The Sin of Killing with a Smokeless Fire Pit

Original text of the Sūtra on the Precepts for Upāsakas, Section One: 无烟火坑杀者。若优婆塞知是人从此道来。于中先作无烟火坑。以沙土覆上。若口说。以是人从此道来。故我作此坑。若是人因是死者。是犯不可悔罪。若不即死。后因是死。犯不可悔罪。若不即死。后不因死。是中罪可悔。

Explanation: The case of killing by means of a smokeless fire pit is as follows: if an upāsaka knows that the person to be killed will come along a certain path, he prepares a smokeless fire pit in advance along that path, covers it with sand and soil, and then says aloud: "Because this person will come along this path, I have set up this fire pit." If that person dies from falling into the fire pit, the upāsaka commits an irremediable offense of killing. If that person does not die immediately but later dies as a result, the upāsaka likewise commits an irremediable offense of killing. If that person does not die immediately, and later does not die as a result, then the upāsaka commits a middling, remediable offense.

Original text: 为人作无烟火坑。人死者不可悔。非人死者。是中罪可悔。畜生死者。下罪可悔。

Explanation: If one makes a smokeless fire pit to kill someone on another's behalf, and a human being dies from falling into the fire pit, then an irremediable offense of killing has been committed; if a non-human falls into the fire pit and dies, the upāsaka commits a middling, remediable offense of killing; if an animal falls in and dies, the upāsaka commits a minor, remediable offense of killing.

Why is it that when different kinds of sentient beings fall into the same fire pit and die, the upāsaka incurs different offenses? First, it is because sentient beings differ in their category of identity, in their merit, and in their own value, so the loss incurred by their death differs, and naturally the offense of killing them differs accordingly. Humans are nobler and more valuable than non-humans, and non-humans are nobler and more valuable than animals; killing a human incurs the greatest offense, while killing an animal incurs the least. Value here refers to the magnitude of the contribution one can make to the world, the magnitude of the benefit one can bring to sentient beings, and the magnitude of worldly and supramundane accomplishments one can attain. Second, it is because the upāsaka's purpose and intention differ; an offense committed deliberately and one committed unintentionally naturally differ. If the upāsaka's target for killing is a human, and he has the intent to kill a human, then when a human dies the offense is grave. His target is not non-humans or animals, and he has no intent to kill non-humans or animals; thus if non-humans or animals die, it counts as accidental killing, and the offense is lesser.

Original text: 为非人作坑。非人死者。是中罪可悔。人死是下罪可悔。畜生死者。犯下可悔罪。若为畜生作坑。畜生死者。是下罪可悔。若人堕死。若非人堕死。皆犯下罪可悔。

Explanation: If the smokeless fire pit was made for non-humans, and a non-human dies as a result, the upāsaka commits a middling, remediable offense of killing. If a human falls in and dies, he commits a minor, remediable offense of killing; if an animal dies as a result, it is likewise a minor, remediable offense of killing.

If the smokeless fire pit was made for animals, and an animal dies as a result, it is a minor, remediable offense of killing. If a human falls in and dies, or a non-human falls in and dies, both are minor, remediable offenses of killing.

Setting up a fire pit for non-humans means one has the deliberate intent to kill non-humans, but because non-humans are not noble enough in status and are not suitable vessels for the Path, killing a non-human incurs a middling, remediable offense, not the gravest irremediable offense. If a human accidentally falls into the fire pit and dies, it is a minor, remediable offense, because the upāsaka had no intent to kill a human; it was the person's own mistaken entry into the fire pit that caused the death, and the upāsaka merely provided the means for falling into the pit. If an animal mistakenly enters the fire pit and dies, it is even more a minor, remediable offense. If one has the deliberate intent to kill animals, then no matter which category of sentient being dies as a result, it is a minor, remediable offense, because animals are not noble enough and are not suitable vessels for the Path; killing them is a minor offense, while the death of humans or non-humans counts as accidental killing, which is also a minor offense.

Original text: 若优婆塞不定为一事作坑。诸有来者。皆令堕死。人死者。犯不可悔。非人死者。中罪可悔。畜生死者。下罪可悔。都无死者。犯三方便可悔罪。是名无烟火坑杀也。

Explanation: If the upāsaka did not set up the smokeless fire pit for any particular category of sentient being, but in his mind hoped that all who came to the fire pit would be killed without exception. If a human dies as a result, he commits an irremediable offense of killing; if a non-human dies as a result, he commits a middling, remediable offense of killing; if an animal dies as a result, he commits a minor, remediable offense of killing. If none of them die, the upāsaka commits three remediable offenses of preparatory means. This is what is meant by the offense of killing by means of a smokeless fire pit.

Setting up a fire pit with the intent to kill all sentient beings who pass by, including humans, means one has the deliberate intent to kill humans; if a human dies, it is the gravest irremediable offense. If one intends to kill non-humans and animals, and non-humans and animals die, it is a middling and a minor remediable offense respectively. The three preparatory means refer to having set up the smokeless fire pit in order to kill the three kinds of sentient beings.