天台菩薩戒疏 1.46

1.46

Ninth: the precept against harbouring anger and not accepting apologies. Now, a bodhisattva takes forbearance as their mental disposition; yet, on the contrary, should the poison of anger accumulate within their mind, it harms compassion and impairs the Path. Among the thieves that plunder merit, none surpasses anger. A slight resentment arising in this life will become a great enmity; therefore, it is established as a major offense. It specifically possesses six conditions: first, there is the object—either superior or intermediate—confronting one; second, one gives rise to the conception of that object; third, the angry mind does not cease; fourth, the other person repents and apologizes; fifth, one displays the conception of not accepting [the apology]; sixth, the other person understands [this refusal], whereupon the offense is committed. If any condition is lacking, one commits a minor offense. As for the text, it likewise has three parts: first, stating the title and enjoining the cessation of evil; next, enjoining the practice of the good; third, adducing the fault and concluding the offense. The first part also has two aspects: first, explaining the act of violation. Committing it oneself or instructing another, when all conditions are fulfilled, both constitute a major offense. Next, in explaining the consummation of the karma: the internal mind serves as the cause, the object before one serves as the condition, harboring and fixing rigid comportment serves as the method, and taking anger as one's primary activity is called karma. Next, from "Yet a bodhisattva..." onward, it enjoins the practice of the good, as in the text. Third, from "Yet on the contrary..." onward, it adduces the fault and concludes the offense. As for "even toward non-sentient beings," it refers to becoming angry at the insentient. For example, when a person in an angry state strikes at domestic livestock, or even stumbles with their feet or hands against wood or stone and gives rise to anger toward them, these are both non-sentient beings. This adduces a minor defilement as an analogy. By "with harsh speech," etc., it directly concludes the fault.