大般涅槃經集解 38.34

38.34

案僧亮曰：答上不入地獄難也。上云善心殺故無罪，似如父母善心殺復得無罪，故須明也。此言我無惡心，地復無罪，故不墮地獄也。夫得殺罪者有三種：一由心得罪，如惡心人殺闡提；二由地得罪，如善心人殺善人；三由心地共得罪，如不善心人殺善人也。僧宗曰：證無惡心，雖殺無罪也。寶亮曰：答初難之後關也。無殺心故，不墮地獄也。以婆羅門悉是闡提，無傷田之義。故知得殺罪者，必我由有惡心，傷彼福田也。

Sengliang comments: This answers the objection above regarding not entering hell. Above it was said that killing with a wholesome mind incurs no sin, which seemed to imply that if parents killed with a wholesome mind they would also be without sin; hence it must be clarified. Here it is said: I had no evil mind, and the field [of the recipient] also brought no sin, so I did not fall into hell. Incurring the sin of killing occurs in three ways: first, incurring sin due to the mind, such as when a person with an evil mind kills an icchantika; second, incurring sin due to the field, such as when a person with a wholesome mind kills a good person; third, incurring sin due to both mind and field, such as when a person with an unwholesome mind kills a good person. Sengzong says: This proves that without an evil mind, although one kills, there is no sin. Baoliang says: This answers the second barrier of the first objection. Because there was no intention to kill, he did not fall into hell. Since the brāhmaṇas were all icchantikas, there was no notion of harming a field [of merit]. Thus we know that incurring the sin of killing requires that one has an evil mind and harms that field of merit.