[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) › [梵網經菩薩戒本疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1813) › 1.44 # 梵網經菩薩戒本疏 1.44 梵網經菩薩戒本疏 1.44 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.44](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1813.1.44) 第三、釋名者，息風名生，依身心轉隔斷不續名為殺生。戒者是能治之行，從所治為名，故云殺戒。《涅槃經》云：「眾生佛性住五陰中，若壞五陰名曰殺生，若有殺生即墮惡道。」息有三種：過去、現在則不可殺，遮未來故名殺。夫眾生者名出入息，斷出入息故名為殺，我等諸佛亦隨俗說名為殺。問：息斷名殺，入滅盡定豈是死耶？答：以後起時息還生故，是故不名斷。問：此報息滅、後報息生，應非無耶？答：以命根斷故、報隔異故，不例滅定。問：殺既爾，從緣必無自性，無自性故應無有罪。答：有無自性得罪，還無自性得報，一切法皆爾。問：既自心變眾生還自殺者，無實眾生死，何因有罪？答：還自心變罪，如眾生來報受罪，當知亦爾。問：知殺性空，殺應無罪。答：空是罪治，知空必不殺、殺必不了空，故亦有罪。若謂無罪而作殺者，以邪見故罪重眾生，於餘何得言無罪也？ > Third, explaining the name: The breath is called life; when it is severed and discontinued as it turns based on body and mind, this is called killing living beings. The precept is the practice that can counter \[it\], named after that which is countered; hence it is called the precept against killing. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra states: 'The Buddha-nature of sentient beings abides within the five aggregates. If one destroys the five aggregates, this is called killing living beings. If there is killing of living beings, one immediately falls into the evil destinies.' There are three kinds of breath: the past and present cannot be killed; because it cuts off the future, it is called killing. Sentient beings are termed 'the in-and-out breath'; severing the in-and-out breath is therefore called killing. We Buddhas also conform to worldly convention and call it killing. Question: If severing the breath is called killing, is entering the cessation attainment death? Answer: Because when one emerges later the breath is produced again, therefore it is not called severed. Question: When the breath of this retribution ceases and the breath of the next retribution is produced, shouldn't \[the continuity\] be not non-existent? Answer: Because the life-faculty is severed and the retributions are distinct and separated, it is not comparable to the cessation attainment. Question: Since killing is like this, arising from conditions it must lack intrinsic nature; lacking intrinsic nature, there should be no offense. Answer: It is precisely without intrinsic nature that one incurs an offense, and again without intrinsic nature that one receives the retribution; all phenomena are like this. Question: Since one's own mind transforms into sentient beings and kills them oneself, there are no real sentient beings dying; on what grounds is there an offense? Answer: One's own mind also transforms into the offense, just as when a sentient being comes to retaliate and one undergoes the punishment—know that it is also like this. Question: Knowing that the nature of killing is empty, killing should have no offense. Answer: Emptiness is the antidote to offenses; one who knows emptiness will definitely not kill, and one who kills definitely does not understand emptiness; therefore there is also an offense. If one says there is no offense and commits killing, because of wrong view the offense is heavier than that toward sentient beings; how could one say of the rest that there is no offense? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.43](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1813.1.43) - [Next: 1.45](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1813.1.45) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1813.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1813~en-mt.1.44) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [法苑珠林](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2122.72.9) — 道世, Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1813.1.44](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1813.1.44) · Pramāṇa