The Scope of the Stealing Precept Among the Five Precepts

Theft refers to taking what is not given, claiming as one's own what does not rightfully belong to oneself. Any act of obtaining something that is not one's own constitutes theft. What does its scope encompass?

For instance, in a group, Person A is the most exemplary individual, yet Person B claims to be the best. By attributing the reputation of being the best to himself, Person B appropriates the honor that rightfully belongs to Person A. Does Person B’s action constitute stealing Person A’s reputation?

When a task was clearly accomplished by Person A, yet Person B claims it as his own work, has Person B stolen Person A’s achievement? In a group where Person A holds a certain authority, if Person B unconsciously exercises that authority, has Person B stolen Person A’s power? Such theft can also be considered false speech. A single act of body, speech, or mind can violate two precepts simultaneously, resulting in the transgression of both.

In reality, the Five Precepts pertain only to body and speech, not to the mind. Regardless of one’s mental state, as long as body and speech do not transgress, one is not considered to have violated the precepts. Therefore, the Five Precepts do not restrain the mind but only the body and speech. Belonging to the Hinayana precepts, guarding the body and restraining speech, when upheld well, cultivate one’s human character, ensuring rebirth as a human or even the attainment of cutting off the view of self. However, to achieve enlightenment, one must receive and uphold the Bodhisattva Precepts.

Upholding the Five Precepts well cultivates virtue and moral character; failing to uphold them results in an incomplete character, insufficient cultivation, and a lack of human virtue. If ordinary individuals lack even basic moral character, it is impossible for them to cut off the view of self and become sages, transcending ordinary human existence.

If one cannot uphold even five precepts and dares not receive them, how could one possibly observe the hundreds of precepts required of monastics? Many lay practitioners often slander monastics, criticizing their shortcomings, but what of themselves? How vast is the difference between their own conduct and the renunciation of worldly life by monastics, or their commitment to abide by hundreds of precepts?

The Five Precepts, though seemingly simple and easy with only five rules, are actually neither simple nor easy to uphold. Very few can fully observe them. The precepts against theft and false speech are particularly difficult to maintain, as the vast majority do not clearly understand their implications and scope.

Upholding the Five Precepts is essentially about being a good human being. If one cannot even manage that, what point is there in discussing attainments or the risk of falling into the three evil destinies in the next life? Many, without even receiving the Five Precepts, delude themselves into believing they have attained fruition or enlightenment. If one cannot even guard the body and speech of the Hinayana Five Precepts, how can one possibly uphold the mental precepts of the Mahayana Bodhisattva? Guarding the mind is the most difficult task of all; to prevent unwholesome karma from arising in thoughts is extremely hard to achieve. The Bodhisattva Precepts in the Yogācārabhūmi-Śāstra are even more challenging to observe. Without eliminating afflictions, one shouldn’t even contemplate them—they are meant for Bodhisattvas on the Bhūmis (stages) who have eradicated afflictions. These precepts focus solely on mental activities, not bodily or verbal actions. As long as an act benefits sentient beings, it must be performed; otherwise, one violates the Bodhisattva Precepts. Such precepts are beyond the reach of Bodhisattvas below the Bhūmis, let alone ordinary beings. Yet many study and receive these precepts, unaware of where such a Bodhisattva precept substance (戒体) could possibly come from.

Body and speech are the functions of the six consciousnesses, while the mind refers to the mental activities of the manas (mental faculty). If one can control the manas, body and speech will naturally not transgress. Conversely, even if the mental inclinations of the manas are unwholesome, if the conscious mind forcibly suppresses them and feigns purity, body and speech may still not transgress, and thus the Five Precepts are not violated. Controlling and subduing the manas is extremely difficult; cultivating the manas to succeed, eradicating afflictions so that they no longer function automatically and consciously, is even harder.

Without eradicating afflictions, mental karma will inevitably be violated. Therefore, eradicating afflictions necessarily means eradicating the afflictions rooted in the manas, enabling automatic and conscious restraint without the conscious mind having to forcibly suppress them. Merely eliminating the afflictions of the conscious mind only amounts to suppressing afflictions, not eradicating them. When the conscious mind becomes negligent, the manas will suddenly manifest afflictions, causing the river to burst its banks and flood.