Bring4th

The act of eating is a service. Is eating a selfish act (STS) or a communal act (STO) ? I choose communion.

Threads are getting nuked...

(05-15-2012, 01:54 PM)Valtor Wrote: [ -> ]The act of eating is a service. Is eating a selfish act (STS) or a communal act (STO) ? I choose communal.

PS: I just had to get this out of my system. You can nuke this thread now if you want.

I would like to discuss this, but the "omnivorous" thread just got nuked. What is going on here?

(05-15-2012, 01:54 PM)Valtor Wrote: [ -> ]The act of eating is a service. Is eating a selfish act (STS) or a communal act (STO) ? I choose communal.

PS: I just had to get this out of my system. You can nuke this thread now if you want.

OMG I am laughing so hard right now

My first post above was just about to be posted in Shin'Ar's thread when... poof ! So I just wanted to get it out and maybe with a bit of luck manage to start a discussion on eating that is fruitful (pun intended ).

I am sure that there are some aspects of this subject that we can all discuss without getting into what we actually eat.

Discussing why there is a need to eat in the first place could be useful.

Or maybe that's too optimistic?

Quote:The act of eating is a service. Is eating a selfish act (STS) or a communal act (STO) ? I choose communal.

I don't find that it is possible to do STS, it would either be depolarizing or polarizing STO.

(05-15-2012, 02:03 PM)Valtor Wrote: [ -> ]My first post above was just about to be posted in Shin'Ar's thread when... poof ! So I just wanted to get it out and maybe with a bit of luck manage to start a discussion on eating that is fruitful (pun intended ).

I am sure that there are some aspects of this subject that we can all discuss without getting into what we actually eat.

Discussing why there is a need to eat in the first place could be useful.

Or maybe that's too optimistic?

Please, somebody explain to me why the subject is "not allowed." This is censorship for no apparent good reason. I would like to hear from the moderators what the heck is going on here. Members obviously WANT to talk about this.

I think maybe they are aware of certain energies behind the scenes.

If that is the case then this is fully understandable.

Click on the image to enlarge...



Sorry for the shoddy artsmanship. Time was of the essence!

BOTH/AND > EITHER/OR

According to Ra, eating in 4th density is much more a communal act in between the food (other-self) and the self than it is in 3d. Ra stated that 4d food is much more full of life and that there is understanding in between food and self.

(05-15-2012, 02:03 PM)Valtor Wrote: [ -> ]My first post above was just about to be posted in Shin'Ar's thread when... poof ! So I just wanted to get it out and maybe with a bit of luck manage to start a discussion on eating that is fruitful (pun intended ).

I am sure that there are some aspects of this subject that we can all discuss without getting into what we actually eat.

Discussing why there is a need to eat in the first place could be useful.

Or maybe that's too optimistic?

Well I thought so too. I was glad to see that Shin'Ar was probing more deeply, rather than rehashing the same arguments over and over.

From the Homecoming 2010 notes:

(We are all doing our homework, right?)

Quote:The point here is simply that these people are once again retreating into the dualism of the Piscean Age. By reinforcing that dualism they make growth beyond this dualism impossible.

We need a new way of looking at the world that transcends the limitations of the entire Piscean age, not merely the latest part of it. It must go beyond Good and Evil, beyond the limited idea of history and beyond the terrible split between Humanity and Nature. The goals must be consciousness and love. The first allows us to see what truly is and the second allows us to embrace it joyfully.

(05-15-2012, 02:13 PM)Valtor Wrote: [ -> ]According to Ra, eating in 4th density is much more a communal act in between the food (other-self) and the self than it is in 3d. Ra stated that 4d food is much more full of life and that there is understanding in between food and self.

This happens now in certain communities. If you ever shift perspective you will suddenly say "AHA!"

---

And yeah, 4D is communist.

The "deeper question" I offered was: Is it possible for physical lifeforms to exist such that the biochemical processes of one only act to support those in all others?

I also happened to notice this "deeper question" was quickly being buried under the "same old arguments" again.

Also- if it is indeed possible for those "food replicator" thingies ala Star Trek to exist, why not focus on how to make that happen, rather than trying to CONTROL others? In consideration of the fact that a mere 5% of the population is vegetarian, it seems highly unlikely that we would be able to force the other 95% into behaving otherwise.

An intriguing thought: There is evidence that this type of technology previously existed here on Earth, but since was lost due to the notion that it should only be available to the "spiritually pure". I wonder how we could avoid a repeat of that scenario, if indeed it ever existed.

My current perspective is that eating is a communion.

---

(05-15-2012, 02:25 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]...
Also- if it is indeed possible for those "food replicator" thingies ala Star Trek to exist, why not focus on how to make that happen, rather than trying to CONTROL others? In consideration of the fact that a mere 5% of the population is vegetarian, it seems highly unlikely that we would be able to force the other 95% into behaving otherwise.

An intriguing thought: There is evidence that this type of technology previously existed here on Earth, but since was lost due to the notion that it should only be available to the "spiritually pure". I wonder how we could avoid a repeat of that scenario, if indeed it ever existed.

Technology could shift this indeed. Either by changing our physical vehicle or by transmuting light/love (energy) directly into what would sustain us.

(05-15-2012, 02:25 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]Also- if it is indeed possible for those "food replicator" thingies ala Star Trek to exist, why not focus on how to make that happen, rather than trying to CONTROL others? In consideration of the fact that a mere 5% of the population is vegetarian, it seems highly unlikely that we would be able to force the other 95% into behaving otherwise.

If light is information, and radiating light is just radiating information, the amount of light being connected to the amount of compassion coupled with knowledge, how does that become "control"?

We already have the tech for artificial food: http://www.fakefoodonline.com/

(05-15-2012, 02:39 PM)Pickle Wrote: [ -> ]If light is information, and radiating light is just radiating information, the amount of light being connected to the amount of compassion coupled with knowledge, how does that become "control"?

Well... if only certain sources of light/information are radiated while other sources are willfully held back (ie we will only promote thoughts and ideas which support our agenda, while ignoring, limiting, or loudly squawking over, those viewpoints which contradict our agenda), then that would constitute manipulation- which is a form of control.

If we freely shared all available sources of light/information on a topic, and then encouraged our audience to weigh the entire body of information against their own inner guidance, then that wouldn't be control.

For example, if we were to a priori define "compassion" in a specific way, so as to preemptively exclude different understandings of "compassion", that would be control. If we encouraged others to seek compassion on their own terms and timeline, and then trusted that they would be eventually led to what we believe it means (because of course we are right about it ), that wouldn't be control.

(05-15-2012, 02:47 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]If we freely shared all available sources of light/information on a topic, and then encouraged our audience to weigh the entire body of information against their own inner guidance, then that wouldn't be control.

That is actually what needs to be done. The problem is that most people are not interested in actual inner guidance, or they will only take guidance from a specific "body" that is not exactly "on a path". Say for example the emotional body or the mental body. This is very common as well. "Intuition" has a multitude of sources.

All paths leads to the source and all is well always. I think I will seriously explore the current state of how tech could feed us. I never actually looked into this. This should be fun !

(05-15-2012, 02:56 PM)Pickle Wrote: [ -> ]That is actually what needs to be done. The problem is that most people are not interested in actual inner guidance, or they will only take guidance from a specific "body" that is not exactly "on a path". Say for example the emotional body or the mental body. This is very common as well. "Intuition" has a multitude of sources.

Agreed. Only I would add that those who are not interested in seeking inner guidance should be left alone to reap the fruits thereof. Also- those of us who feel that we have clear inner guidance on a subject would do well to keep in mind that what constitutes good guidance for us at one time, may not be so good for another at another time. Quite often, one's path is purposely designed to take them on a seeming sidetrack or dead end in order to fulfill a greater purpose in the big picture. An example would be- recovered drug addicts tend to carry more weight with current users than somebody who has never used before.

(05-15-2012, 02:06 PM)Diana Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-15-2012, 02:03 PM)Valtor Wrote: [ -> ]My first post above was just about to be posted in Shin'Ar's thread when... poof ! So I just wanted to get it out and maybe with a bit of luck manage to start a discussion on eating that is fruitful (pun intended ).

I am sure that there are some aspects of this subject that we can all discuss without getting into what we actually eat.

Discussing why there is a need to eat in the first place could be useful.

Or maybe that's too optimistic?

Please, somebody explain to me why the subject is "not allowed." This is censorship for no apparent good reason. I would like to hear from the moderators what the heck is going on here. Members obviously WANT to talk about this.

Hi, Diana

The subject is allowed. But up to this point (and we're actually getting closer with these recent threads because the process espoused by new ways of thinking - that is many people in a community becoming aware of an issue and directing their conscious attention towards solving it for the good of all, is being played out), the topic has not been discussed in a harmonious manner consistent with the guidelines.

It is the honor and duty of a moderator when a thread is experiencing discord to fix the situation in the most balanced way possible. The people within the thread and even the topic being discussed are secondary to this concern of keeping the peace and harmony in this sacred space of sharing and seeking which is so dear to our hearts.

I'm not saying these things should not be taken into consideration! They are another layer of this catalyst.

The goal is to allow these energies to come together and be discussed in a mutually beneficial and harmonious way. As you said, members want to talk about this. The energies are seeking to be expressed. But it is the moderators' duty to see that this expression is not harmful to the body of Bring4th.

One idea that was emerging towards the end of the meat thread was to kind of make group posts representing ideas for finality. The idea was present to capitalize on this by organizing the effort and allowing it to happen on the meat thread. However, we also thought that to organize the effort in that specific way would in fact encourage division, and to take the view away from the big picture. (by big picture I mean what Tenet Nosce is often saying about how there is no right and wrong in this - every situation and diet and person is absolutely unique)

So discussion stalled out on that and we are now trying to brainstorm on that plan while simultaneously watching what is developing here and trying to deal with it in the most balanced way.

Our highest and best selves would like to see all of us put our conscious efforts together and harmonize on this catalyst. So... what's your input? And anyone reading this? How can these things be respectfully and carefully discussed without damaging the wellbeing of our site and community? How can we come together on this?

I might move this post and the subsequent discussion to the Cognitive Distortions thread if warranted.

(05-15-2012, 03:04 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]Only I would add that those who are not interested in seeking inner guidance should be left alone to reap the fruits thereof.

I have run into a different experience. The paths can be quickened from the right interactions and "awareness" of interaction. I notice this when a persons inner self will communicate with me, but the person chooses to ignore what transpires. What happens is a type of karma effect that forces them to take notice. It effectively speeds up catalyst. They may never "get it", and this effect just follows them demanding that they take action.

(05-15-2012, 03:12 PM)Pickle Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-15-2012, 03:04 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]Only I would add that those who are not interested in seeking inner guidance should be left alone to reap the fruits thereof.

I have run into a different experience. The paths can be quickened from the right interactions and "awareness" of interaction. I notice this when a persons inner self will communicate with me, but the person chooses to ignore what transpires. What happens is a type of karma effect that forces them to take notice. It effectively speeds up catalyst. They may never "get it", and this effect just follows them demanding that they take action.

Ah, so you insert your own ego as an intermediary between another person and their own inner guidance. Interesting perspective. Hey, if it works, then great! I would only note that it kind of sounds like what various priests/pastors/gurus have been doing for thousands of years and it hasn't seemed to work out all that well, all things considered. If I'm not mistaken, this sort of relationship has led to much adversity, war, genocide, and other bellicosities. Not to mention when it backfires on the priests/pastors/gurus when their advice is followed without the promised result.

---

My apologies if I am beating a dead carrot, but:

Quote:The "deeper question" I offered was: Is it possible for physical lifeforms to exist such that the biochemical processes of one only act to support those in all others?

I just thought it a highly relevant question. Nobody wants to discuss? Or is there perhaps a concern that the contemplation of this might lead the discussion in a direction that we have pre-determined to be "unacceptable"?

(05-15-2012, 03:17 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]My apologies if I am beating a dead carrot, but:

Quote:The "deeper question" I offered was: Is it possible for physical lifeforms to exist such that the biochemical processes of one only act to support those in all others?

I just thought it a highly relevant question. Nobody wants to discuss? Or is there perhaps a concern that the contemplation of this might lead the discussion in a direction that we have pre-determined to be "unacceptable"?

I actually posted an answer to this, but then I deleted it. I did not yet find a way to word it in a way that would not go into discussing stuff like 2d eating 1d+light/love to grow. But then I realized I did not want to talk about what we eat, including what some 2d bacteria eat.

So instead I try to find info on technology that we currently have that would make it possible for us to sustain ourselves without ending any incarnations. Tech that would allow us to eat 1d basically.

I understand the mods. I can't see how to discuss this. :-/

Seriously, you can just delete the thread. I'll post something in a science/tech thread one day...

(05-15-2012, 03:26 PM)Valtor Wrote: [ -> ]Tech that would allow us to eat 1d basically.

The body can create a vitamin, it cannot create a mineral. Any thoughts there?

(05-15-2012, 03:31 PM)Pickle Wrote: [ -> ]The body can create a vitamin, it cannot create a mineral. Any thoughts there?

Newly Discovered Bacterium Forms Intracellular Minerals

Quote:ScienceDaily (May 11, 2012) — A new species of photosynthetic bacterium has come to light: it is able to control the formation of minerals (calcium, magnesium, barium and strontium carbonates) within its own organism. Published in Science on April 27, 2012, a study by French researchers[1] reveals the existence of this new type of biomineralization, whose mechanism is still unknown. This finding has important implications for the interpretation of the ancient fossil record.

(05-15-2012, 03:31 PM)Pickle Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-15-2012, 03:26 PM)Valtor Wrote: [ -> ]Tech that would allow us to eat 1d basically.

The body can create a vitamin, it cannot create a mineral. Any thoughts there?

I guess that eating a mineral (1d) or building a house with it would both be welcomed catalyst by said mineral.

(05-15-2012, 02:03 PM)Valtor Wrote: [ -> ]My first post above was just about to be posted in Shin'Ar's thread when... poof ! So I just wanted to get it out and maybe with a bit of luck manage to start a discussion on eating that is fruitful (pun intended ).

I am sure that there are some aspects of this subject that we can all discuss without getting into what we actually eat.

Discussing why there is a need to eat in the first place could be useful.

Or maybe that's too optimistic?

Yes. My "benefits of vegetarianism" was nuked.

(05-15-2012, 03:04 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: [ -> ]Only I would add that those who are not interested in seeking inner guidance should be left alone to reap the fruits thereof.

Absolutely. BUT, if they seek us out, then they are, on some level, choosing our input. A Jehovah's Witness knocking on my door is inviting my opinion, not asking to be left alone. If s/he wanted to be left alone, s/he wouldn't be knocking on my door.

---

(05-15-2012, 05:20 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: [ -> ]Yes. My "benefits of vegetarianism" was nuked.

What!!! Even though it was one-sided, and focused only on the positive, rather than on debate, it was nuked?