English
namely, the bhikkhus depriving each other of life, on this cause and occasion, having assembled the community of bhikkhus, questioned them, and censured them, because in that instance, depriving oneself of life, or having one's life taken by a deer-snare, is not a pārājika offense; therefore, setting that aside, and taking only the mutual deprivation of life as the basis for the pārājika, when promulgating the pārājika, he said, "Whatever bhikkhu intentionally deprives a human being of life..." and so on. Because there were noble persons mixed in, it was not said "worthless men" but "those bhikkhus." Thus, having made the third pārājika firm by way of uprooting, for the purpose of a further supplementary rule... A story extolling the virtues of death arose. To explain its origin, "Thus, by the Blessed One..." and so on, was said. 168. Therein, "with minds bound" means minds bound by desire-passion; the meaning is "attached, having expectations." "We extol the virtue of death" means, having shown the danger in life, we extol the virtue of death; we show its benefit. In "one who has done good," and so on, this is the meaning of the word – "good, pure action has been done by you," thus "you are indeed one who has done good." Similarly, "skillful, blameless action has been done by you," thus "one who has done skillful deeds." When the time of death arrives, the fear, called terror, that arises in beings, from that, "the act of protecting, saving has been done by you," thus "one who has provided refuge from fear, from evil." "Wicked action has not been done by you," thus "one who has not done evil." "Cruel, harsh, immoral action has not been done by you," thus "one who has not been cruel." "Offence, violent action, excessive with defilements like greed, has not been done by you," thus "one who has not committed offence." Why is this said? Because every kind of good has been done by you, and evil has not been done by you; therefore, we say to you – "What is this to you, this wretched, evil, suffering-filled, difficult life, overcome by illness?" "Your death is better than life" means your death is more beautiful than life. Why? Because from here, having become one who has made an end, having made an end, having died – that is the meaning. Upon the breaking up of the body... (etc.)... you will be reborn. And thus reborn there, endowed and furnished with the five divine sense-pleasures arisen in the deva-world – the five divisions of sensual objects such as pleasing forms – you will attend, you will wander about, you will delight, having become associated and connected, going hither and thither. That is the meaning. 169. "Unwholesome" means unbeneficial, not conducive to growth, which quickly lead to the destruction of life. Explanation of the Analysis of Words 172. "Sañcicca" – this is an extraction of the word "sañcicca" mentioned in the matrix "having intentionally taken a human body." There, "santi" is a prefix; together with it, this word "sañcicca" is an expression of eagerness; its "sañ" "Having intended, having well intended" is the meaning. But inasmuch as one who intentionally kills, is one who knows, who distinctly knows, and that killing of his, having intended and thoroughly carried out, is a transgression. Therefore, not paying attention to the letters, but only to show the meaning, it is said, "knowing, distinctly knowing, having intended and thoroughly carried out, is a transgression." Thus is its analysis of terms stated. Therein, "knowing" means knowing "it is a living being." "Distinctly knowing" means distinctly knowing "I am depriving it of life"; that is, knowing together with that manner of knowing a living being. "Having intended" means having intended and planned by way of the intention to kill. "Thoroughly carried out" means by way of effort, crushing, sending forth a fearless mind. "Transgression" means that the transgression thus occurring is the ultimate meaning of the word "intentionally." Now, to show the human form mentioned in "should deprive a human being of life," starting from the beginning, it says, "What is called a human form..." Therein, to show the most subtle form of all, in the case of those in the womb, it is said, "that which is in the mother's womb." "The first mind" is the rebirth-linking consciousness. "Arisen" means born. "The first consciousness manifested" is a synonym for that. By the phrase "the first mind in the mother's womb," the entire five-constituent rebirth-linking is shown here. Therefore, that first mind, and the three formless aggregates associated with it, and the kalala-rupa (embryonic form) that arises with it— this is the very first human form. Therein, "kalala-rupa" means thirty forms in the case of males and females, by way of the body-basis decad, and twenty in the case of neuters, by way of the body-basis decad. Therein, the kalala-rupa of males and females is like a drop of oil lifted by one strand of a sheep's wool, clear and translucent. And this is stated in the commentary: "Just as a drop of sesame oil, or a clear lump of ghee; Such in color and appearance is what is called kalala." Thus, taking such a small thing as a basis, this human body, which is a being whose natural lifespan is two hundred years, is an individual existence that has gradually grown from that point until the time of death. "Deprive of life" means to separate from life even at the kalala stage by heating and crushing, or by administering medicine, or even after that, by a similar method. Since, however, depriving of life is, in essence, the cutting off of the life faculty, therefore, in the analysis of this term, it is said: "cuts off the life faculty, obstructs it, disturbs the continuity." Here, one who cuts off and obstructs the continuity of the life faculty is said to "cut off and obstruct the life faculty." This meaning is shown by the phrase "disturbs the continuity." "Disturbs" means "separates." Here, the life faculty is twofold: the material life faculty and the immaterial life faculty. Among these, there is no method for the immaterial life faculty; it cannot be deprived of life. But there is for the material life faculty; it can be deprived of life. However, one who deprives the material life faculty of life also deprives the immaterial life faculty of life. For it ceases together with it, being dependent on it for its existence. But one who deprives it of life, does he deprive the past, the future, or the present of life? Neither the past nor the future. For one of them has ceased, and the other has not arisen. Both are non-existent. Since they are non-existent, there is no method. Since there is no method, neither can be deprived of life. It is also said: "In the past moment of consciousness, it lived, it does not live; it will not live. In the future moment of consciousness, it will live, it did not live; it does not live. In the present moment of consciousness, it lives, it did not live; it will not live." Therefore, where it lives, a method is appropriate. Thus, one deprives the present of life. And this "present" is threefold: momentary present, continuous present, and extended present. Here, "momentary present" means arising That which is accompanied by momentary dissolution, it cannot be destroyed. Why? Because it ceases by itself. What is called "present in continuity" is merely the seven or eight impulsion-moments, which, having occurred in a homogeneous continuity, ceases. Or, for one who has come from the heat and entered a room and is seated, until it becomes dark. Or, for one who has come from the cold and is seated in a room, until the previous season does not subside due to the appearance of a dissimilar season. In this interval, it is called "present in continuity." But from rebirth-linking until death, this is called "present in duration." Both of these can be destroyed. How? When an attempt is made, the life-octad that has been attacked, as it ceases, becomes the condition for a weak, diminished-force continuity. Then, the present in continuity or the present in duration, without reaching its appointed time, ceases in between. Thus, both of these can be destroyed. Therefore, it should be understood that this statement, "he violates the continuity," refers to that. But for the clarification of this meaning, "life" should be understood, "destruction of life" should be understood, "destroyer of life" should be understood, and the "application of destruction of life" should be understood. Therein, "life" by convention is a being; in ultimate sense, it is the life-faculty. Indeed, one who destroys the life-faculty is said to "destroy life." That is just as stated. "Destruction of life" is the volition by which one initiates an action that severs the life-faculty. That murderous volition is called "destruction of life." "Destroyer of life" should be understood as the person endowed with the aforesaid volition. "The application of destruction of life" refers to six applications of destruction of life: by one's own hand, by command, by missile, by fixed device, by magic, by psychic power. Therein, "by one's own hand" means, for one who kills oneself, striking with the body or with something connected to the body. "By command" means, for one who commands another, commanding, "Kill by piercing or striking in this way." "By missile" means, for one who wishes to kill someone standing far away, by body... or by hand, or attached to the body, the discharge of arrows, spears, machines, stones, and so forth. "Immovable" means, for one wishing to kill with an unmoving device, setting up a pitfall, a trap, or administering poison. These four, moreover, will be fully revealed later in the Pāli commentary itself. Magic-based and power-based (killings) are not in the Pāli. They should be known thus. In brief, the incantation of spells for killing is a magic-based application. But in the commentaries: "What is a magic-based application?