Lecture Notes on the Sūtra of the Collection of the Father and Son (186)

The Degrees of the Karma of Killing Vary

Original text: 大王。最后识灭。名为死蕴。最初识起。名为生蕴。

Explanation: The Buddha said: Great King, at the very end of life, when the consciousness-mind has all ceased, the five aggregates are called the aggregate of death; when the very first consciousness-mind arises, the five aggregates are called the aggregate of birth.

When this life of ours ends, at the moment of our final breath at death, the six consciousnesses of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind cease. After the consciousness ceases, that is the aggregate of death; the body is like a piece of wood, without awareness, without life—it is no longer the aggregate of birth, but has become a wooden, clay-sculpted lump, which is the aggregate of death. On the physical body of the next life, the six consciousnesses of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind arise again, and a complete living being appears, with the various functions and activities of the five aggregates. If, while in the mother's womb, the six consciousnesses have not yet manifested, one is also not a complete human being. After four months, at six or seven months, when all six consciousnesses of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind are present, only then is one a complete human being. Before the consciousness-mind has arisen, one is not called a living person, because without the consciousness-mind one is not a complete human being; nor is one a dead person, because the seventh consciousness (manas) and the Ālayavijñāna exist. Therefore abortion is a half-killing; depending on how many months along the abortion is performed, the degree of the karma of killing differs. For abortions performed within the first six months, the fetus is not yet a complete living being, but there is still karmic fault—only the magnitude of the fault differs. Abortion after six months constitutes fully killing a person, because the fetus is already a complete living being. When the consciousness-mind has not yet arisen, abortion does not yet count as killing a person, but it certainly still carries karmic fault.

When we eat eggs, the egg is also not a complete living being, but the egg contains a fertilized ovum that will in the future become a chicken, so there is also karmic retribution. Eating an egg and eating a chicken are two different retributions—a matter of the magnitude of the fault. Although there is a fertilized ovum in the egg, it is not yet a complete living being; it has no activities of the five aggregates. Only when it hatches into a chick is it a complete living being—or just before it is about to emerge from the shell, it is already a complete living being, and destroying it then also counts as killing.

Therefore, if one has no choice but to have an abortion, it should be done as early as possible; the earlier it is done, the less pain the fetus suffers, because there is no activity of the consciousness-mind and it does not know pain. Only after death, when the consciousness-mind returns to the neutrino-body (antarā-bhava), does it know that it was born in vain, and there will surely be hatred in its mind. When the fetus's consciousness-mind has not yet arisen, there is no pain during the abortion. Only when it returns to the state of the neutrino-body and the consciousness-mind arises again is there pain and hatred. There are many different degrees of the karma of killing; by whether the five aggregates are complete or not, one can judge one's own karma and what degree of karmic fault it is.

Moreover, the magnitude of the karmic fault also lies in the mental activity, in the degree of anger, and in whether there is a mind of anger and a mind of killing. For example, suppose there is a complete living person inside a sack, and someone unintentionally kills him, not knowing there is a person inside the sack, thinking it is a lifeless object, and as a result stabs a knife into it and the person dies. This does not count as intentional killing, and after death he will not fall into hell to undergo retribution. Even so, in the future when he meets that person, he will also be unintentionally killed once by that person; it is just that he will not fall into hell to undergo evil retribution. When killing a person, one must see whether the killing is intentional or unintentional. Intentional killing is the offense of killing, the karma of killing a person; unintentional killing is not a complete act of killing a person, but there is still cause and effect. On the other hand, if what is inside the sack is a piece of wood, not a person, and someone, out of anger and hatred, kills it thinking it is another person—originally the wood is not a life, and destroying it is just like chopping firewood—but because his mind harbors hatred and the intent to kill, and he kills it as if it were a person, this fault is great. The magnitude of the fault lies in the intention.

If one crushes an ant to death with extremely great evil intent, this fault is also very great, because the mind of anger is too heavy; it is different from ordinary killing. Ordinary killing is sometimes unintentional, sometimes carries a slight trace of anger, and the retributions are all entirely different. So it is the same with sentencing under the law: it is divided into intentional killing and unintentional killing, and the sentences handed down are all different.