摘要
「無過失」的真義是「不問對錯」，而不是「沒有過失」。「無過失補償制度」是一項救濟措施，其重點不在討論事件發生過程的對或錯，也不在追究該事件所以發生的責任該由誰負責，而是直接把重點擺在受害者所遭受的損失該和何補償才公平的焦點上。追究責任對受害者而言並不能保證他能獲得合理的補償。因此，絕非對受害者最有利的方法。相對而言，追究加害者的過失與責任，不但無法合理保障受害者的權益，且可能對加害者及社會正義產生不公平的戕害。因此，「無過失補償」是一項針對社會正義補救的極高明的方法，也是對受害者及加害者雙方最具實質好處的方法。 佛教教導修行人，如果想明心見性證入實相，就絕對不能受到「是非善惡」、「對錯責任」之蒙蔽，而必須直指人心，直接針對問題發生的根本，才能「見性成佛」。修行的真正最後目標是「見性成佛」，而法律上爭訟的真正結局是對受害者能有一個合理的補償，此兩者有異曲同工之妙。由此觀之，「無過失」觀念及「無過失補償」制度實與佛法追實相求真理的「不思善，不思惡」及「真指人心，見性成佛」相合，兩者都是要直指問題的根本，直接給予問題最實質的解決，而不被「是非善惡、責任歸屬」等枝微末節問題妨礙，得不到解決問題的最佳方案。畢竟佛法要解決的問題不是「善惡對錯」，而是「實相」，而法律所能給予的最大保障也不在爭「是非對錯」，而是「補償」。 換言之，歐美國家的「無過失」觀念及因之而有的「無過失補償」制度是一種「不問對錯的補償」制度，它是一種進步且與佛法相應的觀念與制度，若不幸把「無過失」誤解為「沒有過失也要賠償」，那就反而變成一種製造人心的不平與對立，導致社會不安，使社會向下沉淪的制度了。「無過失」觀念及「無過失補償」制度可說是佛法的實現，若人人能從「無過失補償」制度中體認到凡事爭對錯的侷限性，及佛法勸人掃除爭執對錯的心念，以邁向祥和社會，減少紛爭，則人間淨土自會顯現。
並列摘要
The true meaning of “no-fault” is “regardless of right and wrong”, rather than “not at fault”. The no-fault compensation is a system of social security rather than indemnity. The no-fault scheme does not emphasize on the right and wrong of an event, neither does it pursue who should be responsible for the event; it focuses on how to compensate for the loss of a victim in an event. Since the pursuit of the responsibility of the person at fault in an event often does not guarantee that the victim of the event can get fair compensation for his loss, the pursuit of the responsibility of the person at fault is not the best way of dealing with the aftermath of an event from the viewpoint of the victim. In some cases, the pursuit of the right and wrong of an event can ironically harm the victim and the society as the whole. Therefore, the no-fault compensation is a rather clever way of dealing with the aftermath of an event, and is good to both sides of an event. The no-fault scheme should not be misunderstood as a scheme that forces a person who is not at fault to compensate for the victim of the accident related to him. The final goal of Buddhistical practice is to become a Buddha, and the final goal of lawsuit is to compensate for the loss of a victim in an event. These two goals are similar to each other because the efforts to accomplish these two goals must be directed toward the centers of the problems. The doctrine of Buddhism asserts that if a Buddhistical practitioner is going to realize his own mind, he must direct his attention toward his mind and must not get entangled with the right and wrong of the problems. Similarly, if one is going to help a victim in an accident, he better compensates the loss of the victim directly rather than arguing who should be responsible for the accident. That is, the victim of an accident can collect the compensation directly from his or her own insurance company for medical and hospital expenses regardless of who was at fault in the accident. From this point of view, the no-fault or the “regardless of who was at fault” is in accordance with the essence of Buddhism in that both practices most direct their efforts towards the goals of the practices.
延伸閱讀
- 林宗穎（2009）。被害人與有過失之研究〔碩士論文，國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2009.01524
- 洪朝俊（1998）。無過失責任制度與我國相關法制。中華民國兒童牙科醫學會會刊，2(1)，16-16。https://doi.org/10.6585/BTAPD.1998.2(1).6
- 李佩怡（2021）。對著真心，懺悔所造諸惡。諮商與輔導，(423)，64-64。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=16846478-202103-202104070017-202104070017-64-64
- 李志夫（1995）。The Process of Sinification of Buddhism。中華佛學學報，(8)，72-93。https://doi.org/10.6986/CHBJ.199507.0072
- 李開濟（2003）。Introduction：On The Buddhism。哲學與文化，30(7)，1-2。https://doi.org/10.7065/MRPC.200307.0001