大毘盧遮那成佛經疏 17.46

17.46

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).