法苑珠林 74.19

74.19

As the Samantapāsādikā says: When guarding wealth for another person, or even for the Three Jewels, if one cautiously protects it, securely locking the door of the storehouse, yet a thief steals it through a hole or through the roof, or takes it by force, and it was not something the guardian could prevent or restrain, the offense is reckoned solely against the original owner, and it should not be demanded [from the guardian] at all. If the manager was negligent and failed to guard it diligently, so that it was stolen by a thief, the manager must compensate for it, and the offense is reckoned against the guardian. Therefore the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya says: 'If one receives another's entrusted property from a distant place, and it is damaged on the road, if it was damaged while handling it with good intention, one should not compensate; if it was damaged with bad intention, one must compensate. If one borrows another's property, regardless of good or bad intention, if it is broken, one must compensate in all cases.'
Furthermore, the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya says: 'If a thief brings stolen goods, whether donating them with good intention, or donating them out of fear because others are pursuing him, one may take them, because he has become the owner of the goods. One simply must not beg them from the thief; if he gives them of his own accord, one may take them. Having taken them, if one dyes them an improper color and wears them, and the owner recognizes them, one should return them.'
Furthermore, the Mātṛkā-śāstra says: 'If a madman brings property of his own accord and donates it, and his parents or relatives are unknown, one may take it. If his parents are known, and it was not given by their own hands, one must not take it.'
Furthermore, the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya says: 'If one takes the leftover meat of a tiger from another, one commits a minor offense, because [the tiger] has not abandoned its expectation [of the prey]. If one takes the leftovers of a lion, one commits no offense, because [the lion] has abandoned its expectation.'
Furthermore, the Sarvāstivāda-vibhāṣā says: 'Stealing the leftovers of any bird or beast incurs a minor offense.' (In today's times of famine, many laypeople destroy the burrows of mice to take their stored grain, walnuts, and miscellaneous fruits; according to this, it constitutes an offense.)
The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya says: 'If one takes with the thought that it was given, takes with the thought that it belongs to oneself, takes with the thought that it is refuse-rags, takes with the thought of temporary use, or takes with the thought of a close friend, none of these constitute an offense.' As for a close friend, according to the Vinaya, one must possess seven dharmas before being called a close friend: first, capable of doing what is difficult to do; second, capable of giving what is difficult to give; third, capable of enduring what is difficult to endure; fourth, confiding secret matters to each other; fifth, concealing each other's faults; sixth, not abandoning each other when encountering suffering; seventh, not slighting each other in poverty and lowliness. If a person can practice these seven dharmas, he is a close, good friend, and taking [from him] does not constitute an offense.