction of banners and pennants.

In summary, if a monk arouses a mind of theft and touches any of the various banners and pennants mentioned in this distinction, he commits a Vītī offense.

If he moves them, he commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place and the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, he commits a Pārājika.

9. The distinction of signs and appearances: If a householder of means has robes and ornamental garlands left scattered about and not yet put away, and a monk brings a novice to the house, sees them, and arouses a mind of theft — he takes the robes and articles, puts them in a bag, and tells the novice to carry them away — he commits a Vītī offense.

When the novice carries them outside the boundary of the house, the monk commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If the monk considers that he has obtained them, he commits a Pārājika.

If at that moment the owner discovers this and asks the monk: "Venerable, what are you doing?"

And he answers: "Sir, I was merely feeling the fabric," then he commits a Vītī offense.

If the monk instructs a layperson to carry the items away, he also commits the offenses as stated above. The same applies in the case of leading away a long-haired goat.

If a monk enters a householder's home and a young goat, seeing the color of the monk's robe, mistakes it for its mother and runs toward him — the monk must drive it back. If instead he uses bait or grass to entice it to follow him, he commits a Vītī offense.

When he has led it away but has not yet crossed the boundary, he commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

When he crosses the boundary, he commits a Pārājika.

If during a meal offering a monk arouses a mind of theft, places bowls and spoons into his own alms bowl, and then instructs a disciple to carry them away, he commits a Vītī offense.

When the disciple crosses outside the boundary, he commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If he considers that he has obtained them, he commits a Pārājika. If the monk's disciple becomes aware of this and asks: "Venerable, what are you doing?"

And he answers: "I was only joking," then he commits a Vītī offense.

If a monk is traveling along the road with a caravan of merchants, and midway they encounter another caravan of merchants coming from the opposite direction, and both caravans rest at the same place—if at midnight the monk arises with a mind of theft, and exchanges the carts of one party for those of the other, exchanges the men of one party with those of the other, exchanges the women of one party with those of the other, and exchanges the children of one party with those of the other, intending for the two caravans to depart carrying each other's belongings in confusion—when he does so, he commits the offense of V越毘尼 (Duṣkṛta).

When they depart beyond the boundary of the resting place, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya. If he thinks that he has obtained what he wished, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

This is called the distinguishing characteristic of objects of different kinds.

In summary, if a monk arises with a mind of theft and touches objects displaying these distinguishing characteristics, he commits the offense of Duṣkṛta.

If he moves them, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

If he removes them from their original place and the amount meets the prescribed threshold, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

10. The Distinguishing Characteristics of Stakes: At places such as where the Buddha was born, where the Buddha attained enlightenment, where the Dharma Wheel was first turned, where Ānanda convened a great assembly, where Rāhula convened a great assembly, where Pañcavārsika convened a great assembly—at such places there are beautiful decorative objects in the monasteries, multi-colored banners and canopies hung upon stakes here and there, and various kinds of precious jewels hung upon stakes, and so forth.

If a monk arises with a mind of theft, intending to take the precious objects on those stakes, and reaches out his hand to take a precious object but has not yet detached it from the cord binding it to the stake, he has not yet committed the offense of Pārājika. But when it is removed from the stake, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

If the binding cord is firm and tight, and when taking the precious object the cord comes away from the stake, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

If he wishes to steal the stake itself, then when his hand touches it he commits the offense of Duṣkṛta.

If he causes the stake to be shaken, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

If he removes it from its original place and the amount meets the prescribed threshold, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

If on the stake there hang vessels of milk, vessels of oil, vessels of honey, or bowls, or silk, and a monk arises with a mind of theft and takes that vessel of milk—when he lifts it with his hand, because the cord is soft and the stake is straight, even though he lifts it, he has not yet committed Pārājika. When everything is fully removed from the stake, he commits Pārājika.

If the cord is firm and the stake is bent, even though he lifts it, he has not yet committed Pārājika.

When everything has been removed from the stake and the amount meets the prescribed threshold, he commits the offense of Pārājika. If the cord is firm and the stake is straight, then the moment he lifts it he commits Pārājika.

If he bores a hole through the vessel, he commits the offense of Duṣkṛta.

When he pours from that vessel into his own vessel, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

When he ceases pouring and the amount meets the prescribed threshold, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

If while pouring he suddenly feels remorse, fearing the commission of a grave offense, and pours the contents back into the original vessel, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

The same applies to vessels of oil and vessels of honey.

If a monk wishes to steal a bowl, and when he lifts it with his hand, because the cord is soft and the stake is straight, even though he lifts it he has not yet committed Pārājika.

When the bowl is removed from the stake, he commits Pārājika.

If the cord is firm and the stake is bent, even though he lifts it he has not yet committed Pārājika.

When it is removed from the stake, he commits Pārājika.

If the cord is soft and the stake is bent, even though he lifts and holds it, he has not yet committed Pārājika.

When it is removed from the stake, he commits Pārājika.

If the cord is firm and the stake is straight, then the moment he lifts it he commits Pārājika.

If he steals silk, the case is the same as described above. Furthermore, when stealing silk, if he thinks: "I need a little silk," and climbs the stake and begins rolling up the silk, he has not yet committed Pārājika while the rolling is not yet complete.

When he has cut the silk and the amount meets the prescribed threshold, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

If while rolling up the silk the monk has not yet finished rolling it, and then feels remorse, fearing the commission of a grave offense, and returns it to its original place, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

This is called the distinguishing characteristics of stakes.

In summary, if a monk arises with a mind of theft and touches stakes displaying these distinguishing characteristics, he commits the offense of Duṣkṛta.

If he causes them to move, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

If he removes them from their original place and the amount meets the prescribed threshold, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

11. The Distinguishing Characteristics of Gardens: At that time, there was an elder of great wealth, and a monk by the name of Kuru regularly came and went at his house. The elder's family—parents, elder and younger brothers—all lived together in one household.

But when the parents died, the household fell into discord: the younger brother wished to divide the family estate, while the elder brother was unwilling, wishing to continue living together in familial harmony. The younger brother repeatedly demanded a division of the estate, and the elder brother was compelled against his will to agree. They then deliberated: "Who is capable of dividing it?" and together reached the consensus that only the Venerable Kuru could do so, for when the parents were alive they had made offerings to him with great generosity, and he knew very well all that was or was not in the household.

At that time, the cunning younger brother went to Kuru, paid his respects, and said: "Venerable sir, you were held in deep respect by my parents and are cherished by us brothers. You know clearly all that is or is not in our household. While our parents were alive, we brothers lived together, but now that our parents have passed away, the household is in discord and we wish to divide the estate. Therefore I have come to speak with you. After I live separately, I will make offerings to you, and will sustain myself with the remaining offerings. I entreat you, when dividing the estate, to set aside the better portion for me." If the monk accepts this person's request, he commits the offense of Duṣkṛta.

When he retains the better objects, he commits the offense of Thullaccaya.

When the division of property is completed, he commits the offense of Pārājika.

When the time comes to divide the property, the monk asks: "What should be divided first?" The householder replies: "First divide the two-legged and four-legged kinds." The monk then divides the two-legged first. Among the servants, those who are elderly, difficult to direct, and untrustworthy are divided into one portion, while those who are young, free from illness, easy to direct, and trustworthy are divided into another portion. When dividing the four-legged kind, among the cattle those that are old and feeble, ugly, difficult to use, non-breeding, yielding little milk, or having milk that cannot be drawn, are divided into one portion, while those with small teeth, plump, nimble, easy to use, fertile, yielding much milk, docile, and easily trained are divided into another portion.

When dividing rooms and buildings, the old, dilapidated, and decayed ones are classified into one portion, while the new and fine ones are classified into another portion.

The same applies to multi-storied buildings and shops.

When dividing fields, the barren and poor-soiled plots are classified into one portion, and the fertile and good-soiled plots into another portion. In gardens, the dead ground with little fruit is divided into one portion, while the good ground with abundant flowers and fruit is divided into another portion. Then the time comes to divide grain, gold and silver, and other valuables.

At this point, the elder brother said to the monk: "You are a person whom our parents held dear and we brothers respect—why have you divided the property in such a manner?"

The monk then reflected on the Buddha's teaching: "If a monk divides another's property with such a mind, then even if the owner does not consent to accept his portion, he still commits the offense of Duṣkṛta."

After Kuru had returned, the two brothers discussed the matter: "Then who is the person respected by our parents—a venerable elder of seniority who knows all that is or is not in the household—whom we can ask to divide the property? If we do not divide it quickly, we fear the king may hear of it and impose a tax or seize it." Upon reflection, they concluded that Kuru had not been at fault, and the brothers together agreed to invite Kuru to divide the estate once more. So they went to Kuru, paid their respects and exchanged greetings, then sat to one side and addressed Kuru: "You are the one our parents held in respect; you know all that is or is not in our household. Please now divide this estate on our behalf."

At that moment, Kuru was angered, because previously they had refused to accept his division, and said: "You brothers are ungrateful, suspicious, and faithless. Who would still have the patience to divide property for the likes of you?"

The brothers then said: "Previously, due to our impetuousness, we felt ashamed before you. You know clearly the extent of our household's wealth. Now we ask you to divide this estate for us. If the tax authorities learn of it, we fear they will impose a tax and seize it, and so we wish to divide it quickly."

The monk asked: "Are you truly determined to entrust this division to me?"

They replied: "Indeed we are, Venerable sir!"

The monk then said: "If you are truly determined, then you must make a commitment: after the division is made, each must immediately accept his portion without anyone saying anything further—only then will I divide it for you." They answered in unison: "We accept your instruction and dare not go against your word again."

That monk, having accepted their request, was obliged to divide the portions equally. When dividing fields, a cord must be stretched to measure the land. If he measures the land with a biased mind, then even if the difference is as much as one clump of rice plants, this monk at once commits the offense of Pārājika. For land is intrinsically a priceless object.

That is called the differentiation of gardens (land).

In summary, if a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft and touches any of these differentiated gardens, he commits a Vītimokkha offense. When the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, he commits a Pārājika offense.

12. Differentiation of theft: There were some bhikkhus traveling along a road who were robbed by bandits. But the bandits were few and the bhikkhus many.

At that time, the bhikkhus said to one another: "Now the bandits are few and we are many; we must join together and take back what was lost." They then gathered up bricks and stones, pursued the bandits, and shouted loudly: "You wicked, sinful thieves and robbers! We have shaved off our beards and hair ourselves — do you think we have cut off our hands as well?" At that moment, the bandits threw down the robes and bowls and fled.

If those bhikkhus had not yet thought of their belongings as lost, and then recovered the original articles, there is no offense. But if they had thought of the belongings as lost, and then took those articles back, it is as thieves taking from thieves; if the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, they commit a Pārājika offense.

There were some bhikkhus traveling along a road who were robbed by bandits. After the bhikkhus lost their robes and bowls, they hid in the forest. The bandits thought: "Our gang is large but the goods are few — how can we divide them equally?

We must find a little more." They then hid the robes and bowls in a certain place and went off to rob other travelers on the road. At that moment, the bhikkhus saw where the bandits had hidden the articles, waited until the bandits had gone, and then took back their robes and bowls. If those bhikkhus had not previously thought of the belongings as lost, and then recovered the original articles, there is no offense.

If they had thought of them as lost, they should not take them. If they do take them, it is as going to rob a robber's goods; if the amount reaches the prescribed threshold, they commit a Pārājika offense.

Again, there was a bhikkhu traveling along a road who was robbed by bandits of his robes and bowls, and the bandits continued on their way. At that time, the bhikkhu watched to see where they went and followed them without stopping. Upon reaching a certain village, the bandits divided up the goods. The bhikkhu then spoke to them: "Venerable ones, I am one who has gone forth from home life and relies on others for my livelihood. You may beg for my robes and bowls, but what use do you have for them?" If, by speaking in this way, the bhikkhu managed to recover them, there is no offense.

If the bandits cursed him, saying: "You wretched śramaṇa! We were thinking of taking your very life. How dare you come here hoping to recover your robes and bowls?"

The bhikkhu thought: "This place is near a village; these bandits surely would not dare harm me. I must threaten them."

He then said to the bandits: "Do you think I have no one to protect me? I will report you to the king and the high ministers and let them know you are bandits." If by threatening them in this way he succeeded, there is no offense.

If the bandits grew angry and said: "We will certainly not give them back. Do as you please — go report us if you wish." If the bhikkhu reported the matter to the village headman, and the headman then arrested, bound, or killed the bandits, the bhikkhu should not have made such a report. But if the bhikkhu reported to the village headman and the headman used skillful means to persuade and guide the bandits, thereby recovering the robes and bowls, there is no offense.

Again, there was a bhikkhu who possessed many robes and bowls and kept many disciples, but his disciples did not cultivate moral conduct. They thought: "Let us go to the preceptor's room and steal his robes and bowls. My robes and bowls are also kept in his room." They then made an agreement: "If you obtain robes and bowls, share them with me; if I obtain them, I will share with you." They then entered the room, went to the robe-hook, and took the preceptor's robe to place it among their own robes. If the robe had not yet left the original hook, they commit a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If the preceptor's robe had already been taken from the hook and placed among their own robes, they commit a Pārājika offense.

If the preceptor's robe was still caught on the hook, or if a silk thread had not yet left the hook, the Pārājika offense has not yet been committed; but when all of it has left the hook, they commit a Pārājika offense. If the preceptor suspected that a disciple might steal his robes and bowls, and therefore moved them to another place for safekeeping, and the disciple then entered the darkened room and by mistake stole his own robes and bowls, and upon going out could not tell the difference — if among half of those robes and bowls the prescribed threshold is met, a Pārājika offense is committed.

There was an elderly bhikkhu (one who had gone forth in his later years) who, having gone forth from home life, did not guard his moral conduct well. Another bhikkhu invited him, saying: "Elder! Let us go and steal."

The elderly bhikkhu replied: "When I was still living at home, I was not a thief. Now that I have gone forth from home life, how could I become a thief?"

The other bhikkhu said: "If you do not want to steal, you need only guard the door, and I will share a portion with you."

The elderly bhikkhu thought: "Without stealing I will receive an equal share — why not go?" and replied: "Very well."

So the two went together. The elderly bhikkhu guarded the door while the other bhikkhu entered the house and stole the goods. At the moment of touching the goods, both committed a Vītimokkha offense.

When the goods were moved, both committed a Sthūlātyaya offense.

When the goods were removed from their original place and the prescribed threshold was met, both committed a Pārājika offense.

If a visiting bhikkhu arrived and lodged in a dining hall or a meditation hall, and then departed in the early morning, forgetting to take his robes, bowls, and other articles — at that time, the guest-reception bhikkhu (the māmādhī) went around the rooms to check whether the visiting bhikkhu had departed, and upon seeing the robes and bowls suddenly gave rise to a mind of theft, took the robes and bowls, and moved them to another place to hide them — he commits a Pārājika offense.

If another bhikkhu then came and saw the robes and bowls, and also gave rise to a mind of theft, and took them away to hide them in yet another place, he likewise commits a Pārājika offense.

If a third person came and saw them, gave rise to a mind of theft, and hid them in yet another place, he likewise commits a Pārājika offense. According to however many people gave rise to a mind of theft and moved those articles, all of them commit a Pārājika offense. However, if the owner of the robes and articles, having gone some distance, suddenly remembered them and returned to the temporary lodging to recover them, there is no offense.

There was a bhikkhu who forgot his robes and bowls. Another bhikkhu saw them and gave rise to a mind of theft, but did not take them with his own hands; instead, he instructed an attendant bhikkhu (a mahallaka) to take them. The attendant bhikkhu, thinking they belonged to that bhikkhu, picked them up. At the moment of touching the robes and bowls, the bhikkhu with the mind of theft committed a Vītimokkha offense.

At the moment of moving them, he committed a Sthūlātyaya offense.

When the articles were removed from their original place and the prescribed threshold was met, he committed a Pārājika offense.

As for the attendant bhikkhu, because he had no mind of theft, he committed no offense at any of the three moments. But if from the outset the other bhikkhu had told the attendant bhikkhu to take the robes and bowls and promised to share a portion with him, and the attendant bhikkhu gave rise to a mind of theft and touched them, then at that very moment both committed a Vītimokkha offense.

When they were moved, both committed a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If removed from the original place and the prescribed threshold was met, both committed a Pārājika offense.

If the attendant bhikkhu, upon seeing the robes and bowls, thought: "Why should I share a portion with him? I will take them all for myself," and then took them — he commits a Pārājika offense.

The other bhikkhu commits a Sthūlātyaya offense.

If a bhikkhu wished to build a stūpa for the Buddha but had no building materials, while the Sangha had materials, and he thought: "The reason humans and gods make offerings to the Sangha is entirely on account of the Buddha's grace; to make offerings to the Buddha is to make offerings to the Sangha," and he then used the Sangha's materials to repair the stūpa — that bhikkhu who undertook the construction commits a Pārājika offense. If the stūpa had materials but the Sangha did not, and he thought: "To make offerings to the Sangha is to include the Buddha within that offering," and then used the stūpa's materials to make offerings to the Sangha — that bhikkhu who undertook the construction likewise commits a Pārājika offense.

If the stūpa has no materials but the Sangha has materials, it is permissible to borrow them for use, but a written record must be made clearly stating: when the borrowing took place and when the materials will be returned. Likewise, if the Sangha has no materials but the stūpa has materials, they may be borrowed for use in the same manner. At the time of handover, the supervisory bhikkhu must read the record of handover clearly before the Sangha assembly; if the record is not read, a Vītimokkha offense is committed.

This is called temporary borrowing for use.

If two bhikkhus held property in common and were to divide it, but one bhikkhu gave rise to a mind of theft and sought to take sole possession — setting aside his own share, if the other portion meets the prescribed threshold, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If the other bhikkhu agreed to it, retaining the whole is without offense. Or if one thought: "I am now borrowing this for use and will return it in the future," there is no offense.

There were two bhikkhus engaged in teaching together who had made a mutual agreement: "From now on, if either I or you receive any gift, it must be divided equally between us." But afterward, one of them received a fine robe and thought: "If I receive another one later, it may not be as good as this one." He then said to his companion: "From now on, let each one's gains belong to that person. If you receive something, keep it yourself; if I receive something, I will keep it myself."

Because the robe just obtained was contrary to the agreement, if one half of it meets the prescribed amount, a Pārājika offense is incurred.

If this bhikkhu receives an offering, finishes the dedication of merit, and then says to the donor: "Please keep this item at your place; I will come to take it later," and then says to his companion: "Elder! From now on, whoever's share belongs to him, let him keep it. If you receive it, you keep it; if I receive it, I keep it" —

When he utters those words, he incurs a Thullaccaya offense.

If this bhikkhu hears that someone intends to offer a robe, and he speaks first to his companion: "Elder! From now on, whoever's share belongs to him, let him keep it. If I receive it, I keep it; if you receive it, you keep it" — when he speaks in this way, he incurs a Dukkaṭa offense.

There are two bhikkhus who practice the wearing of rag-robes and make a mutual agreement: "From now on, if we obtain rag-robes, we shall divide them between us."

At that time, one bhikkhu obtains a fine rag-robe and thinks: "This robe is very fine; if I obtain another one in the future, it may not be as good as this." He then says to his companion: "Elder! From now on, whoever's share belongs to him, let him keep it. If you receive it, you keep it; if I receive it, I keep it." Because this bhikkhu breaks the earlier agreement, if one half of that robe meets the prescribed amount, a Pārājika offense is incurred.

If this bhikkhu obtains a fine rag-robe but does not bring it back, and instead goes and hides it, covering it with grass and bricks, and then returns to dissolve the agreement as stated above, he incurs a Thullaccaya offense.

If this bhikkhu sees a fine rag-robe but neither takes it nor hides it, and simply returns to dissolve the agreement as stated above, he incurs a Dukkaṭa offense.

Bhikkhus should know that with respect to the Saṅgha's property, there are cases in which it should be given and cases in which it should not be given. What are the cases in which it should be given? Either on account of harm, or on account of benefit.

What is meant by on account of harm?

If a band of robbers comes to the monastery demanding food and drink, and if they are not given what they demand, they may burn down the monastery and plunder its property. Therefore, even though it would not ordinarily be appropriate to give, out of fear of the harm they may cause, one must give to them in amounts as circumstances allow.

What is meant by on account of benefit?

When repairing the Saṅgha's residential buildings, one should give the plasterers, carpenters, painters, and foremen their morning and evening meals, and provide them with oils for anointing, beverages, and so forth. Or when kings and persons of great influence come, one must provide them with food and drink.

This is called giving on account of benefit.

If a bhikkhu loses his robes, bowl, or other requisites, and has not yet mentally relinquished them, and afterward comes to know where they are and goes to retrieve them — if he finds them, there is no offense. On the other hand, if he has already mentally relinquished them, then even if he comes to know where they are, he should not go to retrieve them, for searching for them incurs a Dukkaṭa offense.

If, at the time of losing them, he inwardly resolves: "In the future, if I come to know where they are, I will go and retrieve them" — then when he finds them, there is no offense.

Two bhikkhus make a mutual agreement: to receive and uphold the scriptures together, and to recite the scriptures together. But afterward, if they do not uphold them and do not recite them, a Dukkaṭa offense is incurred.

These are called the distinctions concerning stolen objects.

If a bhikkhu arouses a mind of theft and touches those various objects that are distinctions concerning stolen objects, he incurs a Dukkaṭa offense.

If he moves them, he incurs a Thullaccaya offense.

If he removes them from their original place and the prescribed amount is met, he incurs a Pārājika offense.

13. Distinctions concerning taxes: There is a bhikkhu traveling along a road together with merchants. This bhikkhu has a large following of attendants. At that time, a merchant says to one of the bhikkhu's disciples: "Your teacher is a great elder; who would dare to inspect him at the customs post. Please take this object on my behalf and put it inside your teacher's robe bag, and carry it through the customs post." The disciple agrees, takes the object, and puts it inside his teacher's robe bag — and thereby incurs a Dukkaṭa offense. The teacher, not knowing about it, commits no offense.

If they proceed to the customs post, the disciple incurs a Thullaccaya offense. The teacher commits no offense.

If they pass beyond the customs post, the disciple incurs a Pārājika offense. The teacher commits no offense.

If the merchant says to the teacher: "You are a person of great virtue; with your retinue traveling together, who would dare to inspect you. Please take a few of these items on my behalf and put them in your disciple's bag to carry through the customs post." The teacher agrees, takes the items, and puts them in the disciple's bag — and thereby incurs a Dukkaṭa offense. The disciple, not knowing about it, commits no offense.

If they arrive at the customs post, the teacher incurs a Thullaccaya offense. The disciple commits no offense.

If they pass beyond the customs post, the teacher incurs a Pārājika offense. The disciple commits no offense.

If the merchant speaks to both teacher and disciple and both agree, then both incur a Dukkaṭa offense.

If they arrive at the customs post, both incur a Thullaccaya offense.

If they pass beyond the customs post, both incur a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu is traveling along a road together with merchants, and upon arriving at a village, the bhikkhu washes his hands, and a merchant asks: "Where does the Elder intend to go?" He replies: "I intend to go on almsround." The merchant says: "You need not go on almsround, Elder; I will provide you with food," and thereupon gives the bhikkhu various fine foods.

When the meal is finished, he says to the bhikkhu: "Please carry a few of these items through the customs post on my behalf."

The bhikkhu says: "The Blessed One has established the precept not permitting me to carry taxable goods through a customs post."

The merchant thinks: "Going through the customs post I will lose them anyway; giving them to the bhikkhu I will also lose them — in both cases I lose them. But giving to the bhikkhu may bring me merit." He then says to the bhikkhus: "Please stand in order; I wish to make an offering," and proceeds to make offerings in order. In each person's bowl there are precious objects filled to the brim. After completing the offering, the merchant passes through the customs gate and stops to wait for the bhikkhus. The bhikkhus then arrive. That merchant prostrates at the feet of the bhikkhus and addresses them: "Do the Venerables know?"

The bhikkhus reply: "We know."

He asks again: "Do you know that I made an offering to you earlier?" They reply: "We know."

He asks: "If you know, then why did I make the offering?"

They reply: "Because you wished to make merit."

The merchant says: "That is true. But my wife and children are in need of food and clothing. A debt must be repaid. Therefore, please return the items given earlier."

The bhikkhus should say: "Wicked man! How dare you show such contempt toward us? Earlier you said it was for making merit, and now you demand it back."

Having said this, if the man still insists on demanding them back and the bhikkhu returns them, there is no offense. If, however, the bhikkhu had previously known that the offering was not genuine and yet still accepted it and carried the goods through the customs post — then even if he returns them, he incurs a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu is traveling together with merchants — and proceeding to the point where he says: "The Buddha does not permit me to carry taxable goods through the customs gate" — and the merchant says to the bhikkhu: "I am not asking you to carry these items through the customs gate; I am only asking you to hold them for me. I wish to meet with the gatekeeper for a moment and will return shortly."

Thereupon the bhikkhu accepts custody of the goods, the merchant passes through the customs gate, and stops to wait for the bhikkhu. The bhikkhu waits for a long time, does not know to whom he should hand over the goods, and then carries them through the customs gate — and thereby incurs a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu is traveling along a road together with merchants — and proceeding to the point where he says: "The Buddha does not permit me to carry taxable goods through the customs gate" — and the merchant says: "I am not asking the bhikkhu to carry these items through the customs gate; I am only asking you to hold them for me. I am going to see the gatekeeper for a moment and will return." The bhikkhu then agrees to hold them and says: "If you do not return, I will abandon your goods and go on." The merchant thinks to himself: "Although the bhikkhu says this, he will not truly abandon my goods and leave," and proceeds through the customs gate and stops to wait for the bhikkhu.

The bhikkhu waits for a long time and does not see him return, so he abandons the goods there and passes through the customs gate. The merchant then asks the bhikkhu: "Where are my goods?"

The bhikkhu, now angered, says: "How dare you make sport of me? Did I not say before: 'If you do not return within a short time, I will abandon your goods and leave'? Your goods remain at the original place — go back and retrieve them." If the bhikkhu acts in this way, there is no offense.

A bhikkhu traveling together with merchants on the road… up to the point where "the Buddha does not permit carrying goods subject to customs duty through a checkpoint" — the merchant then says to the bhikkhu: "I am not asking the bhikkhu to carry the goods through the checkpoint; I only ask him to hold them for me while I go to see the gatekeeper for a moment and then return." The bhikkhu agrees to hold the goods and says: "If you do not return, I will hand your goods over to the gatekeeper." The merchant thinks to himself: "Though the bhikkhu says so, surely he would not have the heart to hand my goods over to the gatekeeper," and so he passes through the checkpoint and waits on the other side for the bhikkhu.

The bhikkhu waits a long time and, seeing that the merchant has not returned, takes the goods and hands them to the gatekeeper, saying: "There is a merchant of such-and-such appearance and such-and-such name; please collect the duty on these goods and return the goods to him"…

The bhikkhu then passes through the checkpoint. The merchant asks: "Where are my goods?" The bhikkhu, angered, replies: "How dare you trifle with me? Did I not say before that if you did not return in a short while I would hand your goods to the gatekeeper? Your goods are now with the gatekeeper; go there and collect them." If the bhikkhu acts in this way, there is no offense.

A bhikkhu's monastery is situated near a main road, and a bhikkhu is walking in meditation there, when a merchant (seeing him) says to him: "I have goods on which duty must be paid; please, Venerable Elder, carry them into the city for me."

The bhikkhu replies: "The Blessed One does not permit me to carry goods subject to customs duty through the customs gate. But I will show you a way: You may go by cutting across the road, or by passing through a fence, or by passing through a ditch, or you may load them onto a cart that has already paid its duty, or you may conceal them in the king's supply wagon, or place them in a slave's water vessel, or hide them under the fleece of a goat and pass through." If he merely instructs them in this way, he commits an offense of Violation of the Vinaya (Dukkhaṭa). The same applies if from within the city he instructs them on how to get out of the city.

If a bhikkhu knows that the goods are subject to customs duty but does not know that carrying dutiable goods through the checkpoint constitutes a Pārājika offense, then when he carries those goods through the checkpoint and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu knows that carrying dutiable goods through the checkpoint constitutes a Pārājika offense, but does not know that the goods in question are subject to duty, then when he carries those goods through the checkpoint and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu knows both that the goods are subject to customs duty and that carrying dutiable goods through the checkpoint constitutes a Pārājika offense, then when those goods pass through the checkpoint and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu does not know that the goods are subject to customs duty, and does not know that carrying dutiable goods through the checkpoint constitutes a Pārājika offense, then carrying them through constitutes no offense.

— What are goods not subject to duty?

— What are goods subject to duty?

The belongings of bhikkhus and bhikkhunīs who are disciples of the Blessed One, and the belongings of all those who have gone forth in non-Buddhist orders — these are goods not subject to duty. If such goods are bought or sold, however, duty must be paid on them.

This is called differential taxation.

In summary, if a bhikkhu arises with a mind of theft and touches these various dutiable goods, he commits an offense of Violation of the Vinaya (Dukkhaṭa). If the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu with a mind of theft touches timely medicine, he commits an offense of Violation of the Vinaya (Dukkhaṭa).

If he moves it, he commits a Thullaccaya offense. If he displaces it from its original position and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If two, or three, or many bhikkhus arise with a mind of theft and touch timely medicine, they commit an offense of Violation of the Vinaya (Dukkhaṭa).

Up to and including when the value meets the prescribed amount, they commit a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu instructs another bhikkhu who has a mind of theft to touch timely medicine, he commits an offense of Violation of the Vinaya (Dukkhaṭa). Up to and including when the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense.

If he instructs two, three, or many bhikkhus who have a mind of theft to touch timely medicine, he commits an offense of Violation of the Vinaya (Dukkhaṭa). Up to and including when the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense. If the bhikkhu who was instructed in turn instructs one other bhikkhu, or two, three, or many bhikkhus who have a mind of theft to touch timely medicine, he commits an offense of Violation of the Vinaya (Dukkhaṭa).

If he moves them, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

If he displaces them from their original position and the value meets the prescribed amount, he commits a Pārājika offense. The same applies likewise to medicines (foods) used at night, used over seven days, used throughout one's lifetime, and to all things whether pure or impure.

A bhikkhu who possesses five qualities in full, and takes what is not given when the value meets the prescribed amount, commits a Pārājika offense.

— The five factors which, when complete, constitute a Pārājika offense are:

— Again, possessing five qualities in full when taking what is not given, if the value meets the prescribed amount, constitutes a Pārājika offense. These are:

There are also five qualities which, when complete, do not constitute a Pārājika offense.

— The five factors which, when complete, do not constitute a Pārājika offense are:

These are the five cases in which a bhikkhu who takes what is not given does not commit a Pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu takes what is not given — whether in the East, West, North, or South, in the sky above, or in a dwelling place — he commits a Pārājika offense in every case.

If a bhikkhu instructs a servant, or an attendant, or an acquaintance, or acts experimentally, or does something he has never done before, or acts out of delusion, or without a sense of shame mistakes wrongdoing for good conduct — and goes and takes what is not given — he commits an offense in every case.

— Cases of non-offense: If his mind is deranged and he is mad, there is no offense. Therefore it is said: "If a bhikkhu takes what is not given in a village or in a wilderness, and on account of what he has taken the king has him arrested and either executed, or bound, or banished, saying: 'O man! Are you a thief? Are you a fool?'—

If a bhikkhu is such a thief, he commits a Pārājika offense and may not live together with the Saṅgha."

At that time, the Blessed One was dwelling in the city of Rājagaha. After the midday meal, he was seated facing east, the shadow of two persons' length falling to the west, on the tenth day of the middle month of winter, six years after his attainment of Buddhahood. On account of the Elder Dhaniya, son of the potter, in connection with King Bimbisāra and the bhikkhu who wore rag-robes, he laid down this rule. Whatever the Buddha has laid down must be respectfully followed and observed. This is called the Dharma of conformity.

MAHĀSĀṂGHIKA VINAYA

End of the Third Volume.

Vietnamese translation: Thích Phước Sơn. MAHĀSĀṂGHIKA VINAYA

Chinese translation: Tripiṭaka Buddhābhadra of India

Together with Śramaṇa Fǎxiǎn, translated during the Eastern Jin Dynasty.

Reviewer: Thích Đỗng Minh