The Study of Dharma by No One Constitutes Theft of Dharma

The so-called "stealing" refers to taking what is not given. In the Dharma, apart from the Vinaya (monastic rules) which cannot be read or studied without having taken the corresponding precepts, all teachings spoken by the Buddha are for sentient beings, addressed to sentient beings, and open to sentient beings. Therefore, when sentient beings study the Buddha Dharma, the issue of "taking what is not given" does not arise. The Buddha expounded the Dharma for sentient beings, enabling them to learn the Dharma unconditionally and without charging any fees. The Buddha's mind is selfless and egoless, solely dedicated to liberating sentient beings from the sufferings of birth and death. Thus, "taking what is not given" fundamentally does not exist.

Even adherents of non-Buddhist paths can freely read and study the Buddha Dharma, even if their intention might be to find faults or to slander it. Reading the Buddhist scriptures to pick flaws does not constitute stealing the Dharma. The key point is that the Buddha's mind is vast and all-encompassing, acting solely for the benefit of sentient beings without any personal gain. If the Buddha did not allow sentient beings to learn the Dharma freely, requiring specific preconditions for study, then learning without meeting those conditions would be stealing the Dharma. However, Buddhism has no such rule; it encourages sentient beings to learn and practice openly and properly.

Regarding the Vinaya, if one has not taken the corresponding precepts, one is not permitted to study it. This is for two reasons: first, to prevent sentient beings from learning its contents and consequently becoming afraid to take the precepts; second, if one studies the rules without having taken the precepts, one might use them to judge or criticize those who have taken the precepts, which would incur fault. Those who have taken the precepts are considered superior to those who have not. Buddhism does not permit inferiors to criticize superiors; even if based on facts, it is still considered faulty and carries karmic retribution. Particularly, the precepts for monastics absolutely must not be read by laypeople. Moreover, laypeople must never use the precepts to comment on how monastics conduct themselves. Even if a monastic breaks the precepts, laypeople are not permitted to criticize them; otherwise, they incur fault, sin, karmic consequences, and negative karma. Criticizing monastics based on facts still constitutes slandering the Sangha, which is substantiated slander (sākāraka nindā). Criticizing or spreading allegations about monastic misconduct without factual basis constitutes unsubstantiated slander (anākāraka nindā), which carries even greater fault and heavier karmic consequences.

There is one specific exception to stealing the Dharma: taking the Buddha Dharma with a thieving mind and transplanting it unchanged into a non-Buddhist path, making it their own teaching, thereby changing the ownership of the Dharma. This constitutes stealing the Dharma. Taking someone else's property to your own home and claiming it as your own, thereby changing the owner, is what constitutes theft. If the Buddha Dharma is not renamed as a non-Buddhist teaching, it does not constitute theft. However, if someone is specifically sent by a non-Buddhist path to steal the Dharma, transforming the Buddha Dharma into a non-Buddhist teaching to serve that path, then they commit the offense of stealing the Dharma.