..續本文上一頁k happiness and are averse to pain. The essential determinant of transgression is the volition to kill, issuing in an action that deprives a being of life. Suicide is also generally regarded as a violation, but not accidental killing as the intention to destroy life is absent. The abstinence may be taken to apply to two kinds of action, the primary and the secondary. The primary is the actual destruction of life; the secondary is deliberately harming or torturing another being without killing it.
我們所應避免的殺生是：「有意地」去殺害，刻意地去摧毀一個具有意識的生命。這項戒律的出發點在于：所有的衆生都熱愛生命、懼怕死亡，都尋求幸福而厭惡痛苦。犯下這條戒律的決定性因素是殺生的意志。這種意志將進而發動行爲，奪去一個衆生的生命。一般而言，自殺也被認爲是犯了殺戒；但出于意外而殺了某個衆生，卻不被認爲是犯了殺戒，因爲在這種情況中，殺生的意圖是不存在的。這條戒律適用于兩種層面的行爲：主要層面是真的摧毀了某個衆生的生命；次要層面是故意地傷害或虐待另一個衆生，即使沒有加以殺害。
While the Buddha”s statement on non-injury is quite simple and straightforward, later commentaries give a detailed analysis of the principle. A treatise from Thailand, written by an erudite Thai patriarch, collates a mass of earlier material into an especially thorough treatment, which we shall briefly summarize here.29 The treatise points out that the taking of life may have varying degrees of moral weight entailing different consequences. The three primary variables governing moral weight are the object, the motive, and the effort. With regard to the object there is a difference in seriousness between killing a human being and killing an animal, the former being kammically heavier since man has a more highly developed moral sense and greater spiritual potential than animals. Among human beings, the degree of kammic weight depends on the qualities of the person killed and his relation to the killer; thus killing a person of superior spiritual qualities or a personal benefactor, such as a parent or a teacher, is an especially grave act.
佛陀對于不傷害的觀點，十分簡單而直接；但之後的注釋書對于此一戒律，則做出了十分詳盡的分析。有一份來自泰國，由泰國博學的長老所寫成的論文，對照整理了許多早期的相關資料，並做了十分全面的處理，我們將在以下簡要說明。(HRH PrinceVajiraJanavarorasa,The Five Precepts and the Five Ennoblers(Bangkok, 1975),pp. 1-9.)
這篇論文指出：殺生在道德責任上有輕重之別，並會帶來不同的後果。叁項影響道德責任輕重的主要因素是：對象、動機以及所投入的努力。在對象方面，殺人和殺動物的嚴重性是不一樣的，殺人的業比殺動物更重，因爲跟動物比起來，人有更高的道德感，更大的心靈潛能。而在人類之中，殺人的業的輕重又取決于：所殺之人的素質以及他與加害者的關系。因此，殺害一個具有更高心靈素質的人，或殺害一個對加害者有恩的人(如父母或師長)，是造了尤其嚴重的業。
The motive for killing also influences moral weight. Acts of killing can be driven by greed, hatred, or delusion. Of the three, killing motivated by hatred is the most serious, and the weight increases to the degree that the killing is premeditated. The force of effort involved also contributes, the unwholesome kamma being proportional to the force and the strength of the defilements.
殺生的動機也影響了道德責任的輕重。殺生的行爲可能是由貪、瞋或癡所誘發的。在叁者之中，由瞋念所引起的殺業是最嚴重的。而如果這個行爲是預謀的，則其嚴重性就更大。此外，在殺生時所投入的精力也會影響道德責任的輕重。惡業的嚴重性與煩惱的強度成正比。
The positive counterpart to abstaining from taking life, as the Buddha indicates, is the development of kindness and compassion for other beings. The disciple not only avoids destroying life; he dwells with a heart full of sympathy, desiring the welfare of all beings. The commitment to non-injury and concern for the welfare of others represent the practical application of the second path factor, right intention, in the form of good will and harmlessness.
與不殺生(止持)相對應的正面行爲(作持)，則如佛陀所言，在于培養對于其他衆生的慈心與悲心。佛教徒不只應該避免殺生；還應該時時充滿同情心，關切所有衆生的利益。遵守不傷害以及關切其他衆生的利益，便是以善意和無害的方式，來實踐第二道支 —正思惟。
(2) Abstaining from taking what is not given (adinnadana veramani)
不偷盜
He avoids taking what is not given and abstains from it; what another person possesses of goods and chattel in the village or in the wood, that he does not take away with thievish intent.30
一個受持不偷盜戒的人，對于他人在村落或森林中所擁有的産業，不會起盜心而私取。(《增支部》 10： 176；《佛陀的話》，頁 53)
“Taking what is not given” means appropriating the rightful belongings of others with thievish intent. If one takes something that has no owner, such as unclaimed stones…
《八聖道之正語正業正命 Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood》全文未完，請進入下頁繼續閱讀…