成唯識論述記 6.364

6.364

述曰：此有二解，無瞋返對斷物命之瞋，此不害即違於損惱物之害，故此二別，明害損物不為斷命，瞋斷物命不但損物。既爾，如訶風等不斷物命，即非害故。故知此中且約麁相，於有情所辨此二別。又不約所治，但明此體別。前無瞋與有情樂，是慈之體；不害拔眾生之苦，即是悲也。故《顯揚》第四云：慈以無瞋為性，悲以不害為性。今此二翻約麁相別。

The Commentary states: There are two explanations of this. Non-ill-will is the direct opposite of anger that severs the life of beings; this non-harming is contrary to harm that injures beings. Hence these two differ, clarifying that harm injures beings without necessarily severing life, while ill-will severs the life of beings, not merely injuring beings. That being so, scolding the wind and the like does not sever the life of beings, and would thus not be harming. Therefore, we know that this distinction between the two regarding sentient beings is stated merely in terms of coarse marks. Furthermore, rather than referring to what is remedied, this simply clarifies the distinction in their entities: preceding non-ill-will gives joy to sentient beings and is the entity of loving-kindness; non-harming pulls sentient beings out of suffering and is compassion. Thus, the fourth fascicle of the Prakaraṇāryavācā says: 'Loving-kindness has non-ill-will as its nature; compassion has non-harming as its nature.' Here, these two opposites are distinguished in terms of coarse marks.