that there be a world separate from himself in terms
　　   of which his actions can be objectified.  Because of
　　   this  intimate   connection   between   action   and
　　   objectification, it can  be said  that  the  deluded
　　   tendency to reify and hypostatize the world--to give
　　   it "concrete  existence"--is  largely  the result of
　　   the significance-conditions of action.

　　　　  To unite completely  with the world  as mistake,
　　   the enlightened  person  must completely  unite with
　　   karman  as the source  of the world as mistake.  Not
　　   merely  with  "his"  karman  in  some  personal   or
　　   individualistic sense, but more

　　　　　　　　　　　　  P.82

　　   importantly  with the ontological  fact of karman as
　　   described.  When one has completely  united  with or
　　   become  the  mistake,  then  and  only  then  is  it
　　   possible  to  transform  action  as  mistaking  into
　　   action as partaking of reality. Since the mistake at
　　   the heart  of action  lies in the separation  of the
　　   agent both from his action and the world (or: in the
　　   requirement  that there  be such  separation  as the
　　   condition  of  the  possibility  of  action),  Zen's
　　   response  is that through  meditation  practice  one
　　   must  learn  a  way  of  action  which  entails  not
　　   separation  but union.  To act  without  separating:
　　   this  is easy enough  to say but very  difficult  in
　　   practice; for what is involved is learning to act in
　　   such  a way  as to undo  one's  doing, in effect, to
　　   enact the undoing  of doing.  The point is that when
　　   one has united with one's karman at its source, even
　　   though  the mistaken  character  of it continues  to
　　   exist, one is no longer taken in by the mistake and,
　　   in this sense, one can be said to be free  from  it.
　　   On  the  practical   level,  then,  there   can   be
　　   liberation  from  the  mistake  even  though,  on  a
　　   theoretical level, the mistake is ineliminable.(16)

　　　　  What  has  been  called  here  "union  with  the
　　   mistake"  corresponds, I think, to what Dogen  means
　　   by his idea  of "Great  Karman."(17) As I understand
　　   it, this  expression  refers  to the fact  that  the
　　   enlightened  person  becomes  united not merely with
　　   his personal karman but also with the fact of karman
　　   as   the   action-objectification   mistake.　　 This
　　   transpersonal  sense  of karman  is  "great"  in the