---
title: "梵網經古迹記 · 1 快意殺生戒"
description: "《梵網經古迹記》由新羅高僧太賢所集，是對《梵網經》的重要註釋著作。太賢活躍於7世紀，屬新羅佛教鼎盛時期，其學說融合唯識與戒律思想。該書系統闡釋《梵網經》的菩薩戒體系，重點解析十重四十八輕戒條，並結合大乘教義探討戒律精神。作為東亞佛教戒律學核心文獻，它不僅影響朝鮮半島佛教發展，更成為漢傳佛教菩薩戒傳承的理論基石，對研究佛教戒律史與中韓佛教交流具有重要價值。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmcvtr36x0hg7le04p2vj4978"
---

### 快意殺生戒第一

> First Precept: Refrain from Taking Life

經：「若佛子若自殺」至「是菩薩波羅夷罪」。

> Sutra: “If a Bodhisattva disciple kills himself” up to “This is a Parajika offense for a Bodhisattva.”

述曰：第二、別誦。此初十戒各二門說：一、顯制意，二、釋經文。初制意者，世間所畏死苦為窮，損他之中無過奪命。如《智論》云：設滿世界寶，無有直身命。是則菩薩濟物為心而施極怖，便失其性。如《瑜伽》云：若問菩薩以何為體？應正答云：大悲為體。由此最初制斯戒也。猶如聲聞出苦為先，初制欲貪最為重戒。第二釋、文者，經有四門：一、違犯相門，二、違犯性門，三、境界事門，四、結成罪門。初者，如經「若自殺」至「呪殺」，此即違犯差別相故。違犯性者，如經「殺業」至「殺緣」故，謂具五支必成犯故。此中「殺業」即究竟也，「殺法」方便，「殺因」意樂及煩惱也，「殺緣」事也。依此有說，不成業道，不入犯重。如《瑜伽》說：「菩薩若見欲作重罪，發心思惟：我若斷彼惡眾生命，當墮地獄；如其不斷，彼罪業成，當受大苦。我寧殺彼墮那落迦，終不令其受無間苦。如是於彼，或以善心、或無記心，知此事已，為當來故深生慚愧，以憐愍心而斷彼命。由此因緣，於菩薩戒無所違犯，生多功德。此闕煩惱，故無違犯；意樂善故，生多功德。」今解不然，不成業道，亦成犯故。如諸有命皆犯重處，雖想顛倒而犯重故，況隨分戒隨位制別。如《文殊問經》說此戒云：「若受出世間菩薩戒，而不起慈悲心，是菩薩波羅夷罪。」於諸犯處，《論》除三人，謂心狂亂、重苦、無戒。傳說亦應除無憶念及有勝利。轉生不能憶，雖作無犯故。諸有勝利處，一切無犯故。言境界事門者，如經「乃至一切有命者不得故殺」。故聲聞戒中唯取殺人，今不簡趣，故言「乃至」。彼隨事重，今約理制。如《涅槃經》佛告阿闍世王言：大王！汝王宮中常勅屠羊，心初無懼，云何於父獨生懼心？雖復人獸尊卑差別，寶命重死二俱無異，若中彼壽盡剎那殺，如何得罪？《文殊問經》說得同罪，以加彼苦緣具足故，廣如彼說。違教之罪輕重雖同，隨心境等業有輕重，如論廣說。問：自品煩惱勢力應等，何故《善生》云貪殺生輕、瞋次、癡重？答：麁細雖等所違有異，違於出離大乘正理。如其次第貪等為重，經約相通且癡為重。結成罪門者，如經「是菩薩」至「波羅夷罪」，以對正行翻結罪故。「常住慈悲心」者，下緣群生傷愍心也。有情法爾種性繫屬，屬我之類由我沒故。「孝順心」者，上緣勝品慚愧心也。以諸菩薩為度於我無量劫受大苦行故，菩薩應起如是二心，而快恣心殺生犯重。律云：聲聞人作人想，得波羅夷；非人人想，但偷蘭遮。菩薩不爾，但於有命故意殺生，皆波羅夷。「波羅夷」者，此云他勝處。善自惡他，惡法所勝，戒是持犯，所依名處。此文略意，謂彼彼相差別犯中，以五緣犯，翻正得罪。餘諸戒文，準此應釋。此中諸戒，依主為名。

> Explanation: The second part is the specific recitation. This first set of ten precepts is explained in two sections: first, revealing the purpose of the precept; second, explaining the scriptural text. Regarding the initial purpose: Among the fears of the world, the fear of death is the ultimate one; among harms to others, nothing exceeds taking life. As the \*Treatise on Great Wisdom\* says: Even if the world were filled with precious gems, they could not equal the value of one's own life. Thus, bodhisattvas, whose nature is to rescue living beings, would lose their very essence if they inflicted extreme terror. As the \*Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra\* states: If one asks what constitutes the essence of a bodhisattva, the proper answer is that great compassion constitutes that essence. Therefore, this is the first precept established. Just as śrāvakas prioritize liberation from suffering and thus first establish the precept against craving desire as most weighty. Now the second section explaining the text: The scripture has four categories: first, the category of violating characteristics; second, the category of violating nature; third, the category of objects and circumstances; fourth, the category of constituting the offense. The first: As in the scripture from "if one kills oneself" through "killing by incantation," this constitutes the differing characteristics of violation. The violating nature: As the scripture says, from "the act of killing" through "the conditions for killing," because when the five factors are complete, an offense is necessarily committed. Here, "the act of killing" is the completion; "the method of killing" is the preparatory action; "the causes of killing" are the intention and mental afflictions; "the conditions for killing" are the object. According to some interpretations, if the karma path is not completed, one does not fall into the grave offense. As the \*Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra\* says: "If a bodhisattva sees someone about to commit a grave offense and thinks: 'If I cut short that evil being's life, I will fall into hell; but if I do not, that person's evil karma will ripen and they will suffer greatly. I would rather kill them and fall into hell than let them undergo the uninterrupted suffering. Thus, toward that person, whether with wholesome mind or neutral mind, having recognized this situation, deeply ashamed for the future, with compassionate mind, he cuts short that life. Due to this cause, he commits no violation of the bodhisattva precepts and generates much merit." This interpretation lacks the factor of affliction, hence no violation; because the intention is wholesome, much merit is generated. Our interpretation differs: even if the karma path is not completed, an offense is still committed. For all living beings fall within the range of grave offenses; even with distorted perception, one commits the grave offense. How much more so, since the precepts are differentiated according to capacity and level. As the \*Mañjuśrī Inquiry Sūtra\* states about this precept: "If one receives the transcendent bodhisattva precepts but does not arouse compassionate mind, this constitutes a pārājika offense for that bodhisattva." Regarding the various offenses, the \*Treatise\* excludes three types of persons: the mentally deranged, those in severe pain, and those without precepts. Tradition also says one should exclude those without memory and those for whom there is great benefit. Those reborn without memory, even if they act, commit no offense. Wherever there is great benefit, there is no offense in all cases. As for the category of objects and circumstances: As in the scripture, "up to and including all living beings, one must not intentionally kill." Thus, in the śrāvaka precepts, only killing humans is taken; here, no distinction is made among realms of beings, hence the phrase "up to and including." There, offenses are weighed by the object; here, the precept is established based on principle. As in the \*Nirvana Sutra\*, the Buddha told King Ajātaśatru: "Great King! In your royal palace you constantly order the slaughter of sheep, and your mind never flinches—why then do you alone feel fear toward your father? Although humans and animals differ in noble and base status, cherishing life and fearing death are identical in both." If one ends another's life within their lifespan in an instant, how is the offense incurred? The \*Mañjuśrī Inquiry Sūtra\* says the same offense is incurred, because the factors of causing suffering to that being are complete; the details are as explained there. Although the offense of violating the teaching is equally grave, karma varies in weight according to mental state and circumstances, as extensively explained in the \*Treatise\*. Question: The afflictions within one's own category should be of equal strength—why then does the \*Sutra of Good Life\* say that killing from greed is lighter, from hatred intermediate, and from delusion heaviest? Answer: Although coarse and subtle qualities may be equal, what is violated differs: it violates the correct principle of the Great Vehicle's transcendence. In that order, greed and so forth progressively increase in gravity; the sutra, speaking in general terms, takes delusion as heaviest. The category constituting the offense: As the scripture states, from "this bodhisattva" through "pārājika offense," because in contrast with correct conduct, the offense is thus concluded. "Constantly abiding in compassionate mind" means the mind of pity directed downward toward all living beings. Sentient beings are naturally bound by their species; those belonging to my kind are lost because of me. "Mind of filial respect" means the mind of shame and reverence directed upward toward superior beings. Because all bodhisattvas, for the sake of liberating me, have undergone great suffering for immeasurable eons, bodhisattvas should arouse these two minds—yet if one kills with a mind of delight and indulgence, one commits the grave offense. The \*Vinaya\* says: śrāvakas who perceive a human as a human commit pārājika; perceiving a non-human as a human constitutes only a sthūlātyaya offense. Bodhisattvas differ: for them, intentionally killing any living being is pārājika. "Pārājika" is here rendered as "the place of defeat by another." Good conquers oneself, evil conquers oneself; when overcome by evil dharmas, the precepts constitute the basis of keeping and violating, hence called "place." The abbreviated meaning of this text is that, within the various differentiated aspects of offense, the offense is concluded through five factors, and by reversing correct conduct, one incurs the offense. The remaining precept texts should be explained according to this model. Among these precepts, each is named according to its primary subject.