四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 2.25

2.25

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.