Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gem
Kamma is volition.
|
Following your discussion, Karmma is more of an impersonal law of nature that is engaged by volition. Intent is by design, while intention is a desire. Intent would be an active choice reflecting a person's heart and desire, but designed for future results, which is where Kamma comes in as the agent of regulation. Kamma acts on its own, apart from a ruling agent. You might say that the universe governs its children without the need for the parent to constantly decide results for actions. Kamma is the mechanism for law to operate. As you read in the Dhammapada and other scriptures, the law is overcome with love, which is the one law requiring no other laws. By this, intent and volition pacify Kamma. Love is a shift of intent toward pathos and compassion for others, which is realization of Buddha nature.
In the Koans, MU is an absolute relative nature. Before realization of the Buddha nature, a 'dog' does not realize it's state of being and the opportunity to overcome. After realization, the shift occurs and compassion for others engages. A 'dog' now has Buddha nature. Yes and No to the question of, "Does a dog have Buddha nature?" Most Sanskrit words have this relative to absolute definition.
In English, saying that a person is constitutionally aware is saying they are (con) with making stand (Stitute). Prostitution is making stand as well, flipping the meaning of the word Stitute into relative. There are people who are both with and against the same concept relative to their mindset and intent. MU. The object of Kamma is to move translation toward the correct symmetry over time. In Hebrew, this is Aleph, or the strength to stand on your own. TRUTH in Hebrew is Aleph Mem Tav, which then explains the essence of the words from the letters. It's a whole other story to tell. Same meaning.