瑜伽師地論略纂 3.133

3.133

「斷彼命故」，謂害。　「解支節故」，謂極害。　「計活命故」，謂執，計執殺生而活命故。　有出家外道，名曰無慚者，即尼揵子，計：隨所住處百由旬內所有眾生，於彼作不殺成律儀，作殺成不律儀；百由旬外，彼皆不成。經對治此，說如是言一切有情所，非唯百由旬。　「即彼外道復作是說」等者，彼計草木皆悉有命，殺成業道。佛為治此，說如是言真實眾生所，殺樹木非業道。　「此即顯示真實福德遠離對治」等者，此言定顯由殺有情是性罪故，亦以性戒真實福德為遠離對治故。《對法》云：殺生事者，謂有情數，故此前言一切有情所；殺草木等是遮罪故，亦以遮戒不實福德為遠離對治，故此後言真實眾生所。又釋：不須依性、遮戒釋，此即顯示次前所說無繫外道二種對治。若不殺一切有情，何但百由旬內真實對治？若不殺草木，是非情故，名不實對治。顯二對治外道二計。兩句之文，與前不同，所以曲示。　「如是所說諸句，顯示加行殺害」者，最極猛惡下七句，由起其心，加行勵力，猛勇行殺，故名如是。加行殺害，非是加行業道也。　「乃至極下捃多蟻」者，此有二義，一者、蟻卵，二、折脚蟻，故存梵音。

"Severing their life" refers to harming. "Dismembering limbs and joints" refers to extremely harming. "Presuming it to be one's livelihood" refers to grasping, because one grasps and presumes that killing living beings sustains life. There is a renunciant non-Buddhist named the shameless one, namely the Nirgrantha, who asserts: with regard to all sentient beings within a hundred yojanas of one's dwelling place, refraining from killing them constitutes moral discipline, and killing them constitutes non-discipline; beyond a hundred yojanas, neither is constituted. Countering this, the sūtra states the words: 'with regard to all sentient beings,' and not merely within a hundred yojanas. In "That same non-Buddhist again asserts as follows," etc., they assert that grasses and trees all possess life, and killing them constitutes a path of karma. To counter this, the Buddha stated the words: 'with regard to real sentient beings'; killing trees and grasses is not a path of karma. In "This shows the antidote of genuine merit and renunciation," etc., these words definitively show that because killing sentient beings is a transgression by nature, one takes the genuine merit of natural morality as the antidote of renunciation. The Abhidharmasamuccaya states: the object of killing living beings refers to that which is counted among sentient beings; hence it was previously stated 'with regard to all sentient beings.' Because killing grasses and trees is a transgression by prohibition, one also takes the non-genuine merit of prohibitory morality as the antidote of renunciation; hence it is stated subsequently 'with regard to real sentient beings.' Another explanation: it need not be explained based on natural and prohibitory morality; this simply shows the two kinds of antidotes against the Nirgrantha non-Buddhists explained immediately before. If one does not kill all sentient beings, how could it be a genuine antidote solely within a hundred yojanas? If one does not kill grasses and trees, because they are insentient, it is called a non-genuine antidote. This shows the two antidotes against the two assertions of non-Buddhists. Because the wording of the two phrases differs from the preceding, it is specifically indicated. In "The phrases thus spoken show preparatory killing," the seven phrases below 'most extremely fierce and evil', because one arouses that mind and makes preparatory effort to kill fiercely and vigorously, are named as such. Preparatory killing is not the preparatory path of karma. In "down to the lowest kunta ant," there are two meanings: first, ant eggs; second, broken-legged ants; hence the Sanskrit pronunciation is preserved.