In regards to eating meat

[Monica]

I didn't understand that there are different selves within one mind/body/spirit complex.

?? I didn't say that.

That "mememememe" as you've put it, is the material for understanding.

What I meant by "memememe" is focusing on self and self's desires. "Me!"

In my analogy, "Spanish" = compassion. Just one compassion, without division of it.

The vegetarians keep saying, "compassion is compassion, whether for human or animal" but the meater-eaters keep talking about compassion to humans, while making excuses for not feeling compassion for animals. So where is the division?

Again, Ra in sixth density. We are third density. Here, you have maybe more knowledge about this, but less about that, and we are also veiled, so here, in the third density, we both teach/learn and learn/teach on equal ground.

Ankh, if we are all teaching and learning the exact same things, then we wouldn't need each other.

If you and I both have exactly the same lessons to learn, then we wouldn't be learning from each other.

Yes, we are equal - one is not better or more evolved than the other, as Pab and I have both said many times - but the type of things we are learning, vs the type of things we are teaching, are different.

Maybe I have more compassion towards animals, but maybe you have more patience, or wisdom, or whatever. I can learn from you just as much as you can learn from me.

But it won't be exactly the same thing. That cannot be, because you and I are different.

I see it more in colors of: when you know more of something there is less of knowledge/understanding about something else. If you are interested in learning, you are at the same time teaching, and vice versa. There is of course no teach/learning, or learn/teaching, when it is not desired by the self.

Agreed. Then you have just said what I was saying: We have different degrees of understanding of different things. Maybe I have more of something, and you have more of something else. Together, we can balance.

But we don't have exactly the same of everything. Then we wouldn't learn from each other.

Compassion towards animals is one of those things.

Why attack at all?

That's a good question. One that I have been asking for 3 years now, and I'm getting weary of asking it.

You just agreed and then said that one side did this/that?

Because it's still happening.

I am. I am hopefully doing a dang good job as a mom to a five year old, and as a nurse at a hospice, physically alleviating sufferings of other selves. I am hopefully also doing alright when sharing love/light to others around me, and recycling, and saving the power, the water and the paper, not owning any car, but taking walks and public transportations instead, and more. But there are probably others who do more, and who do less. We do what we can.

The vegetarians cannot approve or disapprove the actions of another person. That is for each person to decide for themselves. I'm sure we all do many good deeds. I don't think it's relevant to our choice about whether to support the torture and killing of animals. That is simply a choice we make.

Not sure how that fits into this discussion here.

In Pablisimo's analogy, choosing to eat meat, knowing that the animal was tortured and brutally killed, and then "radiating love" to the animal...

is akin to:

Blowing a frog up with a firecracker and then radiating love to the frog.

Yes, radiating love can bring healing. But why blow it up in the first place? Wouldn't it be more efficient to just not blow up the frog at all?

Couple of times I've read that if everybody would go veg there would be a much better world. Do you agree with what I've just said? If so, is that not a desire based on the feelings to alter and/or remake our current society?

The result may be the same, but the motivation is different.

The motivation is driven by compassion for the oppressed, NOT the desire to control others.

That is the difference.

I am sure that whether meat-eater or non-meat-eater, each being is doing the best s/he can, as it is known to the self. In regards to the names you've mentioned, these people were fighting for different causes, and except for Gandhi (who I believe was born into a brahmanian family who are vegetarians by religion), I am not sure that these entities were vegetarians? Do you know that they were vegetarians?

I seem to be failing to convey my point.

It doesn't matter whether they were vegetarians or not. We were talking about taking action, as opposed to just working on 'self.'

I listed those people, as examples of highly-regarded spiritual leaders who were also activists. They didn't just focus on self. They took action.