[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) › [天台菩薩戒疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812) › 2.27 # 天台菩薩戒疏 2.27 天台菩薩戒疏 2.27 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.27](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812.2.27) 第二十一、無慈報酬戒。行乖與樂名曰無慈，故心復怨名稱報酬也。菩薩理應怨親平等，常懷忍辱無捨慈悲，今乃復酬以暢嗔恚，沈淪苦海累劫怨酬，何名出家入道之士，故聖制也。別具四緣：一、是怨境，二、起嗔心，三、興方便，四、酬竟便，便犯。就文為三：初標名舉過制止，次「尚不」下舉輕況重，三、「而出家」下舉過結犯。初言「殺生報生」者，殺命長生永乖，乖佛教旨，怨息無由，故云「不順孝道」。次文言「尚不」等者，出家制不得畜，在家開畜，不得非理打罵起業。「況故」等者，正況復酬。既一切男女是我父母及我故身，今乃以殺相酬，義當於迹，故通云七重，外加一輕垢也。三、結犯中，有本無「出家」字，天宮云：據《梵網》大本合有凡發大心稟菩薩戒，並名出家菩薩。故《淨名》云：「夫出家者，為無為法」等（云云）。 > Twenty-first: the precept against taking vengeance without compassion. Action contrary to bestowing joy is termed 'lacking compassion'; an intentional mind to avenge a grievance is termed 'taking vengeance'. Bodhisattvas by principle ought to be equal toward enemies and friends, constantly harbor forbearance, and never abandon compassion; now one actually retaliates to vent anger, sinking into the ocean of suffering through kalpas of reciprocal vengeance. How could such a one be called someone who has left household life to enter the path? Hence the sage instituted \[this precept\]. It specifically comprises four conditions: 1. it is an adversarial object; 2. giving rise to a mind of anger; 3. initiating expedients; 4. the vengeance being completed—then one commits an offence. In terms of the text, there are three \[parts\]: first, naming \[the precept\], raising the fault, and enjoining restraint; next, from 'even not' onward, using the minor to illustrate the major; third, from 'yet one who has left household life' onward, adducing the fault and concluding the offence. In the first, the words 'killing living beings to avenge \[killing\] living beings' mean that killing life and preserving life are forever contrary; it runs contrary to the Buddha's teaching, and there is no way for grievances to cease; hence it says 'not in accord with the filial way'. In the next text, the words 'even not', etc., mean that those who have left household life are prohibited from keeping \[animals\], while householders are permitted to keep them, but may not unreasonably beat or scold them to generate karma. 'How much more so intentionally', etc., directly illustrates retaliation. Since all men and women are my parents and my past bodies, now retaliating by killing them corresponds in principle to \[injuring\] traces; hence it is generally spoken of as the seven major offences, with the addition of one minor defilement. In the third, concluding the offence, some versions lack the words 'one who has left household life'. Tiangong says: based on the large version of the Brahmajāla Sūtra, they should be present; all who arouse the great mind and receive the bodhisattva precepts are termed 'bodhisattvas who have left household life'. Hence the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says: 'Now, one who has left household life does so for unconditioned dharmas', etc. (and so forth). > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.26](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812.2.26) - [Next: 2.28](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812.2.28) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812~en-mt.2.27) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812.2.27](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812.2.27) · Pramāṇa