諸經要集 14.18

14.18

第四盜凡物者如善見論云。為他別人乃至三寶。守護財物。若謹慎掌護堅鎖藏戶。而賊從孔中屋中竊取。或逼迫取。非守物人能禁限者。但望本主結罪。皆不合徵。若主掌懈慢。不勤守護為賊所偷者。掌物人償之。以望守護主結罪故。十誦律云。遠處受他寄物。在道損破。若好心捉破者。不應償。惡心捉破者須償。若借他物。不問好心惡心。若破一切須償。又十誦律云。賊偷物來。或好心施。或因他逐恐怖故施得取。以成物主故。但莫從賊乞。自與者得取。已染壞色著。有主識認者應還。又摩德勒伽論云。若狂人自持物施。不知父母親眷者得取。若父母可知。不自手與者不得取。又十誦律云。若取他虎殘肉者犯小罪。由不斷望故。若取師子殘者不犯。由斷望故。又薩婆多論云。盜一切鳥獸殘者得小罪（今時儉世多有俗人毀他鼠窟取其貯栗胡桃雜果子等准此犯罪）四分律云。若與想取。己有想取。糞掃想取。暫用想取。親友意想取等。皆不犯。其親友者。依律要具七法。始名親友。一難作能作。二難與能與。三難忍能忍。四密事相告。五互相覆藏。六遭苦不捨。七貧賤不輕。如是七法。人能行者。是親善友。取而不犯也。

Fourth is stealing ordinary property. As the Shanjian lun states: If one guards property for another person or even for the Triratna, if one prudently oversees and protects it, securely locking the storeroom doors, yet thieves steal it through a hole or through the roof, or take it by force, beyond what the custodian can prevent, the offense is charged solely against the original owner, and it is entirely improper to demand compensation [from the custodian]. If the person in charge is negligent and does not diligently guard it, so that it is stolen by thieves, the person in charge of the property must compensate for it, because the offense is charged against the custodian. The Shisong lü states: If one accepts another's entrusted property from a distant place and it is damaged or broken on the road, if it was broken while handling it with good intentions, one should not compensate; if broken with ill intent, one must compensate. If one borrows another's property, regardless of good or ill intent, if it is broken, one must compensate for everything. Furthermore, the Shisong lü states: If a thief brings stolen goods and gives them either with good intentions or out of terror because others are pursuing him, it is permissible to take them, because he has become the owner of the goods; one must only not solicit them from the thief, but if given voluntarily, they may be taken. If one has already dyed and spoiled the color [of the cloth] and worn it, and the owner recognizes it, it should be returned. Furthermore, the Modeleqie lun states: If an insane person personally brings property to give, and one does not know of their parents or relatives, it may be taken; if the parents are known and do not give it with their own hands, it may not be taken. Furthermore, the Shisong lü states: If one takes leftover meat from another person's tiger, one incurs a minor offense, because their hope [of reclaiming it] has not been severed; if one takes leftovers from a lion, there is no offense, because their hope has been severed. Furthermore, the Sapoduo lun states: Stealing leftovers from any bird or beast incurs a minor offense. (Nowadays in times of famine, many laypeople destroy the burrows of mice to take their stored chestnuts, walnuts, and miscellaneous nuts; according to this, it constitutes an offense.) The Sifen lü states: If taken thinking it was given, thinking it was one's own, thinking it was discarded rags (pāṃsukūla), thinking it was for temporary use, or thinking it was belonging to an intimate friend, none of these constitute an offense. As for intimate friends, according to the Vinaya, they must possess seven qualities to be called intimate friends: first, being able to do what is difficult to do; second, being able to give what is difficult to give; third, being able to endure what is difficult to endure; fourth, confiding confidential matters to each other; fifth, mutually concealing each other's [faults]; sixth, not abandoning each other when meeting with suffering; seventh, not slighting each other when poor and lowly. If a person can practice these seven qualities, they are an intimate and good friend; taking from them is not an offense.