In regards to eating meat

[BrownEye]

http://gnosticteachings.org/books-by-sam...organ.html

I assume it was meant in humor. It had me laughing ha. But machine and "I" amount to the only thing real. I don't know what to think of these new gnostics. They almost don't feel like real people.

[Monica]

True. But it isn't necessarily that meat=toxins or that veggies=clean. As you well know.

I agree that it's not so easily demarcated, especially with all the pesticides, hormones, preservatives, etc. tainting the food.

Well... actually! There are chemicals in tobacco (along with coffee and cacao) called beta-carbolines which play an important role in the maintenance of endogenous tryptamines like DMT... but that is a whole 'nother thread. (Think shamanic use of tobacco.) For the purposes of this thread... is it really the physical body that craves the cigarette? Or is it one of the other bodies?

C'mon, Tenet, you know I wasn't referring to natural, organic tobacco used medicinally.

Sounds like ferments!

Yes, maybe. Or fresh fruit and veggie juice, still teaming with lifeforce.

But I sure don't think Ra meant blood from a freshly killed animal.

[yossarian]

Maybe it's the Kundabuffer?

http://gnosticteachings.org/books-by-sam...organ.html

This is crazy.

Here's what the page says:

1. indecipherable, incomprehensible, incredible, narrative meaningless jibber jabber that the reader can barely understand and certainly cannot verify

2. ejaculation is bad

3. the self/ego/I is evil, grammatically rearranged to say, "I am evil" and "you are evil"

So to sum up, you have a bunch of meaningless and completely no-credibility narrative followed by the blind assertion that the reader is evil and that whenever the reader ejaculates he is feeding Satan.

In conclusion, wtf man? How is even gnostic? Didn't the gnostics believe in knowledge and reason, not revelation from gurus?

I could go to Church and hear the exact same message. Humanity has been hearing the same message for thousands of years from gurus. Has the anti-sex brigade ever achieved anything? What about the people who demonize the self, the I, the ego?

---

http://gnosticteachings.org/books-by-sam...organ.html

I assume it was meant in humor. It had me laughing ha. But machine and "I" amount to the only thing real. I don't know what to think of these new gnostics. They almost don't feel like real people.

Not real people? Is this the benjamin fulford AI theory that says all gnostics online are actually the manifestation of a giant supercomputer flooding the internet?

[3DMonkey]

And neither ethical. Nothing wrong or right. It's just food.

I invite you to listen to last week's radio show. Carla talked about the concept of 'right and wrong' while in 3D. She didn't talk about food, but did talk about right and wrong.

I read her blog, and know that she enjoys Burger King Whoppers.

More evolved or less evolved? That's not my question.

[yossarian]

I'm a meat eater. I'm actually on a low carb diet right now and eat ridiculous amounts of meat. Truth is, I'm embarrassed to admit this because some people on this forum remember me as a vegan and even a raw food vegan. But life circumstances change and now I'm on an animal-heavy diet.

how much meat do you eat?

Lots. do you have a theory on this?

I don't cook for myself, I sort of eat what I'm given, and that is a low carb diet that is heavy in beef, chicken, seafood, salami, cheese, dairy products in general, wine, veggies

Basically I eat animal products at every meal, sometimes exclusively animal products. It's meat and cheese heavy.

Do you think this has ruined my vibration or something? I have to agree with the psychics who say it is "grounding." It does seem to bring me back to earth, back to reality. Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing is not clear to me though.

[AnthroHeart]

I can't really eat fried chicken anymore cause it makes me nauseous. Have to settle with light turkey wraps or something. I tried vegetarian before, but I have this bad habit of getting too spacy when the energy builds too much, so I have to eat food that grounds me.

[BrownEye]

Not real people? Is this the benjamin fulford AI theory that says all gnostics online are actually the manifestation of a giant supercomputer flooding the internet?

Ha haven't heard that one. Naw i just sense a "monochrome" tone from some sources, just like this one.

[yossarian]

Not real people? Is this the benjamin fulford AI theory that says all gnostics online are actually the manifestation of a giant supercomputer flooding the internet?

Ha haven't heard that one. Naw i just sense a "monochrome" tone from some sources, just like this one.

Monochrome is inhuman?

The gnostics I know are intellectuals.

You know who was monochrome? Don Elkins. Have you seen the video of him? Extremely monotone.

Or maybe your idea of monochrome does not aplpy to expression but rather consciousness or something

[BrownEye]

The gnostics I know are intellectuals.

Same here. But do they seem to be full of life? Or are they robots?

And are they vegetarians?

[yossarian]

The gnostics I know are intellectuals.

Same here. But do they seem to be full of life? Or are they robots?

And are they vegetarians?

definitely not vegetarians

full of life? yes

robots? no

what do you think?

[Tenet Nosce]

I agree that it's not so easily demarcated, especially with all the pesticides, hormones, preservatives, etc. tainting the food.

Yes. But anyhow, we were talking about listening to the body. Yes, toxins can get in the way, although they are not an impenetrable barrier. Everybody has cravings. Toxins just distort them. That's OK- one can still learn from them.

The way I've explained it to groups is that every food craving presents a choice. Most people have been trained to see only two outcomes: affirm or deny. Surrender to the desire or resist the desire. Most people oscillate between the two, getting quite frustrated in the process.

But there is another choice available. The third choice is: ask why. When a craving is perceived- ask why? Why am I craving this food? When people do this, many of them realize that they don't have the answer. They don't know why they crave a certain food, and have to actually go within in order to retrieve the information.

Going within is good. Often times people will realize that their craving originates in the emotional body or in the mental body. These are then dealt with on the level at which they were created, or above.

Then one is left with the physical cravings. Affirm, deny, ask why?

This process will lead to genuine changes in eating patterns. Moreover, it will allow the body to communicate its needs directly, rather than relying upon experts and gurus to tell us what to do. Experts and gurus have been arguing incessantly for as long as we have recorded history, and I don't get the sense this is going to end anytime soon.

I guess my challenge to you would be- why not trust the body? Let's say you are totally right and meat is not good for any body. I propose- if that were true- then following the above process would result in meatless diets 100% of the time. Would you agree?

C'mon, Tenet, you know I wasn't referring to natural, organic tobacco used medicinally.

Well I wasn't quite sure, but I figured. The other point about this is the beta-carbolines. There is very good reason to believe that the benefits of regular intake of beta-carbolines far outweigh the perceived risks, such as the fat in the cacao bean, or the caffeine in the coffee bean, or the nicotine in the tobacco. I'm not saying everybody go smoke, but what I am saying is that if you do... ask why?

But I sure don't think Ra meant blood from a freshly killed animal.

No, I don't think that's what Ra was referring to. However, I also don't believe that when Ra physically walked among humans, that they demanded everybody stop eating meat lest some horrible fate befall them.

But you raise a very interesting question about the blood, which we have touched upon before. You mentioned the lifeforce in the juice. Would you see this as essentially equivalent to the lifeforce in the blood? Is the lifeforce "tainted" because of the killing of the animal? Or is that just a taboo put upon us to cover something up? If so, what? What really was all this animal sacrifice to the "gods" about, in the first place? I wonder about that...

[Diana]

[quote='Bring4th_Monica' pid='79527' dateline='1333066436']I agree that
Going within is good. Often times people will realize that their craving originates in the emotional body or in the mental body. These are then dealt with on the level at which they were created, or above.

Then one is left with the physical cravings. Affirm, deny, ask why?

Very good idea.

I guess my challenge to you would be- why not trust the body? Let's say you are totally right and meat is not good for any body. I propose- if that were true- then following the above process would result in meatless diets 100% of the time. Would you agree?

I do not go just by the body (including emotional and mental). I go by my spirit (or whatever you want to call the highest part of an individual). Ideally, it would all be in alignment.

But you raise a very interesting question about the blood, which we have touched upon before. You mentioned the lifeforce in the juice. Would you see this as essentially equivalent to the lifeforce in the blood? Is the lifeforce "tainted" because of the killing of the animal? Or is that just a taboo put upon us to cover something up? If so, what? What really was all this animal sacrifice to the "gods" about, in the first place? I wonder about that...

Of course there is life force in blood. I think that is the purpose behind dark magick and voodoo--killing animals; and even humans in some magick, also druids, Aztecs etc.

It is stolen power, a substitute for power--the power of the self. It could also be seen as an STS act. It's one of the horrors of the bible--animal sacrifice.

---

@ Pablisimo--once again your words from the heart are awesome.

I mentioned it before in this thread, but not as beautifully as you did: that my understanding of the subject was so expanded by reading the posts here.

[Monica]

I invite you to listen to last week's radio show. Carla talked about the concept of 'right and wrong' while in 3D. She didn't talk about food, but did talk about right and wrong.

I read her blog, and know that she enjoys Burger King Whoppers.

That's irrelevant to my point. I wasn't referring to Carla's diet. I was referring to what she said about the concept of right and wrong in 3D.

[Tenet Nosce]

I go by my spirit (or whatever you want to call the highest part of an individual).

My spirit tells me to listen to the body, and trust what it says. Even if it is saying to give it some meat. Which tends to be why I am skeptical of those who proclaim that meat eating is spiritually "wrong". If that were the case, then my spirit must be out to trick me, or something.

[Monica]

The way I've explained it to groups is that every food craving presents a choice. Most people have been trained to see only two outcomes: affirm or deny. Surrender to the desire or resist the desire. Most people oscillate between the two, getting quite frustrated in the process.

But there is another choice available. The third choice is: ask why. When a craving is perceived- ask why? Why am I craving this food? When people do this, many of them realize that they don't have the answer. They don't know why they crave a certain food, and have to actually go within in order to retrieve the information.

Going within is good. Often times people will realize that their craving originates in the emotional body or in the mental body. These are then dealt with on the level at which they were created, or above.

That's an excellent idea! I like it. The food may be a comfort food, or have an emotional association, or whatever.

Then one is left with the physical cravings. Affirm, deny, ask why?

At that point, they may still uncover a physical addiction.

I really like your approach. But there are still genuine physical addictions. In addition to the obvious ones like alcohol, cigarettes and caffeine, sugar is also quite addictive. Even cooked food, in general, is addictive, though that might be on an emotional level.

This process will lead to genuine changes in eating patterns. Moreover, it will allow the body to communicate its needs directly, rather than relying upon experts and gurus to tell us what to do. Experts and gurus have been arguing incessantly for as long as we have recorded history, and I don't get the sense this is going to end anytime soon.

I agree that the so-called 'experts' totally contradict one another and it's a confusing mess, trying to sort that all out. And I really like your approach for dealing with emotional/mental associations with food.

But, that still doesn't address the physical addictions. I contend that if someone decides to just 'listen to his body' while physically addicted, the body is of course going to tell him that he needs that cigarette, that drink, or that candy bar.

That could be very dangerous for someone who is trying to get off some addiction. What if we told the heroin or meth addict to 'listen to their body'? Would that work?

I guess my challenge to you would be- why not trust the body?

Once the body is free of addictions and chemical poisonings, sure. But while still in the midst of those things, there is a 3rd person in the middle - the 'spirit' of the addiction so to speak. Ask anyone with a drug habit. An addictive drug is like a demanding mistress. Food addictions are no different.

Let's say you are totally right and meat is not good for any body. I propose- if that were true- then following the above process would result in meatless diets 100% of the time. Would you agree?

No, I don't agree, for the reasons I just stated. I don't believe people would be getting good advice if they just listened to their bodies, while still toxic and addicted. No way.

I like the idea of asking why. At that point, the answer may be that they are simply addicted. But they still need to exert will power, or take other measures, to clear the addiction.

I know people who were addicted to sodas, not only because of the sugar, but because of the caffeine. When they made the decision to quit, they had withdrawal headaches, as intense as a migraine, for a whole week. The body was telling them to drink soda! Upon the first attempt, they gave in and drank a soda. Like magic, the headache went away. The addiction demon got its fix!

They tried it again a few months later, but this time rode it out. Intense headaches for a week. Then the little nasty was starved so it moved out of the house. With the addiction gone, they were able to stay free of it. I know several people who have done this. One of them hasn't had a soda in nearly 30 years, after evicting the addiction.

The other point about this is the beta-carbolines. There is very good reason to believe that the benefits of regular intake of beta-carbolines far outweigh the perceived risks, such as the fat in the cacao bean, or the caffeine in the coffee bean, or the nicotine in the tobacco.

Yes, it is common knowledge that cacao beans have health benefits. But it has been determined that this applies only if it's raw and organic. There is such a huge difference between raw, organic cacao and the chocolate in a Snickers bar that the alternative health community has adopted a new name for it: cacao to distinguish it from cocoa.

It's the same with coffee. There are several new MLM companies touting 'healthy antioxidant' coffee. But most of them rely on adding other ingredients, like medicinal mushrooms, or the coffee fruit. Edgar Cayce referred to coffee as a food, provided it didn't have cream added, at which time it turned into a leathery curd, impossible to digest.

So I think it's an oversimplification to say that coffee and chocolate have health properties which override their negative properties, because there are many factors at play here. For starters, they both still have caffeine. And people will use this shaky data to justify indulging in excessive amounts of candy, which has all sorts of additives. The chocolate in that Snickers bar is nothing like organic, raw cacao.

Now tobacco. Can you please clarify? The way you worded it, you seem to be implying that the nicotine in cigarettes outweighs the risks. But I know you know that isn't true, because if ever there were conclusive findings about risk to health, it's cigarettes!

The list of 599 additives approved by the US Government for use in the manufacture of cigarettes is something every smoker should see. Submitted by the five major American cigarette companies to the Dept. of Health and Human Services in April of 1994, this list of ingredients had long been kept a secret....
While these ingredients are approved as additives for foods, they were not tested by burning them, and it is the burning of many of these substances which changes their properties, often for the worse. Over 4000 chemical compounds are created by burning a cigarette, many of which are toxic and/or carcinogenic. Carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, hydrogen cyanide and ammonia are all present in cigarette smoke. Forty-three known carcinogens are in mainstream smoke, sidestream smoke, or both.

It's chilling to think about not only how smokers poison themselves, but what others are exposed to by breathing in the secondhand smoke. The next time you're missing your old buddy, the cigarette, take a good long look at this list and see them for what they are: a delivery system for toxic chemicals and carcinogens.

Cigarettes offer people only a multitude of smoking-related diseases and ultimately death.

from http://quitsmoking.about.com/cs/nicotine...dients.htm

I'm not saying everybody go smoke, but what I am saying is that if you do... ask why?

Well again, I think that's a good idea to uncover any emotiona/mental attachments. But in the case of cigarettes, what is left after that is often something very simple: The person started smoking at age 13 when he thought it was cool, and has been addicted ever since.

Ultimately, yes, everything is catalyst. So I agree to deal with it on that level first, and then it'll be easier to let go of the addiction. But some substances are simply physically addictive. That must be taken into consideration too.

Someone who relies on smoking pot not just for relaxation, but as a substitute for dealing with emotional issues, might have an emotional addiction to the weed. But it's not going to be the same as being addicted to heroin or meth, no matter how you slice it, because those have physically addictive nature, in addiction to the emotional component.

But I sure don't think Ra meant blood from a freshly killed animal.

No, I don't think that's what Ra was referring to. However, I also don't believe that when Ra physically walked among humans, that they demanded everybody stop eating meat lest some horrible fate befall them.

We all know that Ra didn't demand anything. But I don't think that can be used as a justification, as in, "Ra didn't tell the Egyptians to quite eating animals, so it must be ok." Did Ra tell them to quit fighting too? There are myriad things Ra might or might not have told them. I don't see this as relevant.

But you raise a very interesting question about the blood, which we have touched upon before. You mentioned the lifeforce in the juice. Would you see this as essentially equivalent to the lifeforce in the blood?

While it's still in the animal, yes.

Is the lifeforce "tainted" because of the killing of the animal?

Yes, absolutely.

Or is that just a taboo put upon us to cover something up? If so, what? What really was all this animal sacrifice to the "gods" about, in the first place? I wonder about that...

It's a taboo because it's rooted in STS. STS magickal ceremonies have often relied on blood sacrifice, because they get power by dominating (to the point of death) the victim. AND, because the dead body still has trillions upon trillions of various microbes, available for the taking. The STS 'black magician' can now feast on these lower 2D entities, and get them to do their bidding.

A 3D physical vehicle is much more complex than a plant. It's not just a single entity, but houses an entire population of microbes. So killing an animal isn't just about the animal's individual soul, which has been dominated. It's also about the huge population of microbes now in need of a new master.

This is, of course, in addition to the fact that the soul of the animal has already exited, so it's no longer alive, in the sense that the animal has gone. The only life there is the microbe population, which is busily at work taking the body to a state of decay.

---

My spirit tells me to listen to the body, and trust what it says. Even if it is saying to give it some meat. Which tends to be why I am skeptical of those who proclaim that meat eating is spiritually "wrong". If that were the case, then my spirit must be out to trick me, or something.

Well, only you can decide anything about your own guidance. I can only share my own experiences.

When I was pregnant, I was certain that my spirit was telling me to have a home birth. I ended up in the hospital with an emergency C-section.

Looking back, I don't think I was actually guided in the way I thought I was at the time. I realize now that I had a lot of preconceived ideas and rigid 'rules' at the time, which clouded my perception of said guidance. I realize now that, those biases created a cloud of distortion.

In other words, there can be a 'middleman' so to speak. It can be in the form of biases, mental rigidity, or physical addiction. That middleman is like having another person between me and my guidance. I didn't have a clear transmission. It was like you telling me to deliver a message to, say, Diana. Your words would be filtered through me, and they may or may not arrive at their destination intact. They may get distorted along the way.

This can happen in ourselves too. Strong biases and physical addictions cloud and distort the message we're receiving.

To be clear: I'm NOT in any way assessing YOUR guidance. I'm simply sharing what I have concluded about my own guidance.


Note: Post has been edited.

[Ankh]

But you raise a very interesting question about the blood, which we have touched upon before. You mentioned the lifeforce in the juice. Would you see this as essentially equivalent to the lifeforce in the blood?

While it's still in the animal, yes.

Is the lifeforce "tainted" because of the killing of the animal?

Yes, absolutely.

I've been studying magic since I was 17 years, and what I come to know is that once you kill, whether it is an animal or anyone/anything else, the purpose of the ritual is indeed what is called "black magic".

I just want to add to this discussion about the blood another aspect of the blood and how it's seen in white magic workings. Blood is that substance that reaches all parts of our bodies. Its center is the heart. It has a high aspect of service by transporting oxygene and nutrition to all cells of the body, and taking away waste products. What it in short does, is that it cleanses the body, purifies it. This could be translated into metaphysical purpose of the blood being a physical substance of high service to others polarity. Just wanted to add this aspect in this discussion in regards to blood.

AND, because the dead body still has trillions upon trillions of various microbes, available for the taking. The STS 'black magician' can now feast on these lower 2D entities, and get them to do their bidding.

Where did you get this information? Could you please direct me to it?

[Monica]

I've been studying magic since I was 17 years, and what I come to know is that once you kill, whether it is an animal or anyone/anything else, the purpose of the ritual is indeed what is called "black magic".

I've never heard of any black magician sacrificing a carrot in a ritual.

I just want to add to this discussion about the blood another aspect of the blood and how it's seen in white magic workings.

I've never heard of animal sacrifice being used in a white magick working.

Blood is that substance that reaches all parts of our bodies. Its center is the heart. It has a high aspect of service by transporting oxygene and nutrition to all cells of the body, and taking away waste products. What it in short does, is that it cleanses the body, purifies it. This could be translated into metaphysical purpose of the blood being a physical substance of high service to others polarity.

When it's inside the body, yes.

It's not just the substance; it's the state that it's in.

AND, because the dead body still has trillions upon trillions of various microbes, available for the taking. The STS 'black magician' can now feast on these lower 2D entities, and get them to do their bidding.

Where did you get this information? Could you please direct me to it?

I first learned about this, some 20 years ago. There is a huge amount of info available on the subject. Here is a mainstream science article, for starters:

LaTuga is one of several medical researchers at Duke working with microbial ecologists to study the development of the human microbiome—the enormous population of microbes, including bacteria, fungi, and viruses, that live in the human body, predominantly in the gut. There are 20 times as many of these microbes as there are cells in the body, up to 200 trillion in an adult, and each of us hosts at least 1,000 different species. Seen through the prism of the microbiome, a person is not so much an individual human body as a superorganism made up of diverse ecosystems, each teeming with microscopic creatures that are essential to our well-being

from http://discovermagazine.com/2011/mar/04-...ep-healthy

More:

We may not realize it, but each one of us is a walking ecosystem.

Your Body is a Planet (Discover Magazine)

As far as STS entities using lower 2D entities (microbes) to do their bidding, Ra said that. I'd have to find the quote.

[Ankh]

I've never heard of any black magician sacrificing a carrot in a ritual.

LOL!!

I've never heard of animal sacrifice being used in a white magick working.

Not of the animal, but of the self. It's only taken from the self. It is not recommended, but can be used to "seal" a specific ritual.

I first learned about this, some 20 years ago. There is a huge amount of info available on the subject. Here is a mainstream science article, for starters:

LaTuga is one of several medical researchers at Duke working with microbial ecologists to study the development of the human microbiome—the enormous population of microbes, including bacteria, fungi, and viruses, that live in the human body, predominantly in the gut. There are 20 times as many of these microbes as there are cells in the body, up to 200 trillion in an adult, and each of us hosts at least 1,000 different species. Seen through the prism of the microbiome, a person is not so much an individual human body as a superorganism made up of diverse ecosystems, each teeming with microscopic creatures that are essential to our well-being

from http://discovermagazine.com/2011/mar/04-...ep-healthy

Interesting. Will read it tonight. =)

As far as STS entities using lower 2D entities (microbes) to do their bidding, Ra said that. I'd have to find the quote.

Please do.

[Tenet Nosce]

That's an excellent idea! I like it. The food may be a comfort food, or have an emotional association, or whatever.

Thanks!

At that point, they may still uncover a physical addiction.

That is a very good place to start from! Now again... ask why? Is it really just chemicals in the brain? If so- how to recreate the same chemical response without the addictive substance? If not- then what is the addiction really about? What purpose does it serve? And how can we serve that purpose in a healthier way?

But, that still doesn't address the physical addictions. I contend that if someone decides to just 'listen to his body' while physically addicted, the body is of course going to tell him that he needs that cigarette, that drink, or that candy bar.

Ah- but there you have it! Does the body truly say... cigarette, drink, candy? Or does the mind interpret the craving to mean these? I propose the latter.

That could be very dangerous for someone who is trying to get off some addiction. What if we told the heroin or meth addict to 'listen to their body'? Would that work?

It could- if the above is taken into account. Is the meth/heroin craving really about meth/heroin? Or is that just what it appears to be on the surface? If our "addiction cure" is focused all around the meth/heroin... the substance rather than the purpose... is that perhaps reinforcing the distortion which resulted in the addiction in the first place? Are we then at cross-purposes to ourselves?

Once the body is free of addictions and chemical poisonings, sure. But while still in the midst of those things, there is a 3rd person in the middle - the 'spirit' of the addiction so to speak. Ask anyone with a drug habit. An addictive drug is like a demanding mistress. Food addictions are no different.

Not to downplay the intense struggles that drug addicts go through, or some of the other examples you gave... but I've used quite a number of substances along the whole spectrum. Never had any of these severe withdrawal symptoms. Why is this? Is my body "special"? Do I have a "non-addict" gene? Or is something else going on?

The body was telling them to drink soda!

What I am suggesting is that "asking why" will eventually lead one to the realization that the body is not really asking for soda... it is asking for something else which can just as easily be met by a non-soda item.

Yes, it is common knowledge that cacao beans have health benefits. But it has been determined that this applies only if it's raw and organic. There is such a huge difference between raw, organic cacao and the chocolate in a Snickers bar that the alternative health community has adopted a new name for it: cacao to distinguish it from cocoa.

Right.. which is why I used the word "cacao" instead of chocolate. I agree with you, but your response is tangential to my point. The point is... what is naturally present in the coffee/cacao/tobacco that is driving the craving? What function does that serve? And can we serve that function in a better way.

Now tobacco. Can you please clarify? The way you worded it, you seem to be implying that the nicotine in cigarettes outweighs the risks. But I know you know that isn't true, because if ever there were conclusive findings about risk to health, it's cigarettes!

No, not the nicotine! The beta-carbolines! It is a different chemical. I'm just trying to say... NOTICE... how hardly anybody knows about beta-carbolines. We hear all about the caffeine, the nicotine, etc. Why no talk of the beta-carbolines? There is plenty of research on them.

As I said before, beta-carbolines are what enhance the effect of DMT... and DMT is what causes us to feel that sense of interconnectedness or "spirituality" that we seek... indeed the seeking of this feeling is at the very root of addiction, IMO.

Therefore... why so quick to label these things as "bad"? Is there an agenda behind this? Perhaps to keep us from understanding something important about how the body works? At the very least, you must admit that humans have had a very close relationship with coffee/cacao/tobacco throughout our evolutionary process. Is there a reason for this other than "addiction"?

As a side note on tobacco. Yes- we have undeniably conclusive evidence that smoking has deleterious effects on the body. However, two questions I have about that:

1. Were any of these studies conducted using all-natural, unadulterated tobacco? Or were they done using processed tobacco laden with all sorts of artificial chemicals?

2. Why is it an "all or nothing" thing when it comes to smoking? Why only the checkbox? Smoker or nonsmoker? Black or white? Does a person who smokes three all-natural cigarettes a day really carry the same risk of one who smokes a pack of Marlboros? Why the oversimplification? Is this really a truthful/responsible communication coming from the medical community? Why not two boxes: fried chicken eater or fried chicken non-eater?

We all know that Ra didn't demand anything. But I don't think that can be used as a justification, as in, "Ra didn't tell the Egyptians to quite eating animals, so it must be ok." Did Ra tell them to quit fighting too? There are myriad things Ra might or might not have told them. I don't see this as relevant.

You brought Ra into the discussion, now they are irrelevant to it?

It's a taboo because it's rooted in STS. STS magickal ceremonies have often relied on blood sacrifice, because they get power by dominating (to the point of death) the victim. AND, because the dead body still has trillions upon trillions of various microbes, available for the taking. The STS 'black magician' can now feast on these lower 2D entities, and get them to do their bidding.

Now, we're getting somewhere!

A 3D physical vehicle is much more complex than a plant. It's not just a single entity, but houses an entire population of microbes. So killing an animal isn't just about the animal's individual soul, which has been dominated. It's also about the huge population of microbes now in need of a new master.

Fascinating! But... plants have symbiotic relationships with microorganisms as well...

This is, of course, in addition to the fact that the soul of the animal has already exited, so it's no longer alive, in the sense that the animal has gone. The only life there is the microbe population, which is busily at work taking the body to a state of decay.

And yet the body requires this "decay" to occur in the gut in order to support life. A paradox!

To be clear: I'm NOT in any way assessing YOUR guidance. I'm simply sharing what I have concluded about my own guidance.

I understand that. And thank you for respecting my guidance system.

---

LaTuga is one of several medical researchers at Duke working with microbial ecologists to study the development of the human microbiome—the enormous population of microbes, including bacteria, fungi, and viruses, that live in the human body, predominantly in the gut. There are 20 times as many of these microbes as there are cells in the body, up to 200 trillion in an adult, and each of us hosts at least 1,000 different species. Seen through the prism of the microbiome, a person is not so much an individual human body as a superorganism made up of diverse ecosystems, each teeming with microscopic creatures that are essential to our well-being

from http://discovermagazine.com/2011/mar/04-...ep-healthy

More:

We may not realize it, but each one of us is a walking ecosystem.

Your Body is a Planet (Discover Magazine)

Yes! Do you know this is nearly all I work with in my practice? And I didn't set out for it to be that way... I started promoting as weight loss, hormone balance, and infertility... the universe brought me people with gut issues.

As far as STS entities using lower 2D entities (microbes) to do their bidding, Ra said that. I'd have to find the quote.

The 2D entities can use us to do their bidding as well. Research has confirmed that gut bacteria can actually influence our personality, resulting in behaviors which we might not otherwise participate... including food choices.

[Monica]

I've never heard of animal sacrifice being used in a white magick working.

Not of the animal, but of the self. It's only taken from the self. It is not recommended, but can be used to "seal" a specific ritual.

Oh, well that's different then. We can do whatever we want to, to our own bodies. That's not the same as doing something to someone else's body.

I was referring to the blood of a victim. A victim wouldn't be sacrificed in a white magic ritual.

Interesting. Will read it tonight. =)

Here's more:

According to a growing body of new research investigating the human microbiome, who we are, biologically speaking, is much more diverse than we thought. The emerging findings indicate that our biological integrity and identity are intrinsically tied to the bacterial ecosystems, the communities living with us. Rather than an individual, separate body that is all “human,” the research indicates that we are more like a multi-organism ecosystem. “We need to start thinking of ourselves as super-organisms,” says Dr Julie Segre, senior investigator at the US N/ational Institute of Health.

...A biome is the total community of life occupying a major ecological zone or region, like a rain forest, desert, mountain range, fresh water marsh or a coral reef. A microbiome is a newer term, referring to ecological communities of microorganisms living in certain regions. The human microbiome is the collective genomes of all microorganisms present in or on the human body, from our skin to our lungs, from our mouth to the uro-genital tract. The biggest human microbiome ecosystem is in the gut.

Biologically, we live in a collective with microbial communities, trillions and trillions of them, without which there would be no cellular life.

...As the microbiome research progresses, the scientific thinking about the role of bacteria in human health is moving way past the simplistic view of bacteria as either pathologically dangerous or harmless squatters along for the ride. We’re learning how closely our bacterial communities are involved with the regulatory and information processing systems of our nervous system, endocrine and immune systems. There’s a continuous conversation, an ongoing non-stop stream of chemical signaling between our cells and systems and the bacterial communities living on us and in us. Our bodies are listening, talking and responding to the communication from these communities.

from http://www.ecology.com/2012/01/02/lives-...cosystems/

As far as STS entities using lower 2D entities (microbes) to do their bidding, Ra said that. I'd have to find the quote.

Please do.

I didn't find it on a quick search, sorry.

---

That is a very good place to start from! Now again... ask why? Is it really just chemicals in the brain? If so- how to recreate the same chemical response without the addictive substance? If not- then what is the addiction really about? What purpose does it serve? And how can we serve that purpose in a healthier way?

Absolutely. But those questions are still in the realm of emotional/mental.

Ah- but there you have it! Does the body truly say... cigarette, drink, candy? Or does the mind interpret the craving to mean these? I propose the latter.

That's still emotional/mental.

It could- if the above is taken into account. Is the meth/heroin craving really about meth/heroin? Or is that just what it appears to be on the surface? If our "addiction cure" is focused all around the meth/heroin... is that perhaps reinforcing the distortion which resulted in the addiction in the first place? Are we then at cross-purposes to ourselves?

That's still emotional/mental/spiritual stuff.

Not to downplay the intense struggles that drug addicts go through, or some of the other examples you gave... but I've used quite a number of substances along the whole spectrum. Never had any of these severe withdrawal symptoms. Why is this? Is my body "special"? Do I have a "non-addict" gene? Or is something else going on?

It has been proven that some people are more susceptible to addictions than others. They're called addictive personalities.

Back in the 70s I had a boyfriend who got me into amphetamines. After about a year, I realized I was getting addicted. So I quit. Done.

It wasn't so easy for him. He struggled way more than I did. I have no idea whether he ever even quit altogether.

He probably had an addictive personality, whereas I didn't.

There is a physical component here. Yes, the mind can override the physical - just look at psychic healing - but there is still a physical component that can't be dismissed.

What I am suggesting is that "asking why" will eventually lead one to the realization that the body is not really asking for soda... it is asking for something else which can just as easily be met by a non-soda item.

Well, have you had any luck getting smokers to substitute some food item or something, instead of a cigarette?

Right.. which is why I used the word "cacao" instead of chocolate.

I made the distinction because those reading this might not know the difference.

I agree with you, but your response is tangential to my point. The point is... what is naturally present in the coffee/cacao/tobacco that is driving the craving? What function does that serve? And can we serve that function in a better way.

Sure. But that's still in the realm of emotional/mental. Once those aspects are addressed, then the body can transform the physical. But until then, it's a physical thing. And some have a harder time than others, because of genetics etc.

Taken to an extreme example: We've all had the experience of mind over matter. Even the medical establishment acknowledges the placebo effect.

But there are limits. I've never heard of anyone using their mind to regrow an amputated limb, for example.

No, not the nicotine! The beta-carbolines!

Sorry, that was just a typo. I got that.

It is a different chemical. I'm just trying to say... NOTICE... how hardly anybody knows about beta-carbolines. We hear all about the caffeine, the nicotine, etc. Why no talk of the beta-carbolines? There is plenty of research on them.

Simple. Because the 559 toxic chemicals in cigarettes override any positive benefits from the beta-carbolines.

As I said before, beta-carbolines are what enhance the effect of DMT... and DMT is what causes us to feel that sense of interconnectedness or "spirituality" that we seek... indeed the seeking of this feeling is at the very root of addiction, IMO.

As a side note on tobacco. Yes- we have undeniably conclusive evidence that smoking has deleterious effects on the body. However, two questions I have about that:

1. Were any of these studies conducted using all-natural, unadulterated tobacco? Or were they done using processed tobacco laden with all sorts of artificial chemicals?

I agree on this point.

2. Why is it an "all or nothing" thing when it comes to smoking? Why only the checkbox? Smoker or nonsmoker? Black or white? Does a person who smokes 3 all-natural cigarettes a day really carry the same risk of one who smokes a pack of Marlboros? Why the oversimplification? Is this really a truthful/responsible communication coming from the medical community?

Probably because the vast majority of smokers are smoking the commercial, chemical-laden variety. Not the occasional peace pipe in a ceremony like the Native Americans did.

(Although, as an aside, there is plenty of speculation that it was actually marijuana in that peace pipe, not tobacco.)

We all know that Ra didn't demand anything. But I don't think that can be used as a justification, as in, "Ra didn't tell the Egyptians to quite eating animals, so it must be ok." Did Ra tell them to quit fighting too? There are myriad things Ra might or might not have told them. I don't see this as relevant.

You brought Ra into the discussion, now they are irrelevant to it?

I didn't say Ra was irrelevant. I said whether Ra mentioned meat or not, is irrelevant, because they didn't go around telling people what to do.

Now, we're getting somewhere!

Fascinating! But... plants have symbiotic relationships with microorganisms as well...

Yeah, I knew that was coming!

Yes, plants depend on microbes, but it's mostly outside the plant. As far as I could tell from the bit of research I've done on this, plants don't have the complex internal ecosystems like animals do.

Check out this article from a website devoted to microbes:

http://www.edu.pe.ca/southernkings/microhabitats.htm

It lists all the places microbes live, in great detail. In the oceans, in our bodies, on the air, even high up in the sky.

many animals have more microbe cells than they have animal cells living in or on them, it is as if animals developed as homes for microbes.

Why didn't this say plants and animals?

They describe how some microbes can survive frigid temperatures or even boiling water, and how microbes live in slimey, decaying plants. And here, they just mentioned how animals have more microbes than actual animal cells!

With so much detail, yet nowhere does it say microbes live inside plants. The only mention is decaying plants, and the roots of plants. Which makes sense, since the roots must convert nutrients from the soil into the plant. So of course microbes function there. But I couldn't find anything about microbes living inside the plant itself.

Not saying they don't; only that I didn't find anything about that.

I find this very interesting.

And yet the body requires this "decay" to occur in the gut in order to support life. A paradox!

Not really. What is actually decaying? The food that was eaten, and waste from the metabolic process. The cells are growing and constantly being replaced.

Not a single cell in our body is more than 7 years old. Yet, we are obviously different from a corpse rotting in the ground. No regeneration there - just decay. The difference between life and death, physically speaking.

I understand that. And thank you for respecting my guidance system.

Yes! Do you know this is nearly all I work with in my practice? And I didn't set out for it to be that way... I started promoting as weight loss, hormone balance, and infertility... the universe brought me people with gut issues.

Cool!

Well I wonder whether plants have probiotic colonies inside...? hmmm...

The 2D entities can use us to do their bidding as well. Research has confirmed that gut bacteria can actually influence our personality, resulting in behaviors which we might not otherwise participate... including food choices.

That's on a physical level, yes indeed. But, knowing what we know about 2D entities - that they haven't developed individual sentience yet - and knowing what we know about higher STS entities using lower 2D entities to do their bidding - my guess is that behind the microbes is an STS entity, controlling them. (Somebody's gotta do the dirty work! That is how STS entities serve the Creator.)

We know that there are 'good' bacteria and 'bad' bacteria, right? So it makes sense to me that the colony of 'bad' bacteria are up to no good.

And we know that all the individual bacteria of any given strain, function as a single organism; ie. all the staph bacteria together, all over the world, collectively have a single consciousness.

[Ankh]

Interesting. Will read it tonight. =)

Here's more:

Just read it, and huh - I thought that it would be about:

AND, because the dead body still has trillions upon trillions of various microbes, available for the taking. The STS 'black magician' can now feast on these lower 2D entities, and get them to do their bidding.

That's what I was specifically interested in. Could you please direct me to the underlined information?

[Monica]

That's what I was specifically interested in. Could you please direct me to the underlined information?

The word feast was from me, based on what I read from Ra. I don't remember the quote. It wasn't in those exact words.

[Tenet Nosce]

Just came across this while searching for something else... I post it because it is relevant rather than an endorsement of the views contained therein.

Oldest Evidence of Stone Tool Use and Meat-Eating Among Human Ancestors Discovered: Lucy's Species Butchered Meat

---

We know that there are 'good' bacteria and 'bad' bacteria, right? So it makes sense to me that the colony of 'bad' bacteria are up to no good.

In a nutshell... the "bad" bacteria compete with us for resources and produce waste which is toxic to our bodies, while the "good" bacteria feed upon what the body doesn't use and produce waste which is healthful to our bodies.

Example: Many gut bacteria digest fiber in the diet and make a "waste product" called butyric acid. This molecule, in turn, helps to stabilize our DNA while it is being replicated, and preventing changes which could lead to a cancerous state. So here is an example whereby if we simply ignore, or attempt to bypass this natural symbiosis, the result is eventually death of the body.

The fiber is -so- important to this process which is why I am skeptical of juicing for really long periods of time. Not unless it is known that the gut ecology is robust and healthy before starting.

That's still emotional/mental.

Certainly there are mental/emotional aspects to consider. But there is also the physical. Which is what I am attempting to get at.

Example: Mountain Dew contains bromine, which is chemically similar to iodine. For an iodine-deficient person, their body's cries for iodine could be translated into a perceived craving for Mountain Dew.

I used to be a Mountain Dew junkie. It wasn't the sugar because a Pepsi didn't do it. It wasn't the caffeine because strong coffee didn't satiate the craving. Turns out to be the bromine was the closest thing to iodine in my diet especially since I stopped eating foods with iodized salt added. (Thinking this was a healthy choice, of course!) Also wasn't eating any seafood because I didn't feel I could afford it on my college student's budget (somehow there always was room in the budget for beer and pot) and sea vegetables weren't even on the radar at that time. Bottom line is, I "Did the Dew" fairly well into naturopathic school until I "stumbled upon" some organic iodine drops and realized that even though I still craved caffeine... I wasn't craving Mountain Dew.

---

Well, have you had any luck getting smokers to substitute some food item or something, instead of a cigarette?

I don't work too much with that... however I do know that auricular acupuncture can be quite effective at helping to break the addiction...

(Although, as an aside, there is plenty of speculation that it was actually marijuana in that peace pipe, not tobacco.)

Prolly a mix!

Yes, plants depend on microbes, but it's mostly outside the plant. As far as I could tell from the bit of research I've done on this, plants don't have the complex internal ecosystems like animals do.

Technically speaking, the digestive tract is outside the body. It is like the hole in the middle of a torus. But I get what you are saying.

Well I wonder whether plants have probiotic colonies inside...? hmmm...

My guess would be yes. It is a recurring theme in creation... entities within entities... kind of goes along with densities within densities.

[Tenet Nosce]

My guess would be yes. It is a recurring theme in creation... entities within entities... kind of goes along with densities within densities.

Fastidious Vascular-Colonizing Bacteria

Most phytopathogenic bacteria invade their host plants through natural openings or wounds, colonizing intercellular spaces, expressing virulence factors and inducing various host plant responses. A few, however, are introduced directly into the sugar-rich phloem sieve tubes or into the water-transporting xylem elements by vascular-feeding insects.

Their location within living (sieve tubes) or degenerated (xylem elements) plant cells, rather than in intercellular spaces, offers different challenges and opportunities for them to avoid the host plant's defense system. In addition, many of the plant vascular-inhabiting bacteria establish intimate relationships. These relationships may be beneficial or deleterious with the insects that transmit them from plant to plant.

[Shemaya]

As I said before, beta-carbolines are what enhance the effect of DMT... and DMT is what causes us to feel that sense of interconnectedness or "spirituality" that we seek... indeed the seeking of this feeling is at the very root of addiction, IMO.

Therefore... why so quick to label these things as "bad"? Is there an agenda behind this? Perhaps to keep us from understanding something important about how the body works? At the very least, you must admit that humans have had a very close relationship with coffee/cacao/tobacco throughout our evolutionary process. Is there a reason for this other than "addiction"?

Awesome insight, TN, makes so much sense....not only the root of addiction, but probably the root of so many other mental/emotional/ and physical pathologies. Really interesting thought.

Great discussion on the microbes Monica and all, wish I had time to really delve into it.

[Monica]

Some things to ponder:

1. What is the significance of blood of animals being red and the 'blood' of plants being green?

2. Blood is a biohazard.

[3DMonkey]

"Blood meal, bone meal, and other animal by-products are permitted in certified organic production as soil amendments, though they cannot be fed to organic livestock. Blood meal is different from bone meal in that blood meal contains a much higher amount of nitrogen, while bone meal contains phosphorus"

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_meal

---

http://boards.cannabis.com/organic-growi...lizer.html

"My wife has been using a diva cup instead of tampons or pads, and suggested using it as a fertilizer."

---

I'm thinking we could "give blood" on a regular basis to our gardens. Symbiotic.

---

I invite you to listen to last week's radio show. Carla talked about the concept of 'right and wrong' while in 3D. She didn't talk about food, but did talk about right and wrong.

I read her blog, and know that she enjoys Burger King Whoppers.

That's irrelevant to my point. I wasn't referring to Carla's diet. I was referring to what she said about the concept of right and wrong in 3D.

It is relevant to the thread. When it is suggested that vegetarianism is a more evolved existence, it is prudent to point out that the person from whose mouth came the spiritual writings we all admire would be classified as less evolved by self proclaimed more evolved admirers.

[Shemaya]

It usually comes from cattle as a slaughterhouse by-product

Good point Monkey, even certified organic produce may be grown using slaughterhouse by-products. It really is a tangled web that we live in. Is there a way to assure that organic produce bought in a store is not grown this way? Don't know if this was already discussed, still haven't found the answer to my pet food question, but I did read all about yossarian's banana/papaya/spinach diet.

Austin, do farmers use these types of products frequently, or just sometimes, or rarely?

If you know your local farmer, he can assure you, but even then its possible he has fertilizer products that aren't labeled and he may be unaware of their origins.

So does that mean organic produce (grown with blood meal fertilizer products) has the energy of the horror and death of the slaughterhouse ? So should we eat non-organic, sacrificing our own bodies health with toxic chemicals, but avoiding contributing to the profits made from the death and horror of the slaughterhouse?

I have found in my own life that there is so much resistance to thinking about issues like this around me, and very difficult to carry the weight of this on one person's shoulders living in a community of unawakened other-selves. Especially when there is a host of other issues and "battles" to address everyday, just to live and maintain health and wellness for a family. Just to earn a living to pay the bills!

[Ankh]

That's what I was specifically interested in. Could you please direct me to the underlined information?

The word feast was from me, based on what I read from Ra. I don't remember the quote. It wasn't in those exact words.

Another word that you used was the word "bid". I searched on the lawofone.info, both the word "bid" and "magic", and didn't come across any bidding done between third and second density. There is a bidding between a third and fourth density though. Perhaps you mixed it up?

[BrownEye]

So does that mean organic produce (grown with blood meal fertilizer products) has the energy of the horror and death of the slaughterhouse ? So should we eat non-organic, sacrificing our own bodies health with toxic chemicals, but avoiding contributing to the profits made from the death and horror of the slaughterhouse?

No.

Plants transmute our death and war back into life as a way to continue the life of this planet. We do a good job attempting to end the ability of this planet to host life, but the transformational ability of plant life continues.

I feel at home in the forests, looking down at the cities from a distance. In the city it just feels as if I am a cog in a machine. Synthetic, unnatural.

I find it interesting how many people feel alien to nature.