Commentary on the Sūtra of the Collection of the Father and Son (Pitāputrasamāgamanasūtra) (186)

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 all consciousnesses have ceased, the five aggregates are called the aggregates of death; when the very first consciousness arises, the five aggregates are called the aggregates of birth.

When this life of ours comes to an end, at the moment of our final breath, the six consciousnesses of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind all cease. After the consciousnesses cease, that is the aggregates of death: the body is like a piece of wood, without awareness, without life; it is no longer the aggregates of birth, but has become a wooden, clay-sculpted lump of matter—that is the aggregates of death. When the six consciousnesses of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind arise again upon the physical body of the next life, a complete living being appears, and the various functions and activities of the five aggregates exist. If, while in the mother's womb, the six consciousnesses have not yet manifested, that is also not a complete human being. After four months, and by six or seven months, the six consciousnesses of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind are all present; only then is it a complete human being. Before the mind consciousness has arisen, it is not called a living person, because without the mind consciousness it is not a complete human being; yet neither is it a dead person, because the seventh consciousness (manas) and the ālayavijñāna are present. Therefore abortion counts as half-killing, and depending on the month in which the abortion is performed, the degree of the karmic sin of killing differs. For an abortion within the first six months, the fetus is not yet a complete living being, but there is still sin—only the magnitude of the sin differs. Abortion after six months constitutes fully killing a person, because the fetus is already a complete living being. When no mind consciousness has yet arisen, abortion does not yet count as killing a person, but it certainly still carries karmic sin.

When we eat eggs, the egg is also not a complete living being, but an 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 kinds of retribution—a matter of greater or lesser sin. Although there is a fertilized ovum inside the egg, it is not yet a complete living being; it has no activity 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 killing 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 mind consciousness and it does not know pain. Only after death, when the consciousness returns to the antarā-bhava, does it know that it was born in vain, and there will surely be hatred in its mind. When the fetus's mind consciousness has not yet arisen, there is no pain during the abortion. Only after returning to the state of the antarā-bhava, when the consciousness 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 determine exactly what degree of sinful karma it is.

Moreover, the magnitude of the sin also lies in the mental activity—in the degree of anger, and in whether there is a mind of anger and a mind to kill. For example, suppose there is a complete living person inside a burlap sack, and someone unintentionally kills him, not knowing there is a person inside the sack, thinking it is a lifeless object, and stabs a knife into it, and the person dies. This does not count as intentional murder, 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 by that person once; it is only that he does 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 sin of killing, the karma of murdering a person; unintentional killing is not a complete act of murder, but there is still cause and effect. On the other hand, if what is inside the sack is a piece of wood rather than a person, and someone, out of anger and hatred, kills it mistaking it for another person—originally the wood is not a life, and destroying it is just like chopping firewood—but because he harbors hatred and intent to kill in his mind and kills it as if it were a person, this sin is great. The magnitude of sin lies in the intention of the mind.

If one crushes an ant to death with an extremely evil mind, this sin is also very great, because the mind of anger is too heavy; it is different from ordinary killing. Ordinary killing is sometimes unintentional, and sometimes carries just a bit of anger—the retributions are all 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.