________________
122
The Concept of Pañcasila in Indian Thought
keeping a jewel which may have been dropped,(though not intentionally stolen), are the examples of pācittiya.
All these are the offences discussed in the Vinaya regarding the precept of non-stealing ranging from the severest pārājika to the mildest dukkata. In the Pātimokkha code for nuns these offences are again discussed in a slightly different manner. But with regard to this precept of non-stealing the rules are almost similar. It is therefore unnecessary to discuss the code for nuns in this connection.
However, all acts which appear as acts of stealing are not always so, because sometimes mistakenly or half knowingly thing is taken away; the Vinaya proclaims that such acts cannot be called acts of stealing. It is mainly the intention which makes an act of lifting an object an act of stealing or non-stealing. Even if the article is stolen by the monk but the monk repents for it and acknowledges his offence truly and says that he has done so, and when he is told that it is unworthy of a true monk, he repents for it and seeks for its atonement, he minimises his offence because of his verbal expression and mental purity.2
The Precept of Non-stealing for the Laity
The precepts for the laymen, as has been already told, are not as clearly and precisely stated in Buddhism as in Jainism. “In Vinaya literature that has come down to us Gotama is nowhere shown as legislating for his lay followers, as Mahā. vira did for his."3 However, not only the precept of nonstealing but the other precepts also are less stringently bindings upon them as the precept of 'brahamacarya' or celibacy which for the laity is clearly understood as kāmamithyācāra-virati. 1. यो पन भिक्खु रतनं वा रतनसम्मतं वा उग्गण्हेय्य वा उग्गण्हापेय्य वा
qf&fai - Ibid., p. 215. 2. Book of Discipline, vol. I, I.B. Horner, Intro., p. XIV. 3. Ibid., p. XVII.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
