Chinese
竟不成，唯得方便，不得根本。作庄严已便得杀者，得根本罪。如其杀已，不追成已，无无作罪。若杀者一念中死，可杀之者次后念死，杀者不得根本业罪。若遣使杀，使得作罪，口敕之者得无作罪；若恶口敕，亦得作罪及无作罪。若其杀已，心善、无记，亦得作罪及无作罪。 “若有说言：过去已灭，未来未生，现在无住，云何名杀？一念不杀，微尘不坏，若一不杀，多亦不能，云何言杀？是义不然！何以故？虽复现在一念不杀，能遮未来使不起故，故得名杀。以是义故，不可以见一处无杀，举一切处悉便无杀。有人刺手则便命终，或有截足而命全者。头则不尔，刺截俱死。若有作已得大罪者，是名业道；三业自得，七业自他。若无作者，亦无无作。 “或有说言：身业三事有作无作，口不如是。是义不然！何以故？若口有作、无无作者，口敕杀已，不应得罪，是故口业亦应有作及以无作。心则不尔，何以故？贤圣之人不得罪故。何因缘故名作、无作？是业堕于三恶道故，生于人中寿命短故，所有六入常受苦故，余果相似根本正果，或有相似或不相似。受果报时，在活地狱、黑绳地狱，饿鬼、畜生、人中三处受于余果。若于一人作杀庄严，作庄严已，有二人死，当知唯于本所为人得作无作。 “ 现代汉语译本 最终没有成功，只是得到了方便，没有得到根本。如果做了杀人的准备工作后就杀人，就犯了根本罪。如果已经杀了人，不再继续追究，就没有无作罪。如果杀人者在一念之间就死了，而被杀者在下一念才死，那么杀人者就得不到根本的业罪。如果派遣使者去杀人，使者犯了作罪，口头命令杀人的人犯了无作罪；如果恶语命令杀人，也犯了作罪和无作罪。如果杀了人之后，心是善的或者无记的（既非善也非恶），也犯了作罪和无作罪。 ‘如果有人说：过去已经灭亡，未来尚未产生，现在没有停留，怎么能说是杀人呢？一念之间没有杀人，微尘也不会坏灭，如果一次不杀人，多次也不会杀人，怎么能说是杀人呢？’这种说法是不对的！为什么呢？即使现在一念之间没有杀人，也能阻止未来杀人的行为发生，所以可以称为杀人。因为这个原因，不能因为看到一个地方没有杀人，就认为所有地方都没有杀人。有的人被刺了手就立刻死亡，有的人被截断了脚却能保全性命。头部则不是这样，刺或截都会死亡。如果做了某事会得到大罪，这就叫做业道；身口意三业自己得到果报，七业是自己和他人共同作用的结果。如果没有作者，也就没有无作。 ‘或者有人说：身业的三种行为有作和无作，口业不是这样。’这种说法是不对的！为什么呢？如果口业有作，没有无作，那么口头命令杀人之后，就不应该得到罪报，所以口业也应该有作和无作。心业则不是这样，为什么呢？因为贤圣之人不会因此而犯罪。因为什么因缘叫做作、无作呢？因为这种业会堕入三恶道，生在人中寿命短，所有的六入（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意）经常遭受痛苦，其余的果报相似于根本的正果，或者相似或者不相似。承受果报的时候，在活地狱、黑绳地狱，饿鬼、畜生、人中这三个地方承受其余的果报。如果对一个人做了杀人的准备工作，做了准备工作之后，有两个人死了，应当知道只对原本想要杀的人得到作和无作。
English
English version Ultimately, it did not succeed, only convenience was obtained, not the root. If one prepares to kill and then kills, one commits a fundamental offense. If one has already killed and does not continue to pursue it, there is no non-action offense. If the killer dies in one thought, and the one to be killed dies in the next thought, the killer does not incur the fundamental karmic offense. If one sends a messenger to kill, the messenger commits the action offense, and the one who verbally commands the killing commits the non-action offense; if one commands with harsh words, one also commits both the action and non-action offenses. If after killing, the mind is good or neutral (neither good nor evil), one also commits both the action and non-action offenses. 'If someone says: the past has perished, the future has not yet arisen, the present has no abiding, how can it be called killing? If one does not kill in one thought, even a dust particle will not be destroyed; if one does not kill once, one will not kill many times, how can it be called killing?' This statement is not correct! Why? Even if one does not kill in the present moment, one can prevent future killing from arising, therefore it can be called killing. For this reason, one cannot see that there is no killing in one place and conclude that there is no killing in all places. Some people die immediately when stabbed in the hand, while others survive even when their feet are cut off. The head is not like this; both stabbing and cutting will result in death. If doing something results in a great offense, this is called the path of karma; the three karmas of body, speech, and mind receive their own retribution, while seven karmas are the result of one's own actions and the actions of others. If there is no actor, there is also no non-action. 'Or someone says: the three actions of body karma have action and non-action, but speech karma is not like this.' This statement is not correct! Why? If speech karma has action but no non-action, then after verbally commanding someone to kill, one should not receive punishment; therefore, speech karma should also have both action and non-action. Mind karma is not like this, why? Because virtuous and holy people do not commit offenses because of it. For what reason are they called action and non-action? Because this karma causes one to fall into the three evil realms, to have a short lifespan when born as a human, and to constantly suffer from all six entrances (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind), the remaining consequences are similar to the fundamental right consequence, or similar or dissimilar. When receiving the karmic retribution, one receives the remaining consequences in the three places of the Living Hell (活地狱), the Black Rope Hell (黑绳地狱), the realm of hungry ghosts, the realm of animals, and the human realm. If one prepares to kill someone, and after preparing, two people die, one should know that one only incurs the action and non-action offenses for the person one originally intended to kill. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
若有说言：色是无记，命亦无记，如是无记，云何杀已而得杀罪？是义不然！何以故？如是身命是善恶心器，若坏是器，遮于未来善恶心故，是故得罪。若王敕杀，侍臣称善，是王与臣罪无差别；猎亦如是。若有垂终，其命余残有一念在，若下刀杀，是得杀罪；若命已尽而下刀者，不得杀罪。若先作意规欲挝打，然下手时，彼便命终，不得杀罪。若作毒药与怀妊者，若破歌罗罗，是人则得作无作罪。若自刑者，不得杀罪。何以故？不起他想故，无瞋恚心故，非他自因缘故。 “或有说言：若心在善、不善、无记，悉得杀罪，犹如火毒，虽复善心、不善、无记，触食之者悉皆死者。是义不然！何以故？世间有人捉火不烧，食毒不死，非恶心杀，亦复如是不得杀罪，如诸医等。 “或有说言：婆薮仙人说咒杀人、杀羊祀天，不得杀罪。是义不然！何以故？断他命故，痴因缘故。若见人死心生欢喜，当知是人得成已罪。见他杀已，心生欢喜，出财赏之，亦复如是。若使他杀，受使之人到已，更以种种苦毒而杀戮之。口敕之者，唯得作罪，受使之人，兼得二罪，作以无作。 “若发恶心夺取他物，是人亦得作无作罪。若数时取，若寄时取，因市易取，亦得偷罪。若自不取、不贪、不用，教他令取，是人亦得 现代汉语译本： 如果有人说：‘色（rupa，物质现象）是无记（avyākrta，非善非恶），命（jīvita，生命）也是无记，既然是无记，为什么杀了就会有杀罪呢？’这种说法是不对的！为什么呢？因为这样的身命是善恶之心的工具，如果毁坏了这个工具，就会阻碍未来善恶之心的产生，所以会有罪。如果国王下令杀人，侍臣称赞，那么国王和侍臣的罪过没有差别；打猎也是一样。如果有人临终，生命只剩下一念，如果这时下刀杀了他，就会有杀罪；如果生命已经结束才下刀，就没有杀罪。如果事先打算要殴打，但下手时，那人却死了，就没有杀罪。如果制造毒药给怀孕的人，如果破坏了歌罗罗（kalala，受精卵），这个人就犯了作罪和无作罪。如果自杀，就没有杀罪。为什么呢？因为没有生起对其他人的想法，没有嗔恚心，不是由其他人的因缘造成的。 或者有人说：‘如果心处在善、不善、无记的状态，都会有杀罪，就像火和毒药一样，即使是善心、不善、无记心，接触或食用它们的人都会死。’这种说法是不对的！为什么呢？因为世间有人拿火不会被烧伤，吃毒药不会死，不是以恶心杀人，也不会有杀罪，就像医生一样。 或者有人说：婆薮（Vasu，印度神话人物）仙人念咒杀人、杀羊祭天，没有杀罪。这种说法是不对的！为什么呢？因为断了他人的生命，是愚痴的因缘。如果看到人死，心里生起欢喜，应当知道这个人犯了已罪。看到他人杀人后，心里生起欢喜，拿出钱财赏赐他，也是一样。如果指使他人杀人，接受指使的人到达后，又用各种痛苦的毒药来杀戮。口头命令的人，只有作罪，接受指使的人，兼得两种罪，作罪和无作罪。 如果发起恶心夺取他人的财物，这个人也犯了作罪和无作罪。如果是多次拿取，如果是寄放时拿取，因为市场交易拿取，也犯了偷盗罪。如果自己不拿取、不贪婪、不用，教唆他人去拿取，这个人也犯了偷盗罪。
English
English version: If someone says: 'Rupa (rupa, material phenomena) is avyakrta (avyākrta, neither good nor bad), and jīvita (jīvita, life) is also avyakrta. Since it is avyakrta, how can killing result in the sin of killing?' This statement is incorrect! Why? Because such a body and life are instruments of good and evil minds. If this instrument is destroyed, it obstructs the arising of future good and evil minds, therefore there is sin. If a king orders a killing and a courtier praises it, then the sins of the king and the courtier are no different; hunting is the same. If someone is dying and their life remains with only one thought, if they are killed with a knife at this time, there is the sin of killing; if the knife is applied after life has ended, there is no sin of killing. If there is a prior intention to strike, but when the hand is applied, the person dies, there is no sin of killing. If poison is made for a pregnant woman, if the kalala (kalala, fertilized egg) is destroyed, this person incurs both the karma of action and the karma of non-action. If one commits suicide, there is no sin of killing. Why? Because there is no thought arising towards others, no hatred, and it is not caused by the conditions of others. Or someone says: 'If the mind is in a state of good, bad, or avyakrta, there is the sin of killing, just like fire and poison, even if it is a good mind, bad mind, or avyakrta mind, those who touch or consume them will die.' This statement is incorrect! Why? Because there are people in the world who can hold fire without being burned, and eat poison without dying. Killing without an evil mind does not incur the sin of killing, like doctors. Or someone says: The sage Vasu (Vasu, a figure in Indian mythology) kills people by chanting mantras, and sacrifices sheep to the heavens, without incurring the sin of killing. This statement is incorrect! Why? Because he cuts off the lives of others, which is caused by ignorance. If one sees someone die and joy arises in their heart, know that this person has committed the karma of accomplishment. If one sees someone else kill and joy arises in their heart, and they give money to reward them, it is the same. If one orders another to kill, and the person who receives the order arrives and kills with various painful poisons. The one who gives the verbal order only incurs the karma of action, while the one who receives the order incurs two karmas, the karma of action and the karma of non-action. If one generates an evil mind and steals the property of others, this person also incurs the karma of action and the karma of non-action. If it is taken multiple times, if it is taken when it is entrusted, if it is taken through market transactions, there is also the sin of stealing. If one does not take it oneself, is not greedy, and does not use it, but instructs others to take it, this person also commits the sin of stealing. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
作无作罪。若欲偷金，取时得银，出外识已，还置本处，是人不得偷盗之罪。若欲偷金，得已即念无常之想，心生悔恨，欲还本主而复畏之，设余方便还所偷物，虽离本处，不得偷罪。奴仆财产，先悉生意与主同共，后生贪想辄取主物，取已生疑而便藏避，复思是物同共无异，虽离本处，不得偷罪。若人行路为贼所剥，既至村落，村主问言：‘汝失何物？我当偿之。’若说过所失，取他物者，是得偷罪。若有发心，施他二衣，受者取一，云不须二，辄还留者，是得偷罪。若人发心，欲以房舍、卧具、医药、资生所须施一比丘，未与之间，更闻他方有大德来，辄回施之，是得偷罪。若取命过比丘财物，谁边得罪？若羯磨已，从羯磨僧得；若未羯磨，从十方僧得；若临终时，随所与处，因之得罪。若偷佛物，从守塔人主边得罪。若暴水漂财物、谷米、果蓏、衣服、资生之物，取不得罪。若于非时、非处、非女、处女、他妇、若属自身，是名邪淫。唯三天下有邪淫罪，郁单曰无。若畜生，若破坏，若属僧，若系狱，若亡逃，若师妇，若出家人，近如是人，名为邪淫。出家之人，无所系属，从谁得罪？从其亲属、王所得罪。恶时乱时虐王出时，怖畏之时，若令妇妾出家剃发，还近之者，是得淫罪。若到三道，是得淫罪。若自若 现代汉语译本： 关于作与无作之罪。如果想要偷金子，拿的时候却拿到银子，拿出后意识到拿错了，又放回原处，这个人没有偷盗的罪过。如果想要偷金子，拿到后立即生起无常的想法，心中后悔，想要归还给物主却又害怕，于是设法用其他方式归还所偷之物，即使离开了原来的地方，也没有偷盗的罪过。奴仆的财产，事先都与主人共同经营，后来生起贪念而擅自拿取主人的东西，拿了之后又心生疑虑而藏匿起来，又想到这些东西是共同的，没有什么不同，即使离开了原来的地方，也没有偷盗的罪过。如果有人在路上被盗贼抢劫，到达村落后，村长问他说：‘你丢失了什么东西？我应当赔偿给你。’如果夸大所失之物，拿取他人的东西，这就犯了偷盗罪。如果有人发心，施舍他人两件衣服，接受者只拿了一件，说不需要两件，擅自留下另一件的，这就犯了偷盗罪。如果有人发心，想要将房舍、卧具、医药、生活所需之物施舍给一位比丘，在未施舍之前，又听说其他地方有大德前来，就擅自改变主意施舍给那位大德，这就犯了偷盗罪。如果拿取命终比丘的财物，从谁那里得到罪过？如果已经羯磨（Karma，佛教术语，指僧团的议事和表决），从羯磨僧那里得到罪过；如果尚未羯磨，从十方僧那里得到罪过；如果是临终时，随其所给予之处，因此而得到罪过。如果偷盗佛物，从守塔人或主持者那里得到罪过。如果暴雨冲走财物、谷米、瓜果、衣服、生活用品，拾取的人没有罪过。如果在不适当的时间、不适当的地点，与非处女、处女、他人的妻子，或者属于自身（指自己的妻子）发生关系，这叫做邪淫。只有三天下（指欲界、色界、无色界）有邪淫的罪过，郁单曰（Uttara Kuru，北俱卢洲，四大部洲之一，被认为是理想的居住地）没有。如果与畜生、被破坏者（指已被他人侵犯的女性）、属于僧团的女性、被囚禁者、逃亡者、师父的妻子、出家人发生关系，接近这样的人，叫做邪淫。出家之人，没有所属关系，从谁那里得到罪过？从其亲属、国王那里得到罪过。在恶劣的时代、混乱的时代、暴虐的国王统治的时代，或者恐怖畏惧的时候，如果让妇人或妾出家剃发，又与她们发生关系，这就犯了淫罪。如果到达三道（指地狱道、饿鬼道、畜生道），这就犯了淫罪。如果是自己或者