English
not by the second, because it was given with a different intention. Therefore, it is said: "Even if one dies by both, it is by the first blow..." bound by that (action). "For the purpose of clarifying actions and offenses" means for the purpose of clarifying the division of actions such as immediate (karma) and the division of offenses such as defeat (pārājika). Since the intention that arose earlier, "I will kill the ram," is the prior part, and the intention that determines, "I will kill this one," is present at that time, he is bound by the action as it actually is. Therefore, it is said, "because of the existence of the intention, 'I will kill this object'," and so on. For in all cases, the initial thought of resolve is immeasurable, and by it, the accomplishment of the purpose does not occur. But the thought of killing, which has that as its object, and the life faculty, are to be seen as the measure for the state of immediate (karma) and so on. And he is a killer means he is a killer of living beings; he is bound by the action of taking life. "It should be understood in the manner stated previously" means the offenses of defeat, grave offense, and expiation should be understood in order. Since the earlier intention that arose towards those of great virtue, "I will kill one of my mother, father, or Arahants," is cruel, the determining intention, accompanied by such an earlier intention, is indeed cruel. Therefore, it is said, "Here, however, the intention is cruel." And by this, it should be understood that when killing one's mother, father, etc., with the earlier intention, "I will kill a ram," since the earlier intention is not cruel, the immediate action that arises in this way is not as cruel as an immediate action that arises otherwise. "Bloody" means smeared with blood. "Doing the action" means doing the action of war. "Gone as intended" means when the warrior was shot and the father was shot. This was said to show that it was shot as intended by him. But some say that if it went straight and hit the father, even if not as intended, there is no doubt because the effort was made by oneself with the intention of killing. But there is no immediate (karma) because there was no effort made with the father as the specific object. "Having resolved" is the description of the application of the command, in the manner of a matrix. "Shoot thus" means pull the bow and shoot thus. "Strike thus" means take the sword firmly and strike thus. "Kill thus" means cause the action thus. Having done what, kill them. “In the middle” means on the middle of the elephant’s back. “By this” means “having established, he commands,” and so on. “There” means in the application of the command. Although the specific actions are not mentioned in the commentaries, in the Pāli text, specific actions such as “pierce thus, strike thus, kill thus” are referred to. Therefore, taking the specific actions brought down by the tradition of teachers and correlating them with the Pāli text, he says, “another method,” and so on. “Cutting” means cutting off hands, etc. “Breaking” means splitting open the belly, etc. Or, the meaning here should be understood as: piercing with an arrow, cutting with a sword, and breaking heads, etc., with clubs, etc. “Conch-skull” means the conch-skull torture. Those who perform it cut the skin around the upper lip, both earlobes, the topknot, and the throat, gather all the hair into a knot, twist it with a stick, and pull it out. The skin comes off with the hair. Then, they rub the skull with coarse gravel and wash it, making it conch-colored. “And so on” by the word “and so on” includes all such tortures as the rice-gruel pot, the Rāhu-mouth, the garland of flames, the hand-lamp, the ear-plug, the bark-garment, the deer-like, the fish-hook meat, the coin-torture, the caustic-acid-cutting, the log-rolling, and the straw-mat. There (A.N.A. 2.2.1), “rice-gruel pot” means the rice-gruel pot torture. Those who perform this torture tear open the skull, take a heated iron ball with tongs, and place it there. The brain then boils and rises to the top. “Rāhu-mouth” means the Rāhu-mouth torture. Performing this, they open the mouth with a stake and light a lamp inside the mouth, or they dig into the mouth starting from the earlobes, and blood flows out and fills the mouth. “Garland of flames” means wrapping the entire body with oil-soaked rags and setting them alight. “Hand-lamp” means wrapping the hands with oil-soaked rags and lighting them like a lamp. “Ear-plug” means ear-plu Self-skinning. Doing that, starting from below the neck, they cut strips of skin, and make them fall to the ankles. Then, binding him with ropes, they drag him. He, stepping on his own skin-strips, falls. Rag-wearing. The rag-wearing torture. Doing that, in the same way, they cut strips of skin and place them at the waist. Starting from the waist, they cut and place them at the ankles. With the upper parts, the lower body is as if clothed in a rag garment. Deer-like. The deer-like torture. Doing that, on both armpits and knees, they place iron rings and drive in iron stakes. He stands firm on the ground with four iron stakes. Then, surrounding him, they make a fire. From time to time, removing the stakes from the joints, they set him up only on the four bone-ends. Hook-flesh. Striking with double-mouthed hooks, they tear out skin, flesh, and sinews. Coin-like. The whole body, starting from the top, they strike with sharp chisels, making coin-sized pieces fall, coin-sized pieces fall. Alkali-scraping. Striking the body here and there with weapons, they rub alkali with brushes. Skin, flesh, and sinews melt away, and only a skeleton remains. Bar-turning. Making him lie on one side, they drive an iron stake into his ear-hole, binding him to the earth. Then, taking him by the feet, they spin him around. Straw-mat. A skilled executioner, without cutting the skin, breaks the bones with mallets, and lifting him by the hair, raises him up. He becomes just a heap of flesh. Then, binding him by the hair, taking him, they wrap him up like a bundle of straw. Having caused a discrepancy in the object, then killing another – this is the connection. Even for "front side" and so on, it is taken by the object's nature, by taking the object itself, as it says "striking in front" and so on. With the mind, having made a determination "in front" or not having made it, when it is said "strike in front and kill", if one strikes elsewhere and kills... It is said: Because it was not said by making a hint, there is doubt. But even desiring to kill by striking anywhere with the mind, if he says, "Strike in front and kill!" setting aside the meaning thus spoken by making a hint for him, because the communication was arisen by that very mind, and because he is not indirectly freed from the pārājika of killing a human, they say, "Even if killed elsewhere, there is no doubt." But some do not agree with that. "By specific object" means by specific objects like mother and so on. "By specific action" means specific actions like the anantariya and so on. "By specific offense" means specific offenses like pārājika and so on. "This one standing in the village," it means the village is stated for specifying the person, not for specifying the place. Therefore, because the place is not specified and only the person is specified, there is no doubt. But in phrases like "or in the village," and so on, because the place is specified, doubt is stated if killed elsewhere. "By the beak" means by the sword's point. "By the tharuna" means by the sword's hilt. "This one going," it means by the going, only the person is specified, not the posture. Therefore, he says, "There is no doubt." By phrases like "this one going only," and so on, the posture is specified. Therefore, he says, "There is doubt." Even if it is said, "Kill a tall one!" because there are many tall-shaped ones, and because it is not indicated by a unique characteristic like "this one of such and such a name and such a form is tall," which is not common to others, it is said, "He commands without specifying." Therefore, he says, "He kills whatever is such." And here, they say, "Even if one is specified in mind among many tall-shaped ones, because it is not specified by speech, if another such one is killed, there is no doubt." Because the characteristic factor of the perception of life is absent in the case of another's life, there is no life-taking, he says, "The commander is freed." If so, when there is a specification of place, how is there life-taking? For one who specifies the place, it should be understood that the life-faculty of the one sitting in that place is the object. For indeed, one who specifies the place and indicates, desires to have the one sitting in that place killed, himself But then there is nothing there, therefore, they say, one's own life-faculty together with space is not an object. "Having resolved"— the explanation of the discourse on the use of commands according to the matrix is finished. Explanation of the Messenger Discourse For the teacher who thus commands, there is first a dukkaṭa. If that command does not go according to his intention, for the teacher, at the moment of commanding, there is a dukkaṭa. But if that command goes according to his intention, what is later said to be a grave offense, that very thing occurs at the moment of commanding. Then if he certainly kills him, what is later said to be "for all, the offense is a pārājika," then for this one, at that very moment, it is a pārājika. Thus, this meaning should be understood here. But by the teacher, in the discourse on taking what is not given below (Pārā. 121), in the manner stated, this meaning can be understood, therefore it is not stated here. For it is said there: "For the teacher who thus commands, 'The offense is a dukkaṭa,' there is first a dukkaṭa. But if that command