Pater Emmanuel: (German) It is in the relation of man. "Don't kill," it says . . . the Christianity understands . . .
Prabhupāda: Why they understand like that? That means that Lord Christ was not sufficiently educated to use the right word, "murder"? Does it mean so? There are two words, "killing" and "murder." Murder is especially meant for the human being. So do you think that Christ was not learned enough to use the word "murder" instead of "killing"? "Killing" means any kind of killing, especially animal killing. Otherwise you should have frankly, openly used the word, "Thou shall not murder." Even if it is meant like that, so does it mean that he was preaching amongst the murderers? They are very first-class men? They are all murderers? Therefore the injunction. This kind of interpretation does not appeal to us.
Pater Emmanuel: (German)
German devotee: He said, Śrīla Prabhupāda, that this commandment, "Thou shall not kill," is found in the Old Testament, and when Jesus was talking . . .
Prabhupāda: I do not know many testament, but I see in the Ten Commandments these words are there. If you want to support it by many testaments, that is, of course, your business, but we take the direct meaning, "Thou shall not kill," the Christians should not kill. Interpretation you can give in your own way to support your business, but we see openly. If we can understand openly, there is no need of interpretation.
Pater Emmanuel: (German) No, I understand.
Prabhupāda: Why should we interpret? Interpretation is required when the things are not clear. Here it is clear, "Thou shall not kill," plainly advised. Why should we interpret?
Pater Emmanuel: (German)
German devotee: (translating) To eat plants, is it not killing? To eat vegetables, is it not killing? Plants?
Prabhupāda: Then vegetable killing and animal killing is the same?
Pater Emmanuel: It's not the same. Not the same. But human killing and animal killing is also not the same.