俱舍論疏 16.114

16.114

論「或復生者至殺罪所觸」，第二釋也。命根為生，後解為正，與正量等同故。《婆沙》一百一十八云「問：殺何蘊名殺生？過去耶？未來耶？現在耶？過去已滅、未來未至、現在不住，悉無殺義，云何名殺？答：殺未來蘊，非過去、現在。問：未來未至，云何可殺？答：彼住現在，遮未來世諸蘊和合，說名為殺。由遮他蘊和合生緣，故得殺罪。有說：殺現在、未來蘊，但非過去。問：未來可爾。現在不住，設彼不殺亦自然滅，云何殺耶？答：斷彼勢用說名為殺。所以者何？先現在蘊雖不住而滅，然不能令後蘊不續。今現在蘊不住而滅，則能令其後蘊不續，故於現蘊亦得殺罪。」既無評文，義亦兼通。又《婆沙》云「問：諸蘊中何蘊可殺，於彼得罪？有說：色蘊。所以者何？唯色可為杖等所觸故。有說：五蘊。問：四蘊無觸，云何可殺？答：彼依色轉，色蘊壞時彼便不轉，故亦名殺。如瓶破時，乳等亦失。又都於五蘊起惡心而殺，故於彼得殺罪。」又《婆沙》云「問：殺壽盡者，得殺罪不？答：若此剎那壽應盡，即爾時加害者，不得殺罪。若由加害，乃至一剎那壽住不生法，皆得殺罪，況多剎那。」

On the Śāstra's "Or again, what is born... to ...affected by the sin of killing": This is the second explanation. The life-faculty (jīvitendriya) is life. The latter explanation is correct, because it agrees with the Sammatīya and others. The *Vibhāṣā*, fascicle 118, says: "Question: Killing which skandha is called killing living beings? Is it past, future, or present? The past has already perished, the future has not yet arrived, and the present does not abide; none of them have the meaning of being killed. How is it called killing? Answer: It kills future skandhas, not past or present. Question: The future has not yet arrived; how can it be killed? Answer: While abiding in the present, one obstructs the future aggregation of the skandhas; this is called killing. Because one obstructs the causal conditions for the arising of the aggregation of other skandhas, one incurs the sin of killing. Some say: One kills present and future skandhas, but not past ones. Question: The future may be so. But the present does not abide; even if one does not kill it, it naturally perishes; how can it be killed? Answer: Severing its functional capacity is called killing. Why is that? Although the previously present skandhas perish without abiding, they are not able to cause subsequent skandhas not to continue. Now the present skandhas perish without abiding, and this is able to cause subsequent skandhas not to continue; therefore, one also incurs the sin of killing with regard to the present skandhas." Since there is no critical evaluation, the meaning applies to both. Furthermore, the *Vibhāṣā* says: "Question: Among the skandhas, which skandha can be killed so that one incurs sin toward it? Some say: The form skandha (rūpaskandha). Why is that? Because form alone can be struck by a staff and so forth. Some say: All five skandhas. Question: The four skandhas are without contact; how can they be killed? Answer: They operate relying on form; when the form skandha is destroyed, they cease to operate; therefore it is also called killing. Just as when a jar is broken, the milk and other contents are also lost. Furthermore, one raises an evil mind toward all five skandhas to kill; therefore one incurs the sin of killing toward them." Furthermore, the *Vibhāṣā* says: "Question: If one kills someone whose lifespan is exhausted, does one incur the sin of killing or not? Answer: If the lifespan of that moment was destined to end, and one does harm at that very moment, one does not incur the sin of killing. If, through harm, even a single moment of lifespan that was to abide does not arise, in all such cases one incurs the sin of killing, how much more so for many moments!"