Jesus never sinned?Is it true?

[Guest guest]

so both us have no maturity, because if we say "NO" to other's opinion we do not really believe in relativity.

 

If you believe in relativity, also the opinion that we have to be relative.. is relative.. if i am against relativity, you have simply to accept it as my relative opinion.

 

so.... we get out from this hypochrisy and we start to speak peacefully on what's good and what's bad.. or everyone has to be silent.. The only system to be "relative" is to stop speaking and stop giving opinions

[Guest guest]

**********if i am against relativity, you have simply to accept it as my relative opinion.*********

 

Great that you have accepted. Even acceptance is relative.

Thats where the importance of intention come in

 

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

With the argument that good and bad are relative one can justify anything. With such argument one can say there is nothing good or bad. This is a false concept and an illusion.

 

There is an absolute goodness. That is what(Shreyas = absolute good) Arjuna asks Lord Krishna. This is transcendental goodness, that goes beyong material sattva, rajas and Tamasic.

 

So all material activities should be measured or judged according to this standard.

 

No act shold be performed whimsically. Every act should be done in the transcendental consciousness. Krishna's order for Arjuna is to do his duty in order to protect dharma. This act is not done whimsically.

 

As for jesus' act of eating or providing fishes is totally against dharma period. Innocent creatures were killed for no purpose.

[Guest guest]

I am also a devout hindu, and I dont eat meat.

But my next seat colleage is a muslim, and for him, killing animals for food is not sin. So is for the christians.

 

And they dont consider krishna absolute. Do you see this point?

 

[Guest guest]

**********if i am against relativity, you have simply to accept it as my relative opinion.*********

Great that you have accepted.

••the fact that i have accepted is not relative, is absolute,because i know surely what i have done..

 

and i have not accepted..

 

your relativity is simply cheating

[Guest guest]

"As for jesus' act of eating or providing fishes is totally against dharma period. Innocent creatures were killed for no purpose. "

 

the fact that you understood the purpose of our mayavadi friends in preaching relativity shows your intelligence...

 

this judgement about jesus is simply affected by insufficient information.... we have to be very careful, in the verse "yada yada hi dharmasya.." krsna says the he comes when there's the need, and he does not say that he comes only in india...

 

so better to be careful in blaspheming religious persons, we are very fortunate to have a non sectarian religion, let's use this advantage given by krsna bhagavan

[Guest guest]

1. Plants having life.

2. Even in our own body, there are thousands of organisms, and our defence system destroys the unwanted organisms.

 

So, if you see killing any life as an absolute sin, then everybody is a sinner.

 

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

I am also a devout hindu, and I dont eat meat.

But my next seat colleage is a muslim, and for him, killing animals for food is not sin. So is for the christians.

 

And they dont consider krishna absolute. Do you see this point?

 

 

This is not about what different people think sin is about.

 

Again this is about objectively trying to find what is SIN and NOT what people whimsically assume.

 

That way what jesus did by killing innocent creatures is wrong on an absolute scale.

 

Even Lord Krishna or other devatas do not go about killing innocent creatures whimsically. If they do destroy ceatures it is in keeping with their duties to protect dharma.

 

I do not see dharma in jesus' action here.

[Guest guest]

 

1. Plants having life.

2. Even in our own body, there are thousands of organisms, and our defence system destroys the unwanted organisms.

 

So, if you see killing any life as an absolute sin, then everybody is a sinner.

 

 

Some points to note.

 

1. Sin does not lie in our actions only, but in our motive and knowledge.

 

2. Plants do have lives, but they do not experience pain due to their lower level consciousness(absence of BRAIN). Even activities like farming etc. harm innocent creatures other than plants.

 

There is some sin in this act and that is why we offer food to Lord and eat. If one has the right knowledge that he is maintaining his body only to serve LORD and the society and to lead himself, and other beings toward their goal of moksha, then he does not reap the consequences of the sin.

 

3. Killing animals involves greater sin as they experience pain and are in higher consciousness. One cannot apply the same rule as applied to plants. This is so because animals are higher life forms. Just like the sin of killing a Brahmana(enlightened being who knows Brahman) is much higher than killing a mlechcha, so is killing animals when compared to plants.

 

4. Most of the vegetables, fruits etc. are parts of plants that fall from them. So we are not actually killing those plants. The life of grains is over after they are ready for harvest. So actually we are not killing these beings anyway.

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

2. Even in our own body, there are thousands of organisms, and our defence system destroys the unwanted organisms.

 

 

This action is not done consciouly and is not in our control. So no sin can be attributed to us in this case.

[Guest guest]

****This action is not done consciouly and is not in our control. So no sin can be attributed to us in this case*****

 

Assume you are under the influence of a drug, or something, and do a sin, then are you not responsilbe?

[Guest guest]

"1. Sin does not lie in our actions only, but in our motive and knowledge. "

 

So this itself leads to the concept of relative ignorance, and knowledge.

Do you see, everything in this world is relative?

So there is no absolute sin, and sin is determined relative to the knowledge and motive.

 

"There is "somesin" in this act and that is why we offer food to Lord and eat. If one has the right knowledge that he is maintaining his body only to serve LORD and the society and to lead himself, and other beings toward their goal of moksha, then he does not reap the consequences of the sin."

 

So, there is "someSin"...... this means, it is less sinful compared to a more sinful act....so this is again relative...

 

"3. Killing animals involves greater sin as they experience pain and are in higher consciousness. One cannot apply the same rule as applied to plants. This is so because animals are higher life forms. Just like the sin of killing a Brahmana(enlightened being who knows Brahman) is much higher than killing a mlechcha, so is killing animals when compared to plants"...

 

So, this also supports my view that sin is relative.

Thanks for providing these fantastic points to convince the other guest that Sin is relative.

 

[Guest guest]

"So, if you see killing any life as an absolute sin, then everybody is a sinner."

 

yes.. everybody's a sinner... there's no escape. Everyone has to be killed by all the living beings we kill constantly

 

the only way is to call sri krsna to help us.. because he said "leave all other duties and surrender to me, do not have fear, i will free you from the reactions of your past actions.."

 

 

[Guest guest]

"****This action is not done consciouly and is not in our control. So no sin can be attributed to us in this case*****

Assume you are under the influence of a drug, or something, and do a sin, then are you not responsilbe? "

 

i am responsible.. and if i act in this way because of a drug i am responsible of having taken a drug..

 

there's no way to escape the karma...

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

****This action is not done consciouly and is not in our control. So no sin can be attributed to us in this case*****

 

Assume you are under the influence of a drug, or something, and do a sin, then are you not responsilbe?

 

 

Defensive action with the knowledge of saving our body for doing dharma will relieve us from reactions. Motive is inportant.

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

"1. Sin does not lie in our actions only, but in our motive and knowledge. "

 

So this itself leads to the concept of relative ignorance, and knowledge.

Do you see, everything in this world is relative?

So there is no absolute sin, and sin is determined relative to the knowledge and motive.

 

"There is "somesin" in this act and that is why we offer food to Lord and eat. If one has the right knowledge that he is maintaining his body only to serve LORD and the society and to lead himself, and other beings toward their goal of moksha, then he does not reap the consequences of the sin."

 

So, there is "someSin"...... this means, it is less sinful compared to a more sinful act....so this is again relative...

 

 

Yes some action is sin or not sin relative to the absolute scale of knowledge and motive. So everything is measured or decided based on this absolute scale of knowledge about truth.

 

So this is not similar to saying that anyone can do anything and SIN is illusory or such mayavada arguments. SIN is something well defined with respect(if you will relative) to the absolute scale given above.

 

 

"3. Killing animals involves greater sin as they experience pain and are in higher consciousness. One cannot apply the same rule as applied to plants. This is so because animals are higher life forms. Just like the sin of killing a Brahmana(enlightened being who knows Brahman) is much higher than killing a mlechcha, so is killing animals when compared to plants"...

 

So, this also supports my view that sin is relative.

Thanks for providing these fantastic points to convince the other guest that Sin is relative.

 

 

My point is that SIN is NOT ILLUSORY. It exists because of our ignorance.

 

Anything in Universe is measured relative to some standard. In spiritual terms it is measured or compared to TRANSCENDENTAL platform.

 

Any action leading a satvika jiva towards moksha is DHARMA. All other actions are adharma period. So this is the ABSOLUTE scale. I do not see relativity here. Just different actions at an external level, but a UNITY in attaining the coomon GOAL.

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

"3. Killing animals involves greater sin as they experience pain and are in higher consciousness. One cannot apply the same rule as applied to plants. This is so because animals are higher life forms. Just like the sin of killing a Brahmana(enlightened being who knows Brahman) is much higher than killing a mlechcha, so is killing animals when compared to plants"...

 

So, this also supports my view that sin is relative.

Thanks for providing these fantastic points to convince the other guest that Sin is relative.