大毘盧遮那成佛經疏 17.46

17.46

次明大乘十善差別之相。若菩薩戒者，以方便智攝一切法平等入，當勤修習。言此戒入一切平等法，離於自他而普淨自他。自開一切如來知見亦爾，一切等同於我，以入一切平等法界而修此戒故，與一切不共也。佛次更欲廣說菩薩十善戒相，令真言行菩薩無有疑惑，故以大慈大悲眼，觀察眾生界，告金剛手言。此梵音眼，而有二名，今具存之。以慈眼悲眼，故重說二名也。先說不殺相，謂盡形壽乃至捨一切刀杖等。殺法、殺緣、殺因、殺業等，凡與害命相應者，皆遠離之。觀一切眾生內怨之心，悉同於己，乃至有形之類永無害意，然不但以不殺成持戒也。當謂其方便慧，謂觀此人必造五無間謗法等緣，當增重障無由出離。以大悲心籌量，若害之能利多人，或令彼有出離因緣，寧自入惡道，謂將護彼，以大悲心而加害之。此即方便非彼二乘共也。次盜亦爾。雖一切乃至草葉不取，亦為破彼匱乏因緣，觀彼聚積無厭，由此自損成大障業，乃至方便取之，為修種種功德，然後告之令彼隨喜等。如是種種方便，但隨順深行十戒之行，以大菩提心而為導首，一切無犯。此是持犯之相也。前已略說殺戒，次牒更具說。祕密主！菩薩盡形持不殺戒，當捨刀杖離殺害意，護他之命如護己命。餘謂有異方便也，謂餘方便也。隨諸眾生類中，隨其事業為免彼，故云隨彼業而作之。殷勤修之，令彼免報應，離怨害意也。形類是眾義，如彼類造極惡事極重業，欲免彼故，假令行刀杖等，無過也。聲聞戒亦有對小罪除大罪以輕易重，故今亦爾，如救水中女人等可知也。菩薩戒准亦可知。盡形持不殺命戒，當捨刀杖殺害。如己同他我生命護之，餘類眾生如類物，脫自形類作而受報。應離怨惡意者，此第一戒相也。盡形者，非但一期而已。若菩薩從初發心及成菩提，一切有命之類尚不生一念害心，況起身口耶？其所有隨緣殺具，如殺戒中種種廣說之相，亦乃至一念不畜，況施行方便殺耶？惱害心略有九種，謂憎我身及惡我善友、好我之怨，過去、未來、現在為九也。又有一類，於非情生瞋，如迦葉佛時一比丘經行，為株机所倒，大怒引鑺掘之，為刃所傷自致殞弊，即於須臾受毒蟒身。時彼弟子同學等方焚其身時，後身毒蛇在彼焚處遇佛，以因生惡心欲害之。時佛教誡彼：「爾前身以忿非情故自致此報。今又甚彼，將更受惡身也。」其後不久有童子等，以彼害人，即共殺之而焚其身。彼又以見害忿怒，及欲害因緣，入大地獄。即於焚故身未了時，後報二身同時被見燒。當知此是於非情處生瞋所獲報也。又如律中，比丘經行，伊葉刺額血流，怒言：「佛何故乃制此戒，有何義利耶？」因掣異方，謂是緣生受大苦蟒身，五百商人為護他故，以大慈悲害蛇，令蛇免罪生天，商客悉患勉也。斷之，如有部大律說也。非情處尚爾，況有情處耶，菩薩觀此事故，自不生心亦勸他離也，餘如前說。金槍緣，廣說。又師子救賈客害蛇因緣，在《寶藏經》、《大方便經》等。復次菩薩持不與取戒，他所攝受用物取不起心，況復餘物不與取？諸餘有情見慳，慳不施與，無福作隨類形。眾生慳害，已彼離施。為彼與時，如是持不取戒（對不殺廣說，今此戒亦然）。若他所攝受用物，不起觸取之心，況復餘物不與而取？有餘方便（雖不言方便，義亦有之），見諸有情而極慳悋，積聚而不施與，不造作福，隨眾生像類。害彼慳故，離於自他，為彼行施，得妙色等（謂勸發他施也）。

Next, the distinct characteristics of the ten wholesome actions of the Great Vehicle are clarified. As for the bodhisattva precepts, one should diligently cultivate them by gathering all dharmas with the wisdom of upāya and entering into equality. This means that these precepts enter all equal dharmas, transcend self and other, and universally purify self and other. The spontaneous opening of the vision and knowledge of all tathāgatas is also like this: everything is equal to myself; because one cultivates these precepts by entering into the completely equal dharmadhātu, they are not in common with anything else. Next, wishing to explain further in detail the characteristics of the ten wholesome precepts of the bodhisattva, so that bodhisattvas of mantra practice will have no doubt, the Buddha observed the realm of sentient beings with the eyes of mahāmaitrī and mahākaruṇā, and addressed Vajrapāṇi. This Sanskrit word for 'eye' has two designations, which are now both preserved. Because of the eye of maitrī and the eye of karuṇā, the two names are stated again. First, the characteristic of not killing is explained: namely, to the end of one's physical life, abandoning all knives and staves. The methods of killing, conditions of killing, causes of killing, and karmic actions of killing—whatever is associated with harming life—are all distanced. One observes the inner enmity of all sentient beings as identical to one's own, so that even toward any creature with form, one never has the intention to harm; yet upholding the precept is not accomplished merely by not killing. It should be spoken of with its wisdom of upāya: if one observes that a certain person will definitely create the conditions for the five acts of immediate retribution, slandering the Dharma, and the like, thereby increasing heavy obstacles with no way of escape, then, deliberating with a mind of great compassion, if harming that person can benefit many people or cause that person to have the causes and conditions for liberation, one would rather enter the evil destinies oneself in order to protect them, and with a mind of great compassion inflict harm upon them. This is upāya, not shared with those of the two vehicles. Next, stealing is also like this: although not taking even a single blade of grass, if to destroy the conditions of someone's destitution, one observes that they accumulate without satiety and thereby harm themselves, creating deeds of great obstruction, one might even take it by upāya to cultivate various merits, and afterward inform them to make them rejoice, and so forth. With various upāyas such as these, as long as one conforms to the deep practice of the ten precepts, taking the great bodhicitta as the forerunner, none of it is a transgression. These are the characteristics of upholding and transgressing. Previously, the precept against killing was briefly stated; next it is reiterated and explained more fully: "Lord of Mysteries! A bodhisattva upholds the precept of not killing to the end of their physical life, relinquishing knives and staves, abandoning the intention to kill and harm, and protecting the lives of others just as they protect their own life." 'Other' means having different upāyas; that is, other upāyas. Among the various classes of sentient beings, in accordance with their karmic actions, to rescue them—therefore it says: "acting in accordance with their karma." Diligently cultivate it to make them escape retribution and abandon intentions of enmity and harm. 'Types of form' has the meaning of multitudes; if that kind of being commits extremely evil acts and extremely heavy karma, then in order to rescue them, even if one uses knives and staves, there is no fault. In the śrāvaka precepts there is also the case of counteracting a minor offense to eliminate a major offense, exchanging the heavier for the lighter; therefore here it is also like this, as can be known from the case of saving a woman in water and so on. Bodhisattva precepts can also be understood by analogy. Upholding the precept of not killing living beings to the end of one's physical life, one should abandon knives and staves, and killing and harming. One should protect other lives, equating oneself with others; other classes of sentient beings are like types of objects; escaping from one's own form and class, one acts and receives retribution. One should abandon intentions of enmity and evil: this is the characteristic of the first precept. 'To the end of physical life' does not merely mean a single lifetime. If a bodhisattva, from initial resolve up to the attainment of bodhi, does not give rise to a single thought of harm toward any living creature, how much less could they commit it through body and speech? As for whatever instruments of killing accompany conditions, as explained extensively in various characteristics under the precept against killing, one would not keep them even for a single thought, how much less employ upāya to kill? The mind of affliction and harm has, in brief, nine kinds: hating my body, disliking my good friend, and favoring my enemy, multiplied across past, future, and present to make nine. Furthermore, there is a class of beings that gives rise to anger toward inanimate things. For instance, in the time of Kāśyapa Buddha, a monk was doing walking meditation and was tripped by a tree stump; in great anger, he took a hoe to dig it up, was injured by the blade, and brought about his own death, immediately taking birth in an instant as a venomous serpent. At that time, when his disciples and fellow students were cremating his body, the venomous snake of his subsequent birth met the Buddha at the cremation ground; because of the cause, it gave rise to an evil intention and wished to harm him. At that time the Buddha admonished it: 'In your previous life, because you were angry with an inanimate thing, you brought this retribution upon yourself. Now you are even worse than that; you will take on a yet more evil body.' Not long after that, some youths, because it harmed people, together killed it and cremated its body. Because of the wrath of being harmed and the intention to harm, it entered the great hell. While the former body was not yet finished burning, the two subsequent bodies of retribution were seen to be burned at the same time. One should know that this is the retribution reaped from generating anger toward an inanimate object. Furthermore, as in the Vinaya, when a monk was doing walking meditation, a thorn from a leaf pierced his forehead and drew blood; he said in anger: 'Why did the Buddha institute this precept? What benefit is there?' Because of plucking it and casting it elsewhere, he was born due to this condition into the body of a great python suffering great torment. Five hundred merchants, to protect others, killed the serpent with great compassion, causing the serpent to escape its guilt and be born in heaven, and all the merchants were freed from peril. That it was severed is as explained in the Great Vinaya of the Sarvāstivāda. If it is so even with inanimate objects, how much more so with sentient beings! The bodhisattva, observing these matters, naturally does not give rise to such thoughts and also exhorts others to abandon them; the rest is as explained previously. The conditions of the iron lance are explained extensively. Furthermore, the conditions of the lion saving the merchants and killing the serpent are in the *Ratnakaraṇḍa-sūtra*, the *Mahopāyakausalya-sūtra*, and others. Furthermore, a bodhisattva upholds the precept against taking what is not given: toward the useful objects possessed by another, one does not give rise to the thought of taking them, how much less take other things not given? Seeing other sentient beings who are stingy, and through stinginess do not give, performing no merit, according with their types of form: sentient beings are harmed by stinginess, having separated from giving. When giving for their sake, one thus upholds the precept against taking (explained extensively in contrast to not killing; this precept is now also like that). If toward useful objects possessed by another, one does not give rise to the thought of touching and taking them, how much less take other things without them being given? There are other upāyas (though upāya is not stated, the meaning is present): seeing that sentient beings are extremely stingy, accumulating without giving and creating no merit according to the forms and types of sentient beings, to destroy their stinginess, transcending self and other, one practices giving on their behalf, obtaining wonderful forms and the like (meaning exhorting and inspiring them to give).