(12-02-2011, 08:00 AM)Namaste Wrote: You have to be one seriously unevolved, compassionless ******* to do that to animals.

It's a paradox. While I understand how people can do it, I don't understand how people can do it.

*Balances self*

(12-01-2011, 10:31 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Identifying Smart Food Choices on the Path to Healthier Diets

In my opinion, stuff like this is going to be much more impactful than making meat-eaters "wrong". Sorry that's all I got for ya at this moment.

(12-02-2011, 11:59 AM)Pickle Wrote: It sounds almost like he feels that our existence is some sort of evil conspiracy LoL.

Pickle Wrote:In reality, outside of the trap of the body, in our level of evolution, we would be like a person without hands or arms. We can travel and move our consiousness around, but we cannot do anything.

(12-02-2011, 12:38 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: It is one thing to keep the body in good working order- it is another thing to enslave oneself to diet and exercise regimens- especially under the presumption that it will "make one more spiritual".

For example, when I see somebody who thinks that they "need" to take 2 - 3 hours out of their day to go to the gym, and another 2 - 3 hours in procuring and preparing their special diets, I start to think this individual has some deeper issues that need dealing with. They are using "working on the body" as a distraction from "working on consciousness".

You are right- the body serves a purpose- but only relative to the environment in which it exists. If consciousness wants to travel to other realms, it needs to be able to leave one body behind and take up a new form. Attachment to, and identification with, the body- that is the imprisonment of which I speak.

(12-02-2011, 01:10 PM)Diana Wrote: As one cleans up and clears the physical body, so does one clear other "bodies." Just as emotional stress will cause physical disease, the inverse is also true.

(12-01-2011, 11:49 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote:

(12-01-2011, 11:16 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: I don't disagree with the nested densities concept. I just don't see them as solid and separate. I think entities can 'quantum jump' from 1 reality to another. This idea is supported by M Theory and the work of Nassim Haramein, and is explored in the movie What the Bleep (tho some of the science in that movie is a bit shaky.)

Well, I would hope so! Which is why I would be "shocked and amazed" that you would conclude that third density becomes fourth density. In particular due to this quote:

(12-01-2011, 11:49 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: All I am trying to say is that this free-will choice can be made by a meat-eater. And upon arrival in fourth-density they will not be offered meat to eat. Problem solved.

Quote:Hatonn… which is known to this instrument as the chambered nautilus. As this sea creature grows it becomes too large for his previous shell and creates for himself a larger one and when in the course of time he then grows, he then creates a larger shell and so on in a beautiful and unending spiral until such time as he has no need for it whatsoever, for any physical vehicle, the consciousness having left this form. Then, my friends, all the shells are empty, having served their purpose.

There are two distinct stages to the development of your mental vehicle. In the first stage, it is primarily important that you constantly be aware that in each situation there is freedom, and you are not iron-bound by any restrictions from the outside. In order to fashion this awareness, it is in this stage necessary that you construct for yourself a larger mental shell, a larger home in which to dwell [i.e. stop focusing so much on the physical shell]. Each time that you find that a situation is impressing you as limiting or difficult, it is time for inner work, my friends, in which you explore and discover the larger and more spacious mental atmosphere that is necessary for your balance.

There is a certain point in your development when you will find that you do not need a shell at all, but instead, in the vulnerable body of consciousness, you may swim out into the waters of the universe and merge with all that there is . In that moment, my friends, you will have discovered that there is no need for any vehicle whatsoever, for all things are one. And as your home is the universe, and as all things are one, no protection is necessary.

We are aware that this second stage is, for the most part, a very distant goal and yet we wish you to know that it does exist and that within it is a larger reality which in good time will supersede the limitations and the difficulties of your present state of consciousness. Meanwhile, enlarge your shell, my friends, through meditation and contemplation. Open yourself within, for the world without only seems to press in upon you. In reality, it is pressing upon itself and you are free. [i.e. you are not your body]

Questioner: Does that (inaudible) of longevity and perhaps even immortality or this (inaudible). Is that a conscious spiritual union of, through meditation, of the spiritual mind of the DNA genetic code?

Hatonn: That which is long life is desired by some among your peoples but in your present vibration it is not truly desirable. There will come a time when longevity is natural. Efforts to precede this natural moment by means of scientific and technological advances may perhaps be fascinating and inspiring to your peoples. However, when longevity is a desirable tool which you may use to good effect—learning and growing throughout a longer incarnation—the exterior vibrations will of necessity, have, shall we say, ameliorated and wars and violence and other negative aspects will have lessened in their impact on the planetary vibration.

The efforts of single individuals to have lives on the planet which do not take into account the outer negativity of the planetary vibration are lives which, shall we say, are those of a (inaudible) and may not be as rewarding to the progress of the soul. However, we realize that we are not addressing ourselves to your question but it is not a question that we can answer simply

...

I am aware of your question, my sister. First let us elucidate the question of the one known as Ra for his description of longevity as we understood it included not merely a long life as we now know it but that which you would term an impossibly long life such as one which spans two centuries or more. And, indeed, we enjoy a longer life than you by many centuries for our whole sense of time and space have changed as we have entered new vibratory patterns.

Now, secondly, let us address ourselves to your question of a normally long life being perhaps not desirable. May we say to you that lives as you know them, whether long or short by any standards, are in a certain pattern which you have chosen before you enter into the pattern. As a result of going from the beginning to the end of this pattern your spirit hopes that it will have learned certain lessons and thus have improved and refined the vibration which is its essence in the sphere of eternity in which all of you truly dwell.

When one contemplates and then does that which is known as suicide, one cuts short before the natural end the time of learning. And more often than not, the lessons which that soul had hoped to learn have not been learned. Consequently, it is often so that rather than alleviating karma, the action of taking one’s life adds more karma to the burden which is already carried and you are trying to discharge by the expression which is the lifetime which you are now living.

Thus, when you reenter incarnation, you have not only the original lesson to be learned but an additional severity to that lesson which is brought on by that pain that you have caused to those whom you have previously loved. Many times this type of karma is alleviated by the total forgiveness of those whom you have hurt. However, it is simply desirable to live until it is time for the lesson to be through, for your burdens to be laid down. It is a truism, we are aware, but we must repeat that you are not given those things which you cannot bear; thus, working through what is difficult.

When you finish with a lifetime, at its natural end, whether it be short or long, you can then go on and learn other, perhaps, more agreeable lessons in other, perhaps, more agreeable spheres of vibration. If you may think of your existence as having a natural rhythm and an ongoing purpose, perhaps it will be easier for you to understand that suicide, as you call it, is a stoppage of that rhythm in an arbitrary manner. Instead, it is desirable to proceed with the rhythm of your existence, always seeing the many blessings that are about you and letting the realization of love flow into you from the Father. If you can keep these realizations before you, your life, in this realm and all others, will be enjoyable and fruitful.

(12-02-2011, 02:48 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Here are more quotes with respect to the relative importance of taking care of the body and aiming for longevity. I understand that some do not appreciate using quotes from the material to back up one's view. But this is relevant because it addresses how things are viewed from beyond the veil. I can only assume that once the veil is removed, we will tend to arrive at similar views. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Some of you have offered responses to my previous comments but have ignored the prolific quotes. Again... don't you think it might be at least worth a mention? Seeing as how your view makes Hatonn, Ra, and Q'uo wrong about this?

(12-02-2011, 03:10 PM)Diana Wrote: For me, taking care of the body is not about longevity; it is about having integrity in all things, and caring for that which is under my care.

(12-02-2011, 03:14 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: But that doesn't make meat-eating "wrong" from a spiritual perspective, any more than making smoking a cigarette or drinking alcohol "wrong". It is just another choice to be made and taken under consideration of the whole grand scheme of things.

Yes... everything is connected. Maybe there is some kind of karma associated with meat-eating. But what about the owner of a party store that sells liquor to an alcoholic who goes home and beats his wife? How responsible is that person, really?

(12-02-2011, 02:48 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Here are more quotes with respect to the relative importance of taking care of the body and aiming for longevity. I understand that some do not appreciate using quotes from the material to back up one's view.

(12-02-2011, 02:48 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Some of you have offered responses to my previous comments but have ignored the prolific quotes which support them.

(12-02-2011, 02:10 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: The misunderstanding may be in the difference between 3D vs 4D Earth (consensual reality) as opposed to us being 3D vs 4D entities.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:When I speak of making the 'quantum jump' from 3D to 4D, I am speaking of our bodies, not the reality we live in.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:I am of the opinion that, as Nassim posits, we are the 'event horizon' meaning that each of us has the power to create our own reality (to the extent it is affected by others...ie. consensual reality).

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:The nested Earths will still exist. 3D will still exist, for however long it's designed to exist. But we might not be there.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Well maybe you're right about that. But, I still contend that whether we knowingly contribute to the suffering of beings who can feel pain, is a reflection on the amount of compassion we have. And that does affect our polarity.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Regardless of what happens in 4D, in the here and now, animals are being tortured by the millions each and every day. We all share in the responsibility of that.

(12-02-2011, 03:53 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: Compassion for higher 2D other-selves

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:... the physical body, whether the entity can still be harvestable etc.

Whereas, my focus on the meat issue has to do not with humans, but with animals.

Both perspectives are valid. But they are 2 entirely different perspectives.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:I think that's why it might seem that we disagree. I don't necessarily disagree with your perspective, and I certainly don't think I am in disagreement at all with my understanding of what Ra has said on the subject. I just am focused on a different aspect of the subject: the animals and our response to their plight. I see it as a compassion issue, not a 'criteria for harvest' issue.

Quote:Cats Need Animal-Based Protein

Cats are obligate (strict) carnivores and are very different from dogs in their nutritional needs. What does it mean to be an ‘obligate carnivore’? It means that your cat was built by Mother Nature to get her nutritional needs met by the consumption of a large amount of animal-based proteins (meat/organs) and derives much less nutritional support from plant-based proteins (grains/vegetables). It means that cats lack specific metabolic (enzymatic) pathways and cannot utilize plant proteins as efficiently as animal proteins.

(12-02-2011, 07:34 PM)_X7 Wrote: Humanly produced foods of all kinds (including pet food) on this planet does occupy most awarenesses of all creatures on our planet as a whole. Whether this awareness invokes toil, puposfulness, pleasure, fun, escape or capture, aggression or compassion.... Most of our world's energy literally flows through human consumption acts as the motivating force.

_X7 Wrote:If this proposed statement is largely factual, then food choices surely make or break harmonious existence upon our earth. For each improvement we make in diet and nutrition, we can ameliorate the balance.

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: So are you saying that one must stop eating meat in order to become a 4D entity? I don't think you are, but just asking for the sake of clarity.

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote:

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:When I speak of making the 'quantum jump' from 3D to 4D, I am speaking of our bodies, not the reality we live in.

Then I would tend to agree... yes probably meat-eating creates a dampening effect on this process.

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: But it is one of many factors.

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I think what you are getting at here is actually the inner process of alchemy. But if so, recall that it involves an alternation of distillation (raising vibration) and condensation (lowering vibration) to create the desired outcome. Not saying meat-eating is necessary for this, but just relative to the overall concept of consuming things which "lower our vibration". They have a purpose, too.

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I don't agree with the mindset which says we "should never" put anything unhealthy in our bodies. There is actually a very interesting concept called hormesis which postulates that small, regular doses of toxic substances actually benefits health. Again, not saying this justifies gorging ourselves on McDonald's hamburgers, but you are getting at some more subtle points here.

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Do you happen to know if Nassim is a vegetarian?

Quote:The Resonance Project works with each venue to create healthy, creative vegetarian menus for shared mealtimes to complete the experience.

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: But more to the point... on the other side of the "event horizon" is a consensus reality already in progress. It is already populated by countless beings from the far reaches of the galaxy and beyond. We are not "creating" it from a tabula rasa.

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Yes, this was part of my lost reply so I am glad you brought it up. I think the ability to feel pain and suffering bears some weight here. I just don't think all animals have this capacity.

Quote:Pain is a sensory and emotional experience often caused by intense or damaging stimuli. The International Association for the Study of Pain says pain is a conscious experience involving unpleasantness, i.e. suffering. For a creature to experience pain, by that definition, it must be capable of consciousness and suffering.

Quote:The ability to experience pain in an animal, or another human for that matter, cannot be determined directly but it may be inferred through physiological and behavioral reactions.[7]
Some criteria that may indicate the potential to feel pain include:[8]
Has a suitable nervous system and receptors
Physiological changes to noxious stimuli
Displays protective motor reactions that might include reduced use of an affected area such as limping, rubbing, holding or autotomy
Has opioid receptors and shows reduced responses to noxious stimuli when given analgesics and local anaesthetics
Shows trade-offs between stimulus avoidance and other motivational requirements
Shows avoidance learning
High cognitive ability and sentience
...
Vertebrates

[edit]Fish
Main article: Pain in fish
Animal protection advocates have raised concerns about the possible suffering of fish caused by angling. In light of recent research, some countries, like Germany, have banned specific types of fishing, and the British RSPCA now formally prosecutes individuals who are cruel to fish.[9]
[edit]Invertebrates

Main article: Pain in invertebrates
Though it has been argued that most invertebrates do not feel pain,[10][11][12] there is some evidence that invertebrates, especially the decapod crustaceans (e.g. crabs and lobsters) and cephalopods (e.g. octopuses), exhibit behavioural and physiological reactions indicating they may have the capacity for this experience.[13][14][15] Nociceptors have been found in nematodes, annelids and molluscs.[16] Most insects do not possess nociceptors,[17][18][19] one known exception being the fruit fly.[20] In vertebrates, endogenous opioids are neurochemicals that moderate pain by interacting with opiate receptors. Opioid peptides and opiate receptors occur naturally in nematodes,[21][22] molluscs,[23][24] insects[25][26] and crustaceans.[27][28] The presence of opioids in crustaceans has been interpreted as an indication that lobsters may be able to experience pain,[29][30] although it has been claimed "at present no certain conclusion can be drawn".[29]
One suggested reason for rejecting a pain experience in invertebrates is that invertebrate brains are too small. However, brain size does not necessarily equate to complexity of function.[31] Moreover, weight for body-weight, the cephalopod brain is in the same size bracket as the vertebrate brain, smaller than that of birds and mammals, but as big or bigger than most fish brains.[32][33]
[edit]Crustaceans
Main article: Pain in crustaceans
The question of whether or not crustaceans can experience pain is unresolved. One paper holds that lobsters' opioids may "mediate pain in the same way" as in vertebrates.[30]

Quote:Animals are kept in laboratories for a wide range of reasons, some of which may involve pain, suffering or distress, whilst others (e.g. many of those involved in breeding) will not. The extent to which animal testing causes pain and suffering in laboratory animals is the subject of much debate.[35] Marian Stamp Dawkins defines "suffering" in laboratory animals as the experience of one of "a wide range of extremely unpleasant subjective (mental) states."[36] The United States Department of Agriculture defines a "painful procedure" in an animal study as one that would "reasonably be expected to cause more than slight or momentary pain or distress in a human being to which that procedure was applied."[37] Some critics argue that, paradoxically, researchers raised in the era of increased awareness of animal welfare may be inclined to deny that animals are in pain simply because they do not want to see themselves as people who inflict it.[38]

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote:

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Regardless of what happens in 4D, in the here and now, animals are being tortured by the millions each and every day. We all share in the responsibility of that.

Well, sure. Along with a whole host of other heinous atrocities. But none of this is enough to keep us from choosing our way out of here.

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I am totally interested in discussing what constitutes "higher" and I know it has been discussed at various points along this thread. This is what I am talking about with discerning a principle by which to make these sort of choices which don't rely upon ethics. Ethics is too messy and ultimately divisive.

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: With the part that will remain in this thread, I would be interested to see what happens if we all start with what we can agree upon, and then attempt to build a mental framework upon this. I wonder what might turn up?

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Yes, they are two different angles. Yet connected. For example, if "harvestability" depends on "polarity" which depends upon our attitude toward other-animal-selves...

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: to what degree does a vegetarian lifestyle support harvestability? I am not really sure but it certainly seems that a meat-eater can be harvestable.

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: So now if I back up and look the the broader context of 3D earth post-2012 I believe that all entities incarnated after this time have already qualified themselves as "harvestable". Certainly, we are not going to become a global meatless society before then.

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: So in the meantime, if the primary mission of Wanderers is to increase the harvest, then what relative weight should we, as a group, be giving to various causes as we move into 2012? Of course, everybody has their own little niche. But is there maybe an overarching message we can deliver that might indeed have the effect of drastically reducing meat consumption, while not being dependent upon convincing others of the "wrongness" of it?

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: As for the plight of the animals... are you concerned for their own harvestability into 3D?

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I guess I just assume there are others out there whose cosmic role it is to oversee that part of the process. Maybe you are one of them!

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I guess I just don't see the inherent harm in killing an animal.

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: What if some humans contained variants in their genes that made their digestive enzyme profile more similar to a cat's? What might suddenly adopting a vegan diet do to their health?

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: What if humanity's genes were manipulated so as to make a certain portion of us carnivorous??! What then? It is not so simple as everybody just deciding en masse to stop eating meat. There could be negative health consequences... as well as ways to offset those consequences which have also been discussed. But should we make vegetarianism part of "policy" or the "4D curriculum"? I don't know about that.

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I really don't think it will be "frowned upon" on the other side that I didn't convert my cats to vegetarianism,

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: It is up to each of us individually to decide where we stand on these issues.

(12-02-2011, 03:54 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I don't acknowledge a moral imperative coming from higher densities. I see moral imperative as a third density concept. But again, for all I know, maybe it is a 4D concept and I am confusing my perspectives again by applying a 5D or 6D viewpoint to the situation.

(12-02-2011, 10:24 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: You yourself said you didn't think anyone would eat animals in 4D.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Our planet is already getting 4D light. How does that reconcile with the 'separate but nested' densities?

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Many psychics say they eat meat to 'stay grounded.'

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:I'm not conversant enough in what you're referring to.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:I will just say that I don't accept the idea that it would ever be necessary to knowingly inflict harm on another being, in order to advance spiritually. That flies in the face of what we know about the STO path.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Well that's kinda moot since it's impossible to completely avoid toxic substances. There are enough toxic substances in even organic produce, so I don't think it's a good idea to go looking for more!

Quote:(He's a really lit up guy, incidentally.)

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Assuming that by 'animals' you are referring to the animals commonly used for meat (cows, chickens, fish etc.) why do you think some don't? (Or are you referring to microbes? We don't usually use the term 'animal' when referring to microbes.)

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:All those animals have pain receptors. That isn't opinion; it's fact.

Quote:Even fish have pain receptors!

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:It logically follows that, if a creature has an obvious physical mechanism for feeling pain, then it must be conscious enough to register that pain.

I don't see how it can be argued that any creature with pain receptors doesn't feel pain.

Quote:Has a suitable nervous system and receptors
Physiological changes to noxious stimuli
Displays protective motor reactions that might include reduced use of an affected area such as limping, rubbing, holding or autotomy
Has opioid receptors and shows reduced responses to noxious stimuli when given analgesics and local anaesthetics
Shows trade-offs between stimulus avoidance and other motivational requirements
Shows avoidance learning
High cognitive ability and sentience

Quote:Animal protection advocates have raised concerns about the possible suffering of fish caused by angling. In light of recent research, some countries, like Germany, have banned specific types of fishing, and the British RSPCA now formally prosecutes individuals who are cruel to fish.

Quote:Main article: Pain in invertebrates

Quote:Some critics argue that, paradoxically, researchers raised in the era of increased awareness of animal welfare may be inclined to deny that animals are in pain simply because they do not want to see themselves as people who inflict it.[/b][38]

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Here is that difference in focus again. I really don't understand this entire argument. It seems to be about defining the minimum requirements for graduation, from the perspective of how 'we' can benefit.

Yes, there are many heinous atrocities. And we can't all get involved in every cause. But no one is debating whether one 'should' help starving children if they are able to do so.

Why are we even debating whether we 'should' reduce animal suffering if we are able to do so?

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:That's easy. If they have pain receptors, then I'd consider them 'higher' 2D. It's an easy demarcation.

Quote:We'll miss some trees with that definition, but it's a good place to start.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:I propose that we get the obviously 'higher' ones handled first...then we can maybe move on to plants and microbes.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:OK. Can we all agree that creatures with pain receptors probably feel pain?

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:It depends on the sum total of our STO which includes compassion. Ra never broke it down into 'other human selves' and 'other animal selves.'

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:That's why I gave the example of the dog by the side of the road. Who among us wouldn't feel compassion for that dog?

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:It is the same with any animal.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Compassion must actually be turned off, by not acknowledging the suffering the animal endured, in order to consciously eat it.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:It may be working itself out. In the next decade, it may very well become mandatory for everyone on the planet to go veg or at least drastically cut meat consumption, for the planet to be able to continue to sustain our population.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Yes, that too. And for the heaviness permeating our planet in general.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Well, I guess I rest my case then. I don't think there is any way to convey it to you.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:If they did (and no research has ever shown that to be true, but IF they did) then they probably wouldn't do well with an abrupt, sudden shift to a vegan diet.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Better to transition gradually, and consume superfoods.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:As Pickle as explained (and I agreed), the human body can mutate. So even if they started out that way, they aren't necessarily stuck with that limitation.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Ra didn't give us any sort of moral imperative. That's why we're all struggling to figure this all out. That too is part of the process!

(12-02-2011, 09:53 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: They are just totally in a state of disconnect, and this view is reinforced by many of our cherished institutions, and to a certain degree by a few (not all) anti-meat activists who seem to think it is just fine for humans to consume all manner of processed and petroleum-derived foodstuffs just so long as it isn't meat.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Not to open this whole can of worms... but if plants were found to experience pain and suffering, would you advise not eating them as well?

(12-02-2011, 09:53 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I would say it is the potential to evolve beyond our dualistic mindset... right/wrong, good/bad, black/white, democrat/republican, my team/your team, (the list goes on forever) which is the fulcrum upon which our peaceful and harmonious coexistence rests.

(12-03-2011, 01:10 AM)Diana Wrote: Could we please, for the sake of this discussion, assume that none of the vegetarians on this site are the anti-meat activists you describe

Diana Wrote:This seems to suggest to me that you view the peaceful and harmonious existence as only involving humans and humans. There are plants, animals, minerals, the planet earth itself; all manner of life to be in peaceful coexistence with.

Diana Wrote:Aren't we trying to explore this issue and its "higher" implications?

(12-03-2011, 01:43 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Alright. So I recently purchased a lamb. It was raised organically by a farmer whom I met personally. He and his wife left their corporate jobs to be able to spend more time with their children. Raising organic lamb is part of how they support their family. Two days ago, I ate some of this lamb and found it to be quite delicious.

What would you say are the "higher" implications of this? Anything I really should be concerned about in the grand scheme of things?

(12-03-2011, 01:43 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: No. All I am suggesting is a natural outgrowth. For example, one cannot make peace with others until they have made peace with the self. This is a prerequisite, although many are still attempting to bypass this fundamental step.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote:

(12-02-2011, 10:24 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: You yourself said you didn't think anyone would eat animals in 4D.

I did!

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I see this world as a spiritual kindergarten. Our main lessons seem to revolve around sharing our toys with others and playing nice together. Considering the current state of affairs, teaching a 3D entity to perceive 2D entities as self just seems over-the-bar for your average earth human. That sounds like a very advanced lesson.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: From what I gather, earth's population from this point forward is largely comprised of those who elected to destroy their planet in a nuclear blast or who are remnants of similar disasters. They clearly have not yet learned to see each other as self... can we expect them to grasp these advanced ideas? Is that what we are really here to do?

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Of course, my posting a link to this does not constitute an endorsement.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: But this book is chock-full of quotes from various alchemy writings. It is interesting to see what kind of picture they form when put together. It isn't light reading, but it is the best reference I know.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Well, of course! Although my nitpicky analytical mind would note that probably "knowingly inflicting harm" is an experience which we all must pass through at some point in our journeys. I wonder if in a certain sense it is necessary.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Shall we say that people shouldn't take any actions which they consciously know might bring harm to their own bodies? Most people would say no a person has the right to do with their body as they please, even if they are causing harm to it. How would you weigh in on this?

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Not to open this whole can of worms... but if plants were found to experience pain and suffering, would you advise not eating them as well?

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Well, we all have nociceptors... but the signals only become perceived as "pain" as a result of the way our brain is wired. Theoretically, one could rewire the brain to feel pleasure when those receptors are stimulated. Actually, some have done this, it is called sadomasochism.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Also, I don't know if I would go so far as to say that consciousness is sufficient to experience suffering. I think that requires self-consciousness. But I have no quotes to throw at that one!

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: This is a pretty good list. I would say the last three are more indicative of suffering. It seems to me that suffering needs involve the ability to perceive the difference between what is happening and what is desired to be happening.

Like if a bird or mammal becomes separated from their young, they are clearly distressed. Does a fish even notice? I don't know but I don't think so.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Wow! See I just have a hard time grasping what drives a person to get up in the morning and dedicate their day to saving the fish. Then again I have a hard time grasping what drives anybody who is highly driven! LOL

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: But what about netting fish? Seriously we were considering getting a growing dome so we can grow food all year round. You can get them with fish tanks within and I thought it might be neat to raise some sardines and anchovies. Do you really think this wouldn't be acting in the "4D spirit" of things?

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: This is why I don't think having nociceptors is a sufficient criteria. Since fruit flies have them, should I allow them to invade my kitchen?! I don't think I could manage to escort them out of the house.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I dunno... are we debating that? My main question is... why is this such a high priority item? It just makes sense to me that if we were to make a list or a pie chart of "suffering in the world" that the vast majority of it is perpetrated by humans to other humans. Why not start there?

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: For example, we watched a documentary on sealing. Watching those dudes beat baby seals to death was quite appalling! But in the back of my mind I was wondering... what really drove this guy filming the documentary to leave his family and head off in a boat to "save the seals". First off, he didn't actually save a single seal.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Secondly... I just can't shake the feeling that these types of individuals have some serious unresolved yellow ray issues they are avoiding.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: So a fruit fly is "higher" 2D, in your view?

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote:

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:I propose that we get the obviously 'higher' ones handled first...then we can maybe move on to plants and microbes.

Good plan.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: But I think we are on the right track!

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Probably none. But I think that says something... most humans would respond compassionately to the dog. While most wouldn't respond the same way to a sardine or a fruit fly.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Even a fruit fly?!

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I kind of get what you are saying. But at the same time... isn't acknowledging the suffering necessary for compassion?

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Could there even be compassion without suffering??!

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I tend to agree with this. Which is why I would encourage some activists to take a chill pill! What you resist persists. Why not surrender to the process and trust that the end result will be that which is desired?

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Are you feeling anxious or concerned that the earth may actually not make it, or something like that?

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I think it has more to do with different uses of the words killing and harm. I don't see these two terms as equivalent, though they often overlap.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: No, not necessarily.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I know... but I think there are many who believe the moral imperative exists, but Ra left it for us to figure out. I am saying it doesn't exist at all. I am suggesting that a flourishing STO society doesn't navigate by morals or codes of behavior, whatsoever. In an STO society, people don't serve each other because it is the "right thing" to do. They serve each other because that is who they are.

(12-03-2011, 01:43 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: The next step is to make peace with humanity. There is so much work to be done here that I would almost call it obscene. Then we have the animals, and the plants, and then Gaia herself.

(12-03-2011, 12:39 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: On the other hand, if a squirrel runs toward my vehicle when driving down the street, I do try to avoid it. But if I hit it my reaction is something like, "Gee that's too bad... but what a dumbass squirrel!"

(12-02-2011, 12:38 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: In most realities, we can move in and out of our bodies at will. In some of them, bodies are freely offered and shared among different beings. Bodies are cheap commodities. Wisdom... now that comes at a heavy price.

(12-03-2011, 02:18 AM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: I see it more as a 1-room schoolhouse, with many students at varying levels of development.

Quote:But, they're not all kindergartners.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:I don't think everyone is unable to grasp animal cruelty though. Many are. An increasingly high number of people are grasping it. It may be too advanced for most, but not for all.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:What you are here to do and what I am here to do might be drastically different.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:We each must tune in to our own Higher Self and our own personal life mission.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Sometimes things are necessary for the express purpose of providing catalyst so that we learn to not choose those things.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:So it's not quite so simple as 'do whatever you want' because it often affects others. It opens up a can of worms trying to sort it all out.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:If it were proven at this time, then I would schedule a meeting with the Sub-Logos asap and ask what the hell they had in mind, designing the planet like that!

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Oh yeah. Well I don't know what to say to that. Too weird for me!

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Interesting point. Many people on the road to vegetarianism give up red meat first, then poultry, and fish is the last to go. (and then eggs and dairy if they decide to go all the way to vegan.)

I've often wondered why that is so. There didn't seem to be any logical reason why eating cows was considered worse than eating chickens, and eating chickens was considered worse than eating fish, etc. But that's just sort of the way it has worked out. I never liked fish so I skipped that step, but this particular sequence is very well known and considered the normal way to do it.

If what you're saying is true then that might indicate chicken are more aware than fish, and there might be some biological evidence of that.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:But you are highly driven! You're highly driven to intellectual discussion of deep philosophical concepts!

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Man, did you have to tell me that! Now I'll need to get Diana to come over to my house and escort out my fruit flies!

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Many of us are starting there. Animal activism isn't the only cause I'm involved in! It may be for some, but not for me. It isn't even at the top of my list; ending war is. (Which is why I am currently spending a couple of hours every day doing phone calls for Ron Paul.)

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:But, doing what we can to reduce the meat industry, whether it's by raising awareness of animal suffering or enlightening people about better health choices, will have the same end result: less animal suffering, better health for humans, a more efficient, cleaner and better sustainable ecosystem, a cleaner planet, and, ultimately, less heavy energy on the planet. All of the above are important.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Firstly, you don't know if he even had a family at all.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Secondly, those videos have indeed saved many seals! That particular seal didn't get saved, but others later did, because of that video which was used to educate. Just like the slaughterhouse videos.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:How so? You mean they're avoiding any contact with people because of their yellow ray issues?

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Maybe. If so, so what? Isn't a good thing that they're doing something useful? Maybe they do have issues with humans. That doesn't negate the good they're doing.

Quote:For purposes of this conversation, when I say animals I'm referring to non-bugs.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Not sure what you're getting at here.

Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Apparently not, at least in the design of this planetary system. When I grow up I want to design a system without suffering, that still evolves quickly and efficiently.

Quote:No, the planet will be fine. I'm much more concerned about the inhabitants.

(12-03-2011, 02:43 AM)Pickle Wrote: This is actually what many vegans are against. The promotion of life as a "commodity".

Pickle Wrote:Life is a gift.

Pickle Wrote:It is impossible for me to see things from your perspective.

Pickle Wrote:Even after coming to the understanding that I am just a machine with a program, which could be considered highjacked by a consciousness that is not me, I still can't see it any different than a gift.

Pickle Wrote:And what realities are you talking about?

Quote:Do you really think you get to pick your reality?

Quote:An Oversoul owns you like I own a toe.

Pickle Wrote:If the toe gets dirty, it gets washed off.

Pickle Wrote:Your next reality can put you in front of a car.

Pickle Wrote:Now just think about this a second, if you didn't learn the lesson on the first try, how many times will you get hit by cars?

(12-03-2011, 02:23 AM)Diana Wrote: Making peace with humanity is certainly at the level of obscenity.

Diana Wrote:To me, it's easier or more natural to do what I can where I can, and making peace with humanity is a something I struggle with, while the animals, plants, and Gaia I can handle.

Diana Wrote:If we are talking about humanity making peace with humanity, and then with animals, plants, and Gaia . . . that might take a while. :-/

Diana Wrote:If I may say so in a gentle ribbing way, that's a pretty dumbass comment.

Diana Wrote:Do you expect the squirrel to understand cars?

Diana Wrote:Would you say the same of your pet dog?

(12-03-2011, 03:53 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote:

Diana Wrote:To me, it's easier or more natural to do what I can where I can, and making peace with humanity is a something I struggle with, while the animals, plants, and Gaia I can handle.

OK. There is nothing wrong with doing what you can... but wouldn't you admit that it would seem wise to work on the pieces that you struggle with? You will have to face it eventually.

(12-03-2011, 03:53 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: 2. Do you expect me to mourn over the squirrel I inadvertently struck with my vehicle? Seriously?

(12-03-2011, 03:53 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote:

Pickle Wrote:Life is a gift.

Yes. A gift which can never be lost or stolen. Life is eternal.

Pickle Wrote:It is impossible for me to see things from your perspective.

As you wish.

Pickle Wrote:Even after coming to the understanding that I am just a machine with a program, which could be considered highjacked by a consciousness that is not me, I still can't see it any different than a gift.

Even after all that?! But... you are the consciousness... the machine with a program is your body. When your body falls inanimate to the ground, you will still exist and remain quite alive.

Pickle Wrote:And what realities are you talking about?

I dunno. What realities are you talking about?!

Quote:Do you really think you get to pick your reality?

Who am "I"?

Quote:An Oversoul owns you like I own a toe.

I -am- the Oversoul. And if/when I decide that this body no longer suits my purposes, I will surely discard it and not give it another thought. Is this "not compassionate"? Hardly, I think.

Pickle Wrote:If the toe gets dirty, it gets washed off.

By whom? The hand? Toes and hands are not people, they are body parts.

Pickle Wrote:Your next reality can put you in front of a car.

If by this you mean that I will come back as a squirrel in my next incarnation, I don't think so.

Pickle Wrote:Now just think about this a second, if you didn't learn the lesson on the first try, how many times will you get hit by cars?

As many times as it takes until I cease being too much of a dumbass to keep my vehicle fit for consciousness.

(12-03-2011, 12:49 PM)Pickle Wrote: You are coming across as someone engaged in a social/mental experiment rather than swapping concepts.

Pickle Wrote:Either that or your ego is growing. Show us a video of you walking on water since you claim to be a 6D Oversoul. Levitate? Anything at all?

Quote:Other than saying we are dumbasses for going through the motions of evolution?

Pickle Wrote:If you were born retarded without full function of senses I might say you were here to teach. I assume you have all senses functioning which means you are also here to learn.

(12-03-2011, 11:01 AM)Diana Wrote: I certainly do work on all of it, all the time. But my point is, why wait until I've healed my relationship with humanity to heal my relationships with plants, animals, and Gaia?

Diana Wrote:All events aren't necessarily linear, although I agree that healing self is a first important step; however, the healing of self in part may happen when healing relationships to other selves.

Diana Wrote:Making peace with humanity is just a larger issue for me because humanity is in such a barbaric state.

Diana Wrote:I am not evolved enough to observe cruelty, willful unconsciousness, greed, destructiveness, and the whole lot of human folly with equanimity and unconditional love.

Diana Wrote:They don't understand the speed a car can get up to.

Diana Wrote:Man has created an artificial environment, and I do not think animals understand it.

Diana Wrote:We are in an awkward stage of development: our minds developed more than our hearts. When these two balance, our technology will soar to wonderful and magical heights for the good of all.

(12-03-2011, 01:21 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Moreover, of the great spiritual teachers throughout history- only ONE advocated for vegetarianism. That was Mahavira. Buddha didn't talk about it. Laozi didn't talk about it. Jesus didn't talk about it. I wonder why that is?

Quote:"What are the sins we must shun, that we may never more see disease?" And Jesus answered, "It was said to them of old time "Thou shalt not kill", for life is given to all by God, and that which God has given, let not man take away. For I tell you truly, he who kills, kills his brother. And from him will the Earthly Mother turn away and Satan will have his dwelling in his body. And the flesh of slain beasts in his body will become his own tomb. He who kills, kills himself and who eats the flesh of slain beasts, eats the body of death".

Quote: "You must teach people to put an end to killing and brutal cruelty. If one is trying to practice meditation and is still eating meat, he would be like a man closing his ears and shouting loudly and then asserting that he heard nothing."

Quote:"If a man can control his body and mind and thereby refrains from eating animal flesh and wearing animal products, I say he will really be liberated."
~ The Buddha
From the Surangama Sutra

"In his final teachings before he physically left this earth, the Buddha foresaw that a situation would arise in the future where those speaking in his name would pervert his Doctrine and encourage meat consumption. So here, in this great Nirvana Sutra, he lays down his last will and testament on the matter: in no circumstances should one eat meat or fish " nor animal corpses, found in the jungle, for instance " nor even accept from a donor a meal which contains an abundance of flesh-foods. The very contact of other food with meat is deemed defiling and requires purification of the food by water. It is quite evident from all this that the Buddha in no way condoned the eating of meat and was keen for his monastic and lay followers to abjure the uncompassionate practice of meat eating and follow the pure path of vegetarian Mahayana. In this, we would be wise and benevolent to follow him."

- Dr. Tony Page
Buddha - Self: The "Secret" Teachings of the Buddha in the Mahaparinirvana Sutra, Vol. 2

"The Buddha's teaching leads us to the realization that we must always strive to harm no sentient being, human or nonhuman, whether or not it is in our selfish interest to do so...The beginning of mindful eating is the realization that eating meat is not about the meat-eater; it is about the animals who are tormented and killed."
~ Norm Phelps
The Great Compassion: Buddhism & Animal Rights

"The eating of meat extinguishes the seed of great compassion."~
The Buddha
Mahaparinirvana Sutra

"Ultimately the case for shunning animal flesh does not rest on what the Buddha allegedly said or didn't say. What is does rest on is our innate moral goodness, compassion, and pity which, when liberated, lead us to value all forms of life. It is obvious, then, that willfully to take life, or through the eating of meat indirectly to cause others to kill, runs counter to the deepest instincts of human beings."
~ Roshi Philip Kapleau
To Cherish All Life


"There are three ways of killing that we, as Buddhists, have to restrain: either by directly killing, indirectly killing, or rejoicing to see others be killed. Not only does this apply to human life, it should be also extended to all living beings."

~ Zen Master Thich Thanh Tu
Buddhism for Beginners

"The eating of meat cannot in any way be considered to be helpful to the practice of the dharma, neither can the slaughter of animals be considered to be consistent with the Buddhist teachings of compassion (metta , ahimsa , and karuna ), of loving kindness, or of the nature of the evocation of the enlightenment-mind. The cruelties associated with the slaughter of the animal kingdom for human consumption, the pain, fear, and distress suffered by the animals in the entire process of being fattened for butchering, as well as the environmental disasters wreaked upon our planet through the meat industry, are very well documented, and should be understood by all who claim to be developing bodhicitta, or who wish to."
~ Bodo Balsys
Ahimsa : Buddhism and the Vegetarian Ideal

"Meat eating and a compassionate religion do not go hand in hand."
~ Bodo Balsys
Ahimsa : Buddhism and the Vegetarian Ideal

"One of the greatest obstacles to the birth of bodhichitta in our minds is our craving for meat."
- Shabkar Tsogdruk Rangdrol
Food of Bodhisattvas: Buddhist Teachings on Abstaining from Meat

Quote:"The Buddha said time and time again in the sutras such things as: "My followers should give up all evil actions that directly or indirectly injure others." One may disregard his words; one may consciously lead others to commit evil in provisioning oneself with meat. One may think, "There are always skillful means in the sutras and tantras that counteract the evil so that I shall still be pure of stain." And one can let oneself off the hook by telling oneself that there are substances to be placed into the animals' mouths and words that can be whispered in their ears and impressed upon their minds so that they will not remain in the lower realms. But to do all this reveals a complete failure to grasp the meaning of the Buddha's teaching. It is a perversion of the Dharma."

Quote:"Buddhism cannot be true to itself until Buddhists resolve their ambivalence toward nonhuman animals and extend the full protection of their compassion to the most harmless and helpless of those who live at our mercy in the visible realms."

Quote:"Beware O mortals, of defiling your bodies with sinful food! There are cereals, fruits, sweet vegetables and herbs which the flame can render palatable and mellow. Nor are you denied milk, nor honey. The bountiful earth offers you an abundance of pure food and meals obtainable without slaughter and bloodshed."

Quote:Gautama Buddha[66](pp11–88)[102](pp17–21)[157](pp21–23)[179](pp50–57)[106][182][nb 21]
Krishna[106]
Jiddu Krishnamurti[188][189]
Mahavira[66](pp19–28)
A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada[66](pp173–180)[152](pp56–60)
Rama[106]
Swami Satchidananda[194]
Rabindranath Tagore[197]