Lzh Sarv Bi Vb Pc 156Stingy With Families

Source Status

This entry has been regenerated based on the descriptive information available: code “Lzh Sarv Bi Vb Pc 156,” Vietnamese title “Stingy With Donor Families,” English title “Stingy With Families,” Pali title “Kulamaccharinī,” belonging to “Sectarian Buddhist Canon · Comparative” and “Comparative Vinaya — Chinese.” The truncated ending of the Vietnamese text shows that the previous style was interpreting an attitude of keeping teachings, advice, or spiritual benefits privately for certain donor families, because of personal attachment, fear that others might benefit, or the wish to maintain a dependent relationship.

The complete source text has not been checked within this data. Therefore, it cannot be fully confirmed what conduct the original rule speaks of, how the situation arose, or how the specific penalty is presented in the Chinese text. What follows is an AI interpretation based on the descriptive information and the remaining flow of the text, not a translation of the original scripture.

Context

The relationship between one gone forth and donor families is a special relationship in the Buddhist tradition. Laypeople provide material support, creating conditions for monastics to live the holy life; monastics respond with purity, guidance in the teaching, and by serving as a field of merit for those with faith. This relationship is clear and wholesome only when it is placed on a foundation of non-greed, equality, and common benefit, not transformed into possession or private exchange.

The titles “Stingy With Donor Families” and “Stingy With Families” show that the subject relates to miserliness in relation to supporting families. This is not necessarily material stinginess in the ordinary sense; according to the remaining ending, it may be miserliness regarding influence, attention, advice, or spiritual benefit. When a monastic regards a donor family as “one’s own,” does not want others to approach them, or withholds what would be beneficial because of partiality, the supporting relationship easily becomes distorted.

Content Identifiable from the Descriptive Information

The descriptive information only shows that the training rule is called “Kulamaccharinī” and is placed in the Chinese Comparative Vinaya group. The truncated ending shows that the previous interpretation emphasized intentionally keeping important instruction or teaching hidden in order to maintain a private relationship with a certain family. From this, the main subject can be identified as “macchariya,” that is, a stingy or miserly mind that does not wish to share benefit with others, in the context of relations with donor families.

It should not be inferred further that this rule certainly speaks of a specific person, a specific event, or a particular form of handling beyond what the descriptive information permits. However, at the level of Vinaya principle, this reflects an effort to protect the integrity of the life of one gone forth. A practitioner should not create factions around donors, should not use the Dharma as a means to preserve personal influence, and should not cause laypeople to think that the teaching is the private property of an individual or small group.

Miserliness in the Dharma is not only refusing to give material things. It is also not wanting others to learn, to hear, to draw near to wholesome Dharma, or to benefit from a good condition. When one gone forth nurtures such an attitude, the Dharma is narrowed into a private relationship, and compassion is replaced by possessiveness.

Meaning for Practice

This training rule reminds practitioners to look deeply at their motives when relating to donors. Gratitude toward supporters is necessary, but gratitude does not mean partiality. Attachment in the Dharma should be attachment on the basis of the true Dharma, not emotional dependence, gain and honor, or control. The more a monastic is respected by many people, the more careful that person must be, because such respect can become an environment in which clinging to self develops if mindfulness is lacking.

For the community, this also reminds us that the teaching should be shared with an open mind. Useful advice, wholesome guidance in practice, and spiritual support should not be withheld because of jealousy or the wish to protect one’s own position. Generosity in the Buddhadharma does not mean speaking much or giving indiscriminately, but not allowing a miserly mind to obscure the benefit of others.

Laypeople can also learn from this rule. When supporting a monastic or a Dharma center, one should not turn support into ownership. Right faith does not demand exclusivity, does not want the teacher to belong only to oneself, and does not treat the Dharma as a means for gaining status. Both sides need to preserve clarity so that the relationship of support becomes a condition for practice.

Comparative Note

Because the source has not been directly compared, this interpretation does not confirm details of the Chinese text, nor does it state the translator, canonical location, chapter, or parallel version beyond the descriptive information. For serious research, the source link in the data should be opened and compared with the original text to determine the scope of the training rule, the applicable persons, the key terminology, and the form of handling. The present version only restores the truncated Vietnamese content in a dignified Buddhist interpretive style, based on the title and remaining flow, while clearly acknowledging that the complete source has not been verified.