Discussion on the Issue of Stealing

Question: There is a goji berry tree in a park that does not bear goji berries. Every year, if this tree is not pruned of its branches and leaves, it does not grow well; when the branches and leaves are cut away, the tree grows more luxuriantly. If someone picks the leaves from the tree and takes them home to eat, does this count as stealing?

A's answer: First of all, the tree does not belong to oneself. If there is a thieving mind or a mind of taking advantage, then it counts as stealing.

B's answer: It counts. The goji tree in the park belongs to all the people; if one eats its leaves without permission, that is stealing. Moving something with a thieving mind is stealing.

C's answer: According to current legal provisions, when no owner has been designated, the land and the produce upon it belong to the whole people and are the common property of society as a whole. In that case, when we go to barren mountains to pick fruit, that is also an act of stealing. Picking goji berries out of greed and taking them home, and picking and eating them unintentionally out of hunger, both count as stealing, but the karmic retribution will certainly differ greatly.

Question: What if the park tacitly permits it? What if picking off the leaves would make the tree grow even better? What if picking off the leaves would spare the park staff the labor of pruning branches and leaves? What if the leaves are of no use to the park?

A's answer: Pruning the leaves so the tree grows better is merit; knowing the leaves have medicinal value and privately taking them home is a fault. Pruning branches and leaves so the tree grows better is merit; taking the leaves home without permission falls into two cases: if the leaves are of great use to the park, the retribution is great; if they are purely of no use to the park, the retribution is small. If one prunes branches and leaves for the sake of the tree's better growth, there is merit; but if the pruning causes the tree to die, there is a fault. In my view, many things simultaneously have both wholesome and unwholesome sides; it is just a matter of which side occupies the greater proportion—choose the wholesome and act on it. For example, if you give ten thousand yuan to a beggar, in principle that is a great good deed, but in fact you have also indirectly encouraged the beggar's laziness and dependence; this should count as a small evil within a great good.

B's answer: If it is tacitly permitted, then it does not count as stealing. Right—it should be that everyone tacitly permits it. In the end, it comes down to the initial intention.

C's answer: Whether it counts as stealing is determined by whether the item taken has an owner and whether the person taking it has a thieving mind. It mainly rests on the initial intention. The product of the shared karma of sentient beings has no definite owner.

D's answer: It still depends on the motive. Suppose we mine on the moon—people on Earth think it is public property, but it actually belongs to hidden aliens. What then?

Summary: It depends on the purpose of the park's planting the tree. It is to beautify the environment, not to obtain the tree's branches, leaves, and fruit. If the park staff do not care about the tree's leaves, then picking them entails no fault and no harm to the public interest. Taking and using ownerless property does not constitute stealing. But the tree belongs to the park's administrative department; the key lies in whether the department cares about and needs the leaves. If it tacitly permits it, then it is not stealing. If the department is helpless and lacks the ability to manage it, then it is stealing. Whether something counts as stealing depends on three things: first, whether the owner agrees or tacitly permits it; second, whether the person taking the item has a thieving mind; third, the result—whether it harms others to benefit oneself. If one only benefits oneself without harming others, it does not fall under this rule.