English
with the meaning of the Sutta. Indeed, in the Sutta it is said "He is endowed with psychic power, master of mind" only by the power of Atharvaṇa, it should be understood not by the power of development. "Otherwise" means for the word "should seek," the meaning would be merely "seeking" according to the literal sense. Then, having sought by merely searching, the meaning is "by merely obtaining weapons, etc." "They kill, they harm with this," thus "satth" (weapon) is the name for all instruments of killing, such as stones, ropes, etc. It says, "club," etc. "Club" is a synonym for cudgel. "Collection of weapons" refers to the collection of weapons mentioned in the mātikā as "one who carries a weapon." "Because it is stated later" means because it is stated later by way of conclusion in the analysis of the second word. "Said for clarifying the meaning of the word 'citta'" means because the word "citta" has many meanings, such as "varied," etc., it is said to restrict it to the meaning of "consciousness," having excluded other meanings. 174. "Is bound by action" means is bound by the action of taking life. , that act is accomplished. In both ways, it means by way of the one who directs and the one who is directed. By that disease later, by this, it shows the occurrence of the destruction of life, even with regard to a future life faculty. And thus, "When you are able, then deprive that one of life," by such a command, even if accomplished after a long time, the destruction of life occurs at the very moment of the command. In the case of fixed objects like digging a pitfall, after the act is performed, even if a being takes rebirth later and dies, the destruction of life is directed at a future object. What is said in the Vinaya Vibhaṅga, "The five precepts are only directed at present objects," that is said with reference to abstention from the destruction of life, etc., and should not be taken as referring to the destruction of life itself. With another intention, meaning with the intention not to kill. Dies by the second blow, meaning dies by the second blow without the first blow. By the first blow itself, meaning at the moment of the volition that initiated the first blow. Although the first blow itself cannot kill, when it receives the second, it becomes capable and is the cause of the destruction of life. Therefore, since death is not accomplished without the first blow, by connecting "the act and death by it," it is proper that the act is bound by the first blow itself, not by the second, as it was given with another intention. Just as here, so too in cases like another person giving the second blow. However, if the person giving the second blow also has the intention to kill, then because death also occurred by their own act, it should be understood that the destruction of life occurs at the moment of their act. For the clarity of the act and offense, meaning for the clarity of the division of acts like immediate retribution and the division of offenses like pārājika. Even with a mistaken apprehension like "I will kill a ram," since "this" (being) is grasped as it actually is in ultimate reality, the act is bound according to the actual object. Thus, he says, "this object," etc. And he becomes a killer, meaning he is bound by the act of destroying life. Great (karma) by the intention to kill, directed at those great in virtue like one's mother. Because of its blameworthiness, it is said: “Here, however, the intention is cruel.” “Lohitaka” means smeared with blood. “Performing the deed” means performing the act of war. “Gone according to intention” means when a warrior is pierced and the father is pierced, or when the warrior is not pierced but only the father is pierced, there is no doubt, because the intention to kill the father is present. Even if only the warrior is pierced, the same applies. “There is no immediate result” means there is no act of killing related to the father. “Thus pierce” means to command by teaching the method of piercing, such as “stand on the ground with your feet like this, take the bow like this, and draw it.” “Thus strike” means take the sword firmly and strike thus. “Thus kill” means perform the act of killing thus. “Both commit life-taking” is said because both made an effort to kill whoever, without specifying. If the commander, with the perception “when pierced thus, such a one will die thus,” commands “pierce thus,” they say the commander is bound by karma only if the specified one dies. If the commanded one, specifying “such a one,” aims and shoots an arrow, and the commander commands without specifying, the commander is bound by karma for the death of anyone, but the commanded one is bound only for the death of the specified one, so it should be understood. “In the middle” means in the middle of the elephant’s back. “By this” means by the Pāli saying “commanding with determination,” and so on. “There” means in the effort of the commanded one. Although specific actions are not mentioned in the commentaries, because specific actions like “thus pierce, thus strike, thus kill” (Pārā. 174) are referred to in the Pāli, he says “another method” and so on, showing specific actions that have come down through the tradition of teachers, taking them from the Pāli context. “Piercing” means piercing with arrows, spears, and so on. “Cutting” means cutting off hands, feet, and so on, with swords, and so on. “Breaking” means breaking or splitting heads, and so on, into two with clubs, and so on. “Sankhamuṇḍaka” means tearing off the skin with the hair from the skull and then with coarse gravel, the skull… The act of crushing the head, by rubbing, in the manner of making a conch-shell color. Thus, and so on, by the word 'etcetera', things like a pot of rice-gruel are included. Having struck the chest, having struck the back, having struck the neck, and so on, the rule regarding striking and piercing, etc., in the regions of the body's parts, is included only in the specific action. Because in the commentaries, even in the context of killing related to body parts like the conch-shell head, it is included there. But what in the Sāratthadīpanī, regarding the commentary passage 'strike in front and kill,' etc., the explanation of the meaning 'it is said that even the front side, etc., is taken by taking the object itself, due to the nature of the object, thus 'strike in front,' etc.' — that explanation is not appropriate. Because the act of causing action in body parts like the conch-shell head is stated in the commentaries in the context of specific actions. Indeed, killing another person, having abandoned what was ordered, is a discrepancy in the object (of the command), not a discrepancy in the body part ordered to be struck. Therefore it is said: 'Having caused a discrepancy in the object... ...then kills another (person). Or 'strike in front and kill'... ...there is no karmic bond.' But this, even in the case of the ordered object, is said to show the absence of karmic bond by a discrepancy in the specific action, thus it is understood. Therefore, not just saying 'killing without causing a discrepancy in the object,' but also the rule of specific action 'as ordered' is shown. Otherwise, the word 'as ordered' would become meaningless. And in the definition of 'object,' only this much is said: 'the object is the being to be killed.' But it is not said: 'also the body part to be struck as ordered.' Therefore, even striking in front, etc., is included only in the specific action — this is our view. It should be taken after investigation. By specific object means by specific dead beings like a mother, etc. By specific action means specific actions like those leading to immediate retribution, etc. By specific offense means specific offenses like pārājika, etc. "Whenever, at any time, in the forenoon" means other than the day of the command. Even if he in the forenoon of the day of anyone. This, "standing in the village," "village" is said for the person's determination, not for the place's determination. Therefore it is said: "Wherever he kills, there is no doubt." By this, when there is no desire to determine specific times, places, weapons, postures, or actions, it is made known that even if there is doubt about the determination of place and time, etc., spoken from the mouth of the one who commands, desiring only death by any means, he is still bound by kamma. But whoever, even desiring only death by any means, anywhere, anytime, wishing to be freed from the accusation of unwholesome action due to doubt about time, etc., makes a slight determination of time, etc., for him, because he is not indirectly freed from the pārājika of killing a human, it should be understood from consideration that even with doubt about time, etc., he is bound by kamma. But some do not agree with this; it should be investigated. By the beak: by the sharp point. By the hilt: by the sword hilt. This, "going," by "going" the person alone is determined, not the posture. Therefore he says: "There is no doubt." Even when it is said, "Kill the long one," because there are many long-shaped beings, and because it is not specified by an uncommon characteristic like "a long one of such and such a name and such a form," it is said, "he commands without specifying." Therefore he says: "I will kill whatever is such." And here, even if one is determined in mind among many long-shaped beings, because it is not specified by speech, they say there is no doubt if another such is killed. Because the characteristic factor of "perception of life in another's life" is absent, having excluded oneself, there is no life-taking, so he says: "The commander is freed." When a place is determined, referring to oneself, "sitting in such and such a place," it is said that a killer's thought arises concerning the life faculty of anyone sitting in that place, so it is said: "Neither the killer