菩薩戒本疏 1.63

1.63

The conduct of a great being is to give even without being asked; to be stingy and refuse when a beggar appears before one, and instead to insult and humiliate them, completely contradicts the path of converting [beings]; therefore, a prohibition was established to cut it off. In the Bodhisattvabhūmi, it merely states not giving wealth or Dharma, without mentioning adding humiliation; it should be named the precept against stinginess and not giving with wisdom. Keeping wealth and Dharma secret and stingily begrudging them is called 'stinginess'; reviling and humiliating the other person is 'insult'; following the faults to be guarded against, it is named as a 'precept'. Among the necessary conditions, the 'matter' refers to the sentient being humiliated and the wealth or Dharma begrudged. In the high-grade object, Buddhas and bodhisattvas are excluded, because the text states 'poor and destitute people'. In the medium-grade object, if one is not a poor and destitute person and comes begging merely to test [the bodhisattva], not giving is also not an offense. Regarding the low-grade object, an ancient commentary said it is not parājika, but now I maintain that if they have understanding and are non-human or animal, in principle it is also not light. The begrudged wealth and Dharma: the text states 'even a single coin, a single needle, or a single blade of grass, or not explaining a single phrase, a single verse, or a particle-sized Dharma'. 'Perception' means having an accurate perception according to the object regarding the preceding two objects. 'Intention' refers to the mental intention to secretly begrudge and not give. 'Affliction': since it speaks of 'stingy begrudging', greed is the primary, while the rest are all supporting, either fully present or not. Regarding the preparatory and consummate action: an ancient commentary said that the other person must understand and know the appearance of stingy begrudging, and receive the words of beating and scolding, then a parājika is incurred according to the matter and words. According to the Bodhisattvabhūmi, it is not necessarily the case that the other person must understand and know the appearance of stingy begrudging, and suffer the pain of scolding and beating, before a parājika is incurred. If one has resolved not to give and utters words of secret begrudging, whether they understand or not, a parājika offense should be incurred. Therefore, that text says: 'If any bodhisattva possesses wealth and property, but out of a nature stingy with wealth, when those who are poor, suffering, without reliance and without protection, properly seeking wealth, come and present themselves before him, does not arouse pity and cultivate wise relinquishment; or when those properly seeking Dharma come and present themselves before him, out of a nature stingy with Dharma, although presently possessing the Dharma, does not bestow it, this is named the second defeat.' And this sūtra states 'and instead further reviles and humiliates them', which superabundantly demonstrates the severity of the transgression. Regarding the gravity of the infraction: if spoken in terms of the object, toward those who are poor and suffering it is parājika, while toward those who are not poor and suffering it should be light. If spoken in accordance with the mind, following the above praise and defamation, an ancient commentary said that two conditions must be fulfilled before a parājika is incurred, namely stinginess and added humiliation. If stingy but not humiliating, or humiliating but not stingy, neither is parājika. Regarding similarities and differences in the training rules: for a śrāvaka, only failing to teach the Dharma to a disciple constitutes a duṣkṛta, and not giving wealth is not regulated as an offense. A nun not giving wealth or Dharma to one within two years [of probation] incurs a pātayantikā, and outside of two years not giving Dharma incurs a duṣkṛta. Added humiliation is determined separately, not combining into a parājika. A bodhisattva does not discriminate between close and distant; refusing whoever asks incurs a parājika offense. Because the original vow encompasses all beings, the seven assemblies incur the offense alike. According to the Sujāta-sūtra, for laypeople it is also not regulated as a parājika. Furthermore, the Upāliparipṛcchā-sūtra states: 'Lay bodhisattvas should practice two kinds of giving: first, wealth; second, Dharma. Renunciant bodhisattvas should practice four kinds of giving: first, paper; second, ink; third, brush; fourth, Dharma. Bodhisattvas who have attained forbearance practice three kinds of giving: first, royal rank; second, wife and children; third, head, eyes, skin, and bones.' Attaining forbearance should refer to the ten understandings and above. In the text, 'instructing another to be stingy' should also have two aspects: first, instructing the other person to be stingy with wealth and Dharma; second, sending the other person to begrudge their own wealth and Dharma. 'Karma of stinginess': mental karma is primary; if manifest signs are spoken by mouth, body and speech also assist in completing it. 'Methods of stinginess': the various methods of expressing secret begrudging. Either pretending an excuse of other matters to dismiss them, or displaying sternness and reviling them to drive them away. 'Conditions of stinginess': as above, possessing five conditions. A single blade of grass among wealth, or a single particle of dust in Dharma, are expressions of the utmost extremity. Four words make a phrase, and four phrases make a verse; less than a verse or phrase is a minute Dharma. For example, if someone wishes to hear the word 'impermanence' and one does not speak it for them, this word 'impermanence' does not form a phrase. The Bodhisattvabhūmi says: 'If any bodhisattva abides in the bodhisattva's pure moral discipline, possesses food, drink, and other requisites of life, and seeing a seeker arrive, properly seeking food, drink, or such matters, harbors a mind of resentment and hatred, harbors a mind of anger and affliction, and does not bestow it, this is called having an offense and having a transgression; it is a defiled transgression. If due to indolence, laziness, and negligence one is unable to give, it is an undefiled transgression. There is no transgression: if one presently possesses no material goods that can be given; if what they desire is not an accordance-with-Dharma object or an improper object; if one wishes skillfully to tame and subdue them; if the seeker is someone improper with respect to the king, and one wishes to protect the king's intentions; or if one is protecting monastic regulations, and thus does not give, in all such cases there is no transgression.'