[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1804) › 2.25 # 四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 2.25 四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 2.25 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.25](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1804.2.25) 一者善心犯戒。謂如《僧祇》中：知事比丘，闇於戒相，互用三寶物；隨所違者，並波羅夷。或見他厭生，與其死具；看俗殺生，教令早與，勿使苦惱。此並慈心造罪，而前境違重。不以無知，便開不犯；由是可學，皆結根本。即律文云，愚癡波羅夷，乃至吉羅亦爾。又如《薩婆多》云：年少比丘，不知戒相，塔上拔草，罪福俱得。若論來報，受罪則輕；由本善念，更不增苦；不免地獄，由違受體。若犯性戒，具受二罪，謂業道也，及以違制；若犯遮戒，如壞草木，但得一罪，以化教中本不制故。無情可惱，若後懺洗，復本清淨；不同犯性。廣如下《智論》中說。 > First is transgressing precepts with a wholesome mind. For example, as in the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya: an administrative bhikṣu, ignorant of the precept characteristics, intermingled and used property of the Three Jewels; whatever was violated, all were pārājikas. Or seeing another person weary of life, one provides them with instruments of death; or watching laypeople slaughter living beings, one instructs them to kill them quickly so as not to cause them suffering. These all constitute creating offenses with a mind of compassion, yet the circumstantial object violated is heavy. One is not permitted non-transgression simply due to ignorance; because it could have been learned, all are established as root offenses. This is just as the Vinaya text says: 'Ignorant pārājika, down to duṣkṛta, is also like this.' Furthermore, as the Sarvāstivāda says: 'A young bhikṣu, not knowing the precept characteristics, pulled up grass on a stūpa; he obtained both offense and merit.' If discussing the future retribution, the suffering received is light; because of the original wholesome intention, it does not add further torment; yet he does not escape hell, because of violating the received essence. If one violates a natural precept, one fully incurs two offenses: that of the karmic path and that of violating the prohibition; if one violates a prohibitory precept, such as destroying grass and trees, one incurs only a single offense, because originally it was not prohibited in the teaching of conversion. There is no sentient being to be harmed; if one later repents and purifies it, one returns to original purity, unlike violating natural precepts. This is extensively explained below in the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.24](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1804.2.24) - [Next: 2.26](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1804.2.26) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1804.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1804~en-mt.2.25) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1804.2.25](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1804.2.25) · Pramāṇa