第九寶品

(未完待續)

84	八四
Should any bhikkhu pick up or have (someone) pick up a valuable or what is considered a valuable, except in a monastery or in a dwelling, it is to be confessed. But when a bhikkhu has picked up or had (someone) pick up a valuable or what is considered a valuable (left) in a monastery or in a dwelling, he is to keep it, (thinking,) “Whoever it belongs to will (come and) fetch it.” This is the proper course here.	如果任何比丘撿起或令（某人）撿起一件貴重物品或被認為是貴重物品，除了在寺院或住所內，波逸提。但是，當比丘撿起或令（某人）撿起寺院或住所中（被遺留下）的貴重物品或被視為貴重物品時，他應收藏它，（思考）「無論它屬於誰，都會（過來）拿它。這於此是如法的。
The general purpose of this rule is to prevent a bhikkhu from picking up misplaced valuables belonging to other people, for as the origin story shows, there are dangers inherent in such an act even when done with the best intentions.	本戒條的總體目的是防止比丘撿起屬於其他人的遺失的貴重物品，因為正如起源故事所示，即使是出於最好的意圖，這種行為也存在固有的危險。
“Now at that time a certain bhikkhu was bathing in the Aciravatī River. And a certain brahman, having placed a bag of 500 gold pieces on the river bank, bathed in the river and left, forgetting it. The bhikkhu, (saying to himself,) ‘Don’t let this bag of the brahman’s be lost,’ picked it up. Then the brahman, remembering, rushed back and said to the bhikkhu, ‘My good man, have you seen my bag?’	「爾時，有一位比丘正在阿致羅筏底河沐浴。某一位婆羅門，將一袋五百金幣放在河岸上，沐浴在河中，忘記它而離去。比丘（自言自語）『不要讓這個婆羅門的袋子丟失』，把它撿起來。這時，婆羅門想起來了，衝回來對比丘說：『善男子，你看到我的袋子了嗎？』
“‘Here you are, brahman,’ he said, and gave it to him.	「『給你，婆羅門，』他說，把它交給了他。
“Then the thought occurred to the brahman, ‘Now by what means can I get away without giving a reward to this bhikkhu?’ So (saying,) ‘I didn’t have 500, my good man, I had 1,000!’ he detained him for a while and then let him go.”	「然後，婆羅門想到，『現在我怎麼能不給這位比丘報酬而逃脫呢？』所以（說）『我沒有 500 ，善男子，我有 1,000 ！』拘留了他一段時間，然後就放了他。」
However, a bhikkhu who comes across a fallen valuable in a monastery or in a dwelling he is visiting—if he does not pick it up—may later be held responsible if it gets lost: thus the two situations mentioned as exemptions in the rule. In situations such as these, a bhikkhu is allowed even to pick up money and other items he is not normally allowed to take. In fact, the Vinaya-mukha states that if he does not pick up the valuable and put it in safe-keeping, he incurs a dukkaṭa. None of the other texts mention this point, although it is probably justified on the grounds that the bhikkhu is neglecting his duty in not following the “proper course” here.	然而，比丘在寺院或他所拜訪的住處中發現掉落的貴重物品，如果他沒有撿起來，之後如果丟失的話，可能要承擔責任：因此，戒條中提到的兩種情況是豁免的。在這類情況下，比丘甚至可以拿走金錢和其他他通常不被允許拿走的物品。事實上，《戒律入口》指出，如果他不撿起貴重物品並將其妥善保管，他犯《突吉羅》。其他文獻都沒有提到這一點，儘管這可能是合理的，因為比丘在這裡沒有遵循「適當的方針」而忽視了他的職責。
The Vibhaṅga advises that if a bhikkhu has picked up a fallen valuable in this way and put it in safe keeping, he should take note of its features. (The Commentary adds that if it is a bag of money, he should open the bag and count how much it contains. The same would hold for such things as wallets at present.) He should then have an announcement made, “Let him come whose goods are lost.” If a person comes to claim the item, the bhikkhu should ask him/her to describe it. If the person describes it correctly, the bhikkhu should hand it over. If not, he should tell the person to “keep looking.” If the bhikkhu is going to leave the monastery to live elsewhere, he should entrust the item to another bhikkhu or—if no suitable bhikkhu is available—to a suitable lay person (§).	《經分別》建議，如果比丘以這種方式撿起掉落的貴重物品並將其妥善保管，他應該記下它的特徵。（《義註》補充說，如果是一袋金錢，他應該打開袋子數一下裡面有多少錢。在目前，錢包之類的東西也應如此做。）然後他應該宣布：「誰的東西丟了請過來。」如果有人來領取物品，比丘應該請他/她描述它。如果此人描述正確，比丘應該交給他。如果不正確，他應該告訴這個人「繼續尋找」。如果比丘要離開寺院到其他地方居住，他應該將物品託付給另一位比丘，或者－－如果沒有合適的比丘－－託付給合適的在家人（§）。
The Commentary adds that if, after a suitable length of time, no one comes to claim the item, the bhikkhu should have it exchanged for something of lasting use to the monastery. If, after that, the owner does come to claim the item, the bhikkhu should tell him/her of the use to which it was put. If the owner is satisfied, there is no problem. If not, the bhikkhu should arrange to have the owner compensated. However, as we noted in the discussion of compensation under Pr 2, the Canon imposes only one potential penalty on a bhikkhu in a situation such as this: The Community, if it sees fit, can force him to apologize to the owner (Cv.I.20; see BMC2, Chapter 20).	《義註》補充說，如果在一段適當的時間後，沒有人來領取該物品，比丘應該將其換成對寺院持久使用的東西。如果之後，所有者真的來領取該物品，比丘應該告訴他/她該物品的用途。如果所有者滿意的話就沒有問題。如果不滿意，比丘應該安排對所有者進行補償。然而，正如我們在討論《波羅夷》二下的賠償時所指出的，在這種情況下，《聖典》只對比丘施加一種潛在的處罰：如果僧團認為合適，可以強迫他向所有者道歉（《小品》.一.20；見《佛教修道準則第二冊》第二十章）。
The factors for the offense here are four.	這裡的犯戒因素有四個。
1) Object: a valuable or anything considered a valuable that one finds left behind, except in a monastery or a dwelling that one is visiting.	1）對象：發現留下的有價值的東西或任何被認為有價值的東西，除了在拜訪的寺院或住處中。
2) Perception: One does not perceive it as discarded.	2）感知：不認為它是被丟棄的。
3) Intention: One wants to keep it in safe keeping for the owner.	3）意圖：希望為所有者保管它。
4) Effort: One picks it up or has someone else pick it up.	4）努力：自己撿起或讓別人撿起。

Object	對象
The Vibhaṅga defines a valuable as jewels, gold, or silver. At present, money would be included here. What is considered a valuable means anything that people use or consume. Items meeting these definitions at present would include wallets, watches, keys, eyeglasses, cameras, etc.	《經分別》將有價值的物品定義為珠寶、黃金或白銀。目前，金錢也包含在這裡。被認為有價值的東西是指人們使用或消費的任何東西。目前符合這些定義的物品包括錢包、手錶、鑰匙、眼鏡、相機等。
According to the K/Commentary, the object has to belong to someone else to fulfill the factor of effort here. The Vibhaṅga does not state this point explicitly, but it does make the point implicitly with the activities it discusses under this rule: putting an item in safe keeping, quizzing those who come to claim it, taking an item on trust, borrowing it. These are all activities that pertain to the belongings of others, and not to one’s own belongings. The K/Commentary adds that if the owner has given one permission to take the article, it does not fulfill the factor of object here. This comment has to be qualified, of course, by noting that if the item is a valuable, then taking it would involve an offense under another rule.	根據 K/《義註》，物品必須屬於其他人才能滿足此處的努力因素。《經分別》沒有明確說明這一點，但它確實透過在本戒條下討論的活動隱含地表達了這一點：妥善保管一件物品，詢問那些前來索取它的人，託付一件物品，借用它。這些都是與他人的財物有關的活動，而不是與自己的財物有關的活動。 K/《義註》補充說，如果所有者已給予拿取該物品的權限，則不滿足此處的對象因素。當然，這個評論必須是有限制的，留意到如果該物品是貴重物品，那麼根據另一條戒條，拿走它就會涉及犯戒。
The Vibhaṅga defines in a monastery as follows: If the monastery is enclosed, then within the enclosure. If not, then in the immediate vicinity (according to the Commentary, a radius of two leḍḍupātas—approximately 36 meters—around the monastery buildings). As for in a dwelling: If the area around the dwelling is enclosed, then within the enclosure. If not, then in the immediate vicinity (according to the Commentary, the distance one can throw a basket or a pestle (!) from the dwelling).	《經分別》對寺院裡的定義如下：如果寺院是封閉的，那就在封閉的範圍內。如果不是，那麼就在緊鄰範圍裡（根據《義註》，圍繞寺院建築的半徑為兩個 leḍḍupāta，大約 36 公尺）。至於住處裡：如果住處周圍的區域是封閉的，則在封閉範圍內。如果不是，那麼就在緊鄰範圍裡（根據《義註》，可以從住處扔籃子或杵（！）的距離）。
For some reason, the Commentary says that if the item has fallen in an area of the monastery where many people come and go—e.g., the doorway to the Bodhi tree or public shrine—one should not pick it up. Its reasoning here is hard to guess. It notes that the Kurundī—one of the ancient commentaries—interprets the range of a bhikkhu’s responsibility in the opposite direction. In other words, the Kurundī holds that if a bhikkhu walking alone along a road outside a monastery comes across a valuable or anything considered valuable in such circumstances that he might later be suspected of being responsible for its disappearance, he should stop and wait by the roadside until the owner appears. If no owner appears, he should make it “allowable” and take it with him. The Sub-commentary adds that making it allowable means deciding that it has been thrown away, and applies only to items classed as “considered a valuable.” All of this, however, lies outside the allowances in the Vibhaṅga, and at most can be adopted, where appropriate, as a wise policy.	由於某種原因，《義註》說，如果該物品落在寺院內人來人往的地方，例如菩提樹的門口或公共聖壇，則不應撿起它。這裡它的推理很難猜測。它指出，《Kurundī》——古代註釋之一——從相反的方向解釋了比丘的責任範圍。換句話說，《Kurundī》認為，如果一個比丘獨自走在寺院外的路上，遇到一個貴重的東西或任何被認為有價值的東西，並且在這種情況下他可能會被懷疑對它的失蹤負有責任，他應該停下來在路邊等待，直到所有者出現。如果所有者沒有出現，他應該讓它成為「允許的」並帶走它。《複註》補充說，讓它成為允許的意思是決定它已被丟棄，並且僅適用於被歸類為「被認為有價值」的物品。然而，所有這些都超出了《經分別》的允許範圍，最多可以在適當的情況下作為明智之舉而採用。
The Commentary also notes that if someone asks to put his/her belongings in safe keeping with a bhikkhu, the bhikkhu should not accept—so as to avoid being responsible for them—but if he/she leaves the things with the bhikkhu and goes off in spite of his objections or before giving him a chance to object, he should take the belongings and put them away in safe keeping.	《義註》還指出，如果有人要求將自己的物品交給比丘保管，比丘不應接受——以免對這些物品負責——但如果他/她將物品留給比丘，並且儘管他反對，或者在給他反對的機會之前離開，他應該拿走財物並妥善保管。

Perception & intention	感知及意圖
According to the Commentary, if one picks up money for one’s own use, for the Community, or for anyone aside from the owner, the case would come under NP 18, rather than here. The same holds true with dukkaṭa objects, such as jewels and semi-precious stones. This judgment, though, would seem to hold only in the case where one perceives the money, etc., as thrown away or left behind for the use of the person or Community for whom one is taking it. If one does not perceive it as thrown away or abandoned, and one is not borrowing it or taking it on trust, the case would come under Pr 2, regardless of what the item is.	根據《義註》，如果撿取金錢用於自己、僧團或除所有者之外的任何人，則該情況將屬於《捨墮》一八，而不是這裡。對於珠寶和半寶石等《突吉羅》物件也是如此。然而，這項判定似乎僅在以下情況成立：認為金錢等被丟棄，或留下供拿取者或拿取者僧團使用。如果不認為它被丟棄或遺棄，並且沒有借用它或親厚取，則該情況將屬於《波羅夷》二，無論該物品是什麼。
The Commentary also makes the peculiar point that if one sees an item belonging to one’s mother or other close relative left behind on the roadside, one would incur the full penalty under this rule for picking it up to put in safe keeping for the owner, but no offense if one took the item, on trust, for one’s own. Of course, after taking it on trust like this, one could then without penalty give it back to the owner as one liked.	《義註》還提出了一個奇特的觀點，如果看到屬於自己母親或其他近親的物品留在路邊，根據本戒條，拾起該物品並妥善保管將受到全額懲罰，但如果出於親厚而拿取這件物品，則沒有犯戒。當然，這樣親厚取之後，就可以依照自己的喜好，不受懲罰地還給所有者了。

Effort	努力
When getting someone else to pick up the item, the offense is incurred not in the asking but only when the other person does as asked.	當讓別人拿起物品時，犯戒行為不是在要求時發生的，而是在對方按照要求行事時才發生的。

Non-offenses	不犯
There is no offense if, within a monastery or a dwelling, one picks up a valuable or what is considered a valuable—or if one has it picked up—with the thought, “Whoever this belongs to will come for it.” (§)	如果在寺院或住處內，撿起一件貴重物品或被認為是貴重物品—或如果令其被撿起—心裡想：「無論這東西是誰的，都會來拿它。」並沒有犯戒。（§）
Also, according to the Vibhaṅga, there is no offense in taking an item “considered to be a valuable” no matter where it is found if one takes it on trust, borrows it, or perceives it as having been thrown away (§).	此外，根據《經分別》，如果基於信任拿走一件「被認為是有價值的」物品、借用它或認為它已被扔掉，那麼無論它在哪裡被發現，都不會構成犯戒（§）。
Summary: Picking up a valuable, or having it picked up, with the intention of putting it in safe keeping for the owner—except when one finds it in a monastery or in a dwelling one is visiting—is a pācittiya offense.	摘要：撿起或讓人撿起貴重物品，並意圖為所有者將其妥善保管——除非在寺院或正在拜訪的住處中發現它——是《波逸提》罪。

* * *

(未完待續)