critique wanted

[theist 1]

On a Christian forum they are discussing sin. Below is a post I would like to have read by devotees here and please offer corrections where needed.

 

I copied some from Sivananda's web site also.

 

Know the original meaning for the word?

 

Is papa a like word in usage?

 

Thank you

________________________

 

Sin--a primer

 

We often use the word. But what does it mean? Someone once told me it means missing the mark. Rather if that is actual original meaning of the word I'm not sure, but it expresses the point quite well. An action performed that misses the mark by missing the true intent behind action is a sin. The true intent is to please God. That is sinless or karma free action.

 

Karma is spoken of in terms of it's phases of manifestation in our experience. Usually seen as three distinct phases.

 

Sanchita- Our accumulated stockpile of past karmic reactions that haven't manifested yet. The results of our past sins.

 

Prarabdha- This phase of karma is responsible for the circumstances of our present birth. Family, wealth, health, bodily form etc.

 

Kriyamana- karmic actions that we are presently performing, the reactions of which will form our future.

 

As stated above these three phases of karma are really united and all called differently according to our relative experience of them. One action performed repeatedly becomes a tendancy for future actions and reactions.

 

From one yogi's web site:

 

KINDS OF KARMA

Karma is of three kinds, viz. Sanchita or the accumulated works, Prarabdha or the fructifying works, and Kriyamana or the current works. Sanchita is all the accumulated Karmas of the past. Part of it is seen in the character of man, in his tendencies and aptitudes, capacities, inclinations and desires. Prarabdha is that portion of the part of Karma which is responsible for the present body. It is ripe for reaping. It cannot be avoided or changed. It is only exhausted by being experienced. You pay your past debts. Kriyamana is that Karma which is now being made for the future. It is also called Agami or Vartamana.

In Vedantic literature, there is a beautiful analogy. The bow-man has already sent an arrow; it has left his hands. He cannot recall it. He is about to shoot another arrow. The bundle of arrow in the quiver on his back is the Sanchita. The arrow he has shot is Prarabdha. And the arrow which he is about to shoot from his bow is Agami. Of these, he has perfect control over the Sanchita and the Agami, but he must surely work out his Prarabdha. The past which has begun to take effect he has to experience.

 

[livingentity 0]

I heard a lecture where Prabhupada speaks on this and I am trying very hard to find it for you. Perhaps someone else remembers it also and can help to find this lecture.

[theist 1]

I'll look also. I don't remember hearing it so I have no idea where to start. Maybe I'll get lucky and you will find it first. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[theist 1]

Someone just responded that the Hebrew word for sin is "chait" which means to miss the mark.

[livingentity 0]

I listen to so many lectures and also do a lot of reading. It could have been in something I read also. I will keep trying.

 

Darn 60's...ruined my short term memory...LOL!!!

[theist 1]

any suggestions on what to search under?

 

Gingko

[livingentity 0]

mature and immature. For some reasons, these words keep coming up in my head.

 

ginko...was that a subliminal message tossed in? LOL...

[theist 1]

subliminal Mb Er Sa Sh Am Gi E?

[Kulapavana 0]

or good (virtuous) and bad (sinful) activities are equally material. lets keep the original definitions as precise as they were intended to be. the abrahamic religions are concerned with material religiosity or punya and papa. actually, this is also the focus of many Vedic injunctions, but it is not the MAIN focus of the Veda. the main focus of the Vedas is transcendental activity which is outside sin and virtue.

 

do not try to blur the lines and call all material activity "sin". the distinction is there for a very good reason. primitive people are unable to understand transcendental activity. for them the clear distinctions between sin and virtue MUST be kept. otherwise they will commit most horrible activities in the name of God. it happened many, many times... (even very close to home)

[theist 1]

 

do not try to blur the lines and call all material activity "sin". the distinction is there for a very good reason. primitive people are unable to understand transcendental activity. for them the clear distinctions between sin and virtue MUST be kept. otherwise they will commit most horrible activities in the name of God. it happened many, many times... (even very close to home)

 

 

[ancient_paztriot 0]

"for them the clear distinctions between sin and virtue MUST be kept. otherwise they will commit most horrible activities in the name of God"

 

Hey, the irreligious have historically committed the most heineous crimes… period. Stalin, Hitler, Bush and all these people… businessmen pushing millions into poverty, etc. are simply profiteering by their own calculations… something any living entity can do… they apply their free will in excercising false proprietorship.

 

Take God and religion out and they can act anyway as their independence dictates… including advocating God officially for others but secretely not for themselves.

 

I mean take God out and all explanation is gone. Nothing left but madness. Then it no longer matters who does or says 'what?'.

[Kulapavana 0]

when you are talking about the definition of sin irreligious people will not listen anyway.

 

as to what kind of people committ worst crimes: demons do. and they will use any excuse: ideology, race and yes, religion too. but we should not make it easy for them to use religion as an excuse, by blurring lines between sin and virtue - that can bewilder even sincere, but less intelligent, people. If unsure, Aryans always err on the side of virtue.