俱舍論疏 16.109

16.109

論「今次應辨至殺生相者」，自下有四半頌明成不善業相。此半行頌明成殺業道相。具三緣成殺生：一由故思、二由他想、三不誤殺。或開為四，殺生為一緣也。《雜心論》云「有欲殺生心」，當此論故思。「眾生想」，當此論他想。「第三緣殺生」，與此論不同。此論云「不誤殺」。直言殺生，若不簡誤，但斷前命，兼上二緣即成殺罪。此據無簡別心。不誤殺者，如有欲殺強人，誤殺尫人，不成業道。此據有簡別殺。據義不同，義不相違。

On the Śāstra's "Next, we should now distinguish... to ...the characteristics of killing": Below there are four half-verses clarifying the characteristics of accomplishing unwholesome karma. This half-verse clarifies the characteristics of accomplishing the karmapatha of killing. Having three conditions accomplishes killing: first, by deliberate intention; second, by the notion of another; third, by killing without mistake. Or it may be expanded into four, with taking life as one condition. The *Saṃyuktābhidharmahṛdaya* says: "There is a mind desiring to kill living beings," which corresponds to "deliberate intention" in this treatise. "The notion of a sentient being" corresponds to "the notion of another" in this treatise. "The third condition, taking life" differs from this treatise. This treatise says "killing without mistake." If one simply speaks of taking life without specifying a mistake, merely severing the life of the one before oneself, combined with the above two conditions, immediately accomplishes the sin of killing. This is based on a mind without discrimination. "Killing without mistake" is like someone who wishes to kill a strong person but mistakenly kills a weak person, which does not accomplish the karmapatha. This is based on killing with discrimination. Because the senses they rely on differ, the meanings do not conflict.