andrey wrote:But in the Law of Karma what makes sense is the intention or the feeling behind the act. We receive accordingly not to the act, but to the motive we have behind. One kills out of anger, one kills for to protect, according to your law both are killed in return. Is it fair?
Haribol. It seems to me that you can read something which wasn't written. As far as I remember there wasn't written: if one kills he will be killed. There was written that you achieve so much sufferings, as much you did.
As for motive, it plays role. But it doesn't mean that killing under motive of protection is better (you achieve less sufferings) than killing out of anger. The difference is in the realisation of causing sufferings. If you know that your action will lead to sufferings and nevertheless perform that action, you will receive bonus sufferings.
Om Tat Sat.