Korean Journal of Buddhist Studies ISSN:1598-0642(Print) 불교학연구

In this paper, I first closely look at the notion of right or wrong livelihood (ājīva), and show that it has never been clearly understood in Theravādin tradition, and also that this misunderstanding has adversely affected both traditional and modern interpretation of Buddhist ethics.  To solve this issue, I propose the theory of multiple sieves as an interpretive framework for Buddhist ethics. Although Buddhist moral evaluation ultimately depends on intention (cetanā), ethical precepts are formulated primarily in terms of bodily and verbal actions. This methodological feature results in moral categories that are inevitably imprecise, allowing certain ethically problematic activities to escape judgment at one level while being restricted at another. Buddhist ethics is therefore best understood as a system of multiple, hierarchically arranged moral filters.
The paper first examines the Five, Eight, and Ten Precepts, together with the Vinaya, to demonstrate how increasingly refined moral frameworks regulate activities permitted at more basic levels. On this basis, it argues that right livelihood functions as a secondary moral sieve, capturing forms of livelihood that may not constitute explicit violations of right action or right speech. The same analytical model is applied to the canonical lists of five wrong trades and five unwholesome gifts, explaining why these practices are prohibited despite not necessarily violating fundamental precepts such as non-killing or basic religious practices such as generosity. By situating these doctrines within a unified ethical structure, the paper offers a coherent reading of Theravāda sources and resolves interpretive tensions that have influenced both traditional and modern discussions of Buddhist moral theory.