Why is lust considered as a deadly sin?

Any answers are appreciated.

Thank you.

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 months ago

    Because sexual energy, from a theistic point of view, should be applied to spiritual ascension and God-communion and not carnal desire.

    • 2 months ago

      Since you’ve brought up the topic of sexual energy, what are your thoughts on the nofap/semen retention?

      • 2 months ago

        It's an effective method but not for everyone.
        Some people actually get more sexual energy from stimulation, so it just depends.
        Others "build up" and release it for rituals or perhaps even Yoga/meditation.
        One consistent effect definitely is refraining from porn. Use your third eye to get aroused, and start manipulating that energy. Such as orgasming "up" the spine.
        Experiment and find what works for you it's more of an art than a science.

  2. 2 months ago

    I don't know. Animalistic is of note.

  3. 2 months ago

    its lustful desire for ones flesh. So basically have feelings for the b***h and don't be a dick and you're fine. Don't have to wife every girl you bang but be courteous and respectful.

    • 2 months ago

      not sure what to think about this homosexual. while this behavior is to be encouraged it does not apply to lust being a sin at all. being respectful and lustful is not mutually exclusive.

  4. 2 months ago

    Because some hebrews got cheated on once and couldn’t get over it

  5. 2 months ago

    Projecting Lust is the sin. Either way "sin" is just bullshit made up by narrowminded ChristCucks.

  6. 2 months ago

    It’s all about impulse control.
    People needed to know not to let their impulses run wild for the purpose of societal development.
    Don’t steal?
    Don’t lie?
    Don’t frick around lest ye find out?
    Don’t frick everything that walks?
    Lust is the harbinger for promiscuity and that destroys trust, which ruins societies.
    If you cannot run a dna test, and you spend all your days worrying your wife is fricking others you won’t grow your crops.
    If you’re worried your husband is fricking the neighbors you’ll burn the roast.
    It’s a snowball effect.

    Besides that, in the more spiritual aspect, you absorb the sexual energy of your partner. If you’re partners a prostitute you absorb their previous partners energy too.
    Everyone wants to talk about microchimerism in women.
    No one wants to talk about it in men.

    • 2 months ago

      Yep. Sins are behaviors that lead individuals and their collective civilizations to inevitable ruin. They inevitably exit the gene pool and the light of consciousness gets snuffed out instead of getting passed on in good health.

    • 2 months ago

      Very interesting. Seems like the word "sin" could be the same as "karma" in a way.
      The word "karma" means "action". From my understanding, living a "correct life" is living consciously and not let yourself be dictated by unconscious karmic action, which could be call "to sin". The "sin" that humans carry and live from, are the things within not yet brought to light that influence our actions.
      Living correct is living consciously, from conscious karmic action, which is a life without sin.
      Living incorrect is living unconciously, from unconscious karmic action, which is living a life in sin.
      Being a slave to desire, not understanding the nature of desire and sensation, could then be called a sinful life maybe.

      Also the thing about microchimerism seems interesting, I'll have to look more into that.

      • 2 months ago

        >Seems like the word "sin" could be the same as "karma" in a way.
        Depends the level you are looking from.
        On the purely material, not really - on this level there exists karma and niskarma: warranted/preferred and unwarranted action. Karma with beneficial results that lead one into the heavens can hardly be considered "sin".
        On a transcendent platform, though, all karma and identification with such keeps you trapped in samsara and thus whether it leads one to heavens or hells it is "sin" in that it sustains the illusion. On that level as well, on RARE occasions actions that would be seen as sinful because they produce a negative material result would also be seen and not sinful because they bring one closer to escaping samsara.

  7. 2 months ago

    It's putting aesthetics before functionality.

    Steve Jobs wanting computers symmetrical on the inside is a great example.

  8. 2 months ago

    because it doesnt have a corresponding wang-tile number, and is a projection of a superior wang tile.

    some people have attempted to prove that lust is an inferior wang-tile, but i cant find any primary reliable sources for this theory.

  9. 2 months ago

    generally, Lust is considered the least grievous sin because its just in your human nature. Its deadly though because it can begat other sins, its basically the biggest gateway sin. Lust can lead to wrath, greed, gluttony, and envy.

  10. 2 months ago

    It has ruined more lives than any other vice. Lust lead to a lot of broken families and broken families destroy civilization.

  11. 2 months ago

    >ego indulgent
    having desires keeps you away from God

  12. 2 months ago

    Sex is as much a problem to be solved as it is a pleasure to be had.
    If you wish to see the results of unrestrained sexuality, see any liberal democracy.

  13. 2 months ago

    Because people try to kill you when you don't have sex with them

    • 2 months ago

      weird usually people try to kill you if you do it against their will or before the age of consent

  14. 2 months ago

    why did this board become full of Christian threads

    • 2 months ago

      This as as annoying as the twitter replies that say “why are all the replies nothing to do with the subject”

      • 2 months ago

        go back there

    • 2 months ago

      I noticed this too.
      I think it's honestly just normies. They found this board somehow.

    • 2 months ago

      Basically schitzos found out the only way to fight their illness is through God

      It just werks

      • 2 months ago

        Most shamans/priests/gurus/lighthouse-keepers were schizo or schiztypal. The problem today is there are very few of those jobs to go around.
        Finding God does literally just werk for lots of crazy frickers who would be doing crazy shit were it not for washing their hands 77 times and saying 10,000 sutras leading to god's forgiveness for their bedsheets being crooked that morning.

  15. 2 months ago

    Not just "a", but "the" deadly sin.
    >Gita 3.36-43:
    > Arjuna said: O descendant of Vṛṣṇi, by what is one impelled to sinful acts, even unwillingly, as if engaged by force?
    > Bhagavan Krishna said: It is lust only, Arjuna, which is born of contact with the material mode of passion and later transformed into wrath, and which is the all-devouring sinful enemy of this world.
    > As fire is covered by smoke, as a mirror is covered by dust, or as the embryo is covered by the womb, the living entity is similarly covered by different degrees of this lust.
    > Thus the wise living entity’s pure consciousness becomes covered by his eternal enemy in the form of lust, which is never satisfied and which burns like fire.
    > The senses, the mind and the intelligence are the sitting places of this lust. Through them lust covers the real knowledge of the living entity and bewilders him.
    > Therefore, O Arjuna, best of the Bhāratas, in the very beginning curb this great symbol of sin [lust] by regulating the senses, and slay this destroyer of knowledge and self-realization.
    > The working senses are superior to dull matter; mind is higher than the senses; intelligence is still higher than the mind; and he [the soul] is even higher than the intelligence.
    > Thus knowing oneself to be transcendental to the material senses, mind and intelligence, O mighty-armed Arjuna, one should steady the mind by deliberate spiritual intelligence [Kṛṣṇa consciousness] and thus – by spiritual strength – conquer this insatiable enemy known as lust.

    When you say "lust", you likely mean the above as seen through bodily hedonism, sexual desire.
    Lust however covers all the sins, lust for notability and respect - pride, lust for achievement without effort - sloth, lust for acquisition - greed, etc.
    We are naturally joy seeking beings. The error comes when we falsely identify as the material body, and think the way to joy is through the lusts of mind and body.

    • 2 months ago

      I always wonder what the point is of "falsely identifying with the body"
      You are your body, its your tool and while ordinarily people would say you shouldn't judge a book by its cover sometimes outer physicality does reflect your inner state.
      You are what you do every single day. You are limited in how you teach your body to work together with yourself. You are that little mind and what people see every day of your works as much as you might be that spark you were given from up high long ago.

      • 2 months ago

        >what the point is of "falsely identifying with the body"
        Like why souls are capable, or what is meant by saying it?
        >You are your body, its your tool
        You are not the hammer you pick up. You are not the car you drive. you are not the tool. You are not your body.
        >sometimes outer physicality does reflect your inner state.
        Do you mean karma?
        >You are what you do every single day.
        You arent, though. That is the point.
        >You are limited in how you teach your body
        And? Both you and your body are limited, though in different ways.
        >to work together with yourself
        What do you mean by this? You have no direct connection to your body. You arent actually controlling or impacting the mind and body you are experiencing.
        >You are that little mind
        You arent, though.

        • 2 months ago

          >Like why souls are capable, or what is meant by saying it?
          In the sense of: you are what you repeatedly do. If you have a rich inner life but are not able to start a business, outwit a competition, publish a book, create something real that impacts other souls. What good are you? You don't have mastery over this world in this case, which is a major reason why people keep coming back.
          Let's suppose I just grab your consciousness and I'd make you do an exam about aspects of this world. How well would you perform? Would you be able to intuitively understand mathematics and biology and describe as detailed as possible the natural world or the structures found in music? Would you be able to replicate them in your minds eye?
          >You are not the tool. You are not your body.
          See the point above. If you body is not capable of performing its duties then you are useless, whether a god sits behind you or just a normal soul. You are your body and how you shape it and take care of it, given its limitations, is your spirit manifesting itself as best as it can.
          I've felt other parallel lives in my own body, sometimes even switching to them if my eye was necessary on a matter. But those parts had their own growth, their own suffering and their own works to get where they are. Just because I once gave them a small seed does not mean I own their tree of life. There are some beings who think they do though, so I understand that these worldviews come up through the collective unconscious.
          >Do you mean karma?
          I mean hard work. David Goggins was a big fat loser who turned himself into a diamond through willpower and discipline. In your frame of the world, was that his soul coming loose or his mind?How can you tell really?
          Your spirit can't tell you to run. If you sit still there is no external force that can make you do that. You agree with its sensations, feelings and thoughts or you don't. The influence of esoteric and physical self is a range, not a binary scale.

          • 2 months ago

            >you are what you repeatedly do
            But this "you" described by acts and thoughts is not the "you" talked about in terms of the eternal observer. If you wish, I will gladly start using atma and ahankara to differentiate if the English method of using the same word confuses the topic.
            Atma has no direct connection to manas (mind) and the material body. The social construct of who the ahankara developed by acts and others' consideration is ALSO not atma.
            The Gita is speaking to atma.
            >What good are you?
            Ahankara's worth is allowing atma to experience as if they were the center and the one in control and doing things.
            Atma's worth is twofold
            >Paramatma enjoys it
            >it fulfills the claim of Paramatma being All-Inclusive and Infinite
            If by "good" you mean in regards to material or social projects, then by all means claim atma has no worth. In the same way the issues of this real world have no worth in the universe of Tetris.
            >You don't have mastery over this world in this case
            Atma never has mastery over anything but atma, and that mastery is of a singular choice.
            > your consciousness
            Atma does not HAVE consciousness. Atma IS consciousness.
            Bodies and minds do not have atma. Atma has a body and mind observed.
            >I'd make you do
            I do not DO, and you cannot MAKE. Atma observes. The body and mind you observe can interact with the body and mind I observe.
            Neither atma is the doer.
            >If you body is not capable of performing
            We arent talking about the body's capabilities.
            >Just because I once gave them a small seed does not mean I own their tree of life.
            Because you didnt. You are not the doer.
            >David Goggins
            You observed a body externally perform events.
            >was that his soul
            >his soul
            This is why this is the first and most repeated point.
            Everything in your calculation will be wrong if you keep getting this prime realization incorrect.

          • 2 months ago

            See, I understand you are reasoning from your particular philosophy (of which there are many flavours on earth) while I attempt to focus on pragmatic measures that let people live in their own personal power, preferable in a responsible way (arya). In that sense, one is interested not in knowing the peculiarities or definitions of a particular walk, but rather what real development underlies it. In addition, we are interested in having measurable and observable, repeatable observations in personal life or other people that support this esoteric structure. In this case we have true understanding:i.e. we could write the Gita ourselves from scratch. That is not to dismiss a particular way but just a developmental milestone.

            Example: I could write a book about an esoteric way of life and if that entered the collective unconscious then people would live and die by it. This is a universal concept where many people will something into being. If we scrubbed the Gita from history, how would its teaching surface?
            >never has mastery
            You came into this world with affinities and deficiencies. Some exploited and some you neglected to grow. There are some untapped new fountains of experience that could enter your consciousness if you worked on it.
            I've met a higher consciousness once, who looked like one of the blue Elves or Vedas, and what I noticed was that they could generate visions and emulate reality to a degree. When I had to try it in turn, I fumbled and failed at details. I wasn't perfect at it and that meant I had a lot to study and work still. That was work my human mind self had to do.
            How would that fit into your frame you're painting?
            >Paramatma enjoys it
            Did you ask it? Is it really enjoyment or is that a projection or assumption of the writer? We don't know.
            >You observed a body
            And? That body had the will to rise from the gutter. Where does this force of good come from? The world could be a lot better if a lot of people realized their power.

          • 2 months ago

            >I attempt to focus on pragmatic measures
            this dependsd entirely on what you mean by pragmatic. you say you are concerned with it, but if that were true you would see that all of your concerns MUST lead to dissolution, and thus any extended effort put into them is futile.
            Once you realized you are not the body, you realize what you thought was pragmatic was vainglorious.
            >That body had the will
            It didnt. Every event of that body is predetermined and inevitable.

        • 2 months ago

          >You have no direct connection to your body.
          >You arent actually controlling or impacting the mind and body you are experiencing.

          • 2 months ago

            There is an intermediary, or more like both observer and observed are downward symptoms of a prime. A doesnt cause B, B doesnt cause A, but both are connected through C.
            You have heard the analogy of like watching a movie?
            >not in control of life, observing like watching movie
            >if we are immersed and identify with movie, we will enjoy/suffer along with it
            This expands to understand neither are we in control of what movie is playing, though it is "curated" per our desires.
            Or a modern analogy would be like an MMO. I'm sure you've had the idea, where the "true self" is immersed in a game universe and identity.
            Well consider this to be adding that it isnt "your computer" running the game, but rather your computer sends requests to a main server that then sends "approval" and allows your computer to create the results of your desired inputs.
            Instead of self causing external, or external causing self.
            It is God causing self and external, and self and external's connection is through this shared link to God.
            This is why it appears we both do and do not affect the material world around us.

  16. 2 months ago

    Lust isn't just about that of the carnal flesh, it's an aspect of control and when unchecked, the pursuit can be all-consuming. It can be about a lust for power.

  17. 2 months ago

    Deadly in the sense that its presence is quiet and pleasurable at the beginning and so the spiral downwards begins. You realize the truth too late until you are fully "naked" as the bible would put it (not a religion-gay but the comparison is true from my point of view) and you are full with anxiety and depression.

  18. 2 months ago

    Fun fact: the "seven deadly sins" is not a Biblical concept.

  19. 2 months ago

    cuz its moronic planet of tyrants, if ur peepee gets hard or pussy wet it is lust btw, domysl sie

  20. 2 months ago

    Because back in the olden times it led to dudes rapin'. Or so it's been said.

    Just a guess.

  21. 2 months ago

    >Why is lust considered as a “deadly sin”?
    because any lustful thought, image, or sound it a literal command for your body to produce its most highly refined physical substance, taking away resources that the rest of the body can put to good use.
    doing this very often will absolutely shorten one's life

  22. 2 months ago

    The seven deadly sins are powerful destroying energies.
    They destroy your life, your relationships, your community and your soul.

    It's not hard to imagine why misuse of sexual energies can destroy a person, or destroy a family, or destroy a community.

  23. 2 months ago

    Lust as a deadly sin harkens back to an era of arranged marriages. You were not to fall in love with your heart's desires, but to marry who your family chooses for you, and cultivate love where there was none to begin with. The latter is more difficult than the former, but should you succeed, that love will not be fleeting as opposed to a love born in lust.

  24. 2 months ago

    You live in Weimar times and you have to ask?

  25. 2 months ago

    I think lust is historically considered taboo across most cultures because it (in excess) leads to dishonesty in relationships. This is true for most addictions, though. The whole point of religion, if you ask me, is the cultural cohesion of a group of people so as to maintain civilizational integrity. When you find out that someone you've kept next to you in your sleep has betrayed your trust, that leads to a decay in societal functions. We are interconnected, after all. Thus we created rules and consistently included promiscuity because of the level of deceit necessary.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *