[split] "Some people eat animals, some don't."

[Jade]

Hmm, to the point of 'consuming the trauma', I am a practicing internal alchemist and I believe that such energy can be transmuted in to higher frequencies.

The way I see it that trauma can either go in to the Earth and take its time slowly returning to a higher energy state, or I can take it and transmute it many times faster than would happen in the natural process of nature so I see it that through transmutation I am raising the vibration of suffering. Without this transmutation then yes I would agree that you are simply consuming this energy and it is processed at a low energy level.

There is an old saying of the alchemist, 'Nature unaided fails.' This means that evolution must be taken to a conscious level for nature to grow beyond its base levels and functions.

Thus, what happens to the energy in the body is of prime importance, perhaps moreso than the state of the energy coming in. Even good, positive energy can be made negative once it is inside your system. Receiving 'good' energy doesn't necessarily mean it will stay as good energy, just as 'bad' energy won't necessarily stay as bad energy.

Of course not. But to the unconscious, there are analogs. Not everyone can vibrate at such a steady point and hold their own vibrations with such ease - you have worked very long and hard to be able to produce such results. Others who are less protected can be very affected by the energy exchange.

Do you enjoy your service of transmutation so much that you wish to see factory farms perpetuated? Do you think the only/best/or most efficient way to transmute the trauma is to first consume it literally? I don't mean these questions to be loaded, I'm just curious to what your motivations are to continue this service, as it is a unique one.

[Aion]

Objective-subjective nature of reality can make an interesting twist on the functions of polarizing.

Not so much energetically, but polarity wise.

Try not to mix them up, there is a subtle difference.

You're not wrong if you desire pure or 'clean' energy to avoid eating meat, ESPECIALLY slaughtered animals..   same goes for plants poorly cared for, crudely handled, and artificial foods.

Of course, methods are methods. Also, I understand that all things are energy and made from energy so how would polarity not be related to energy? I understand polarity as being a particular property of intelligent energy, so I'm not sure what you mean. Could you be more specific?

[The_Tired_Philosopher]

There's subtlety.  Can anyone in this thread say what is and isn't service, polarizing, or depolarizing for you?

For me?

How about for themselves?

It is 'Work in Consciousness'. What works for you?

[Aion]

Aha Well, I agree with you although I'm not sure everyone will. I get what you mean though.

[Aion]

Hmm, to the point of 'consuming the trauma', I am a practicing internal alchemist and I believe that such energy can be transmuted in to higher frequencies.

The way I see it that trauma can either go in to the Earth and take its time slowly returning to a higher energy state, or I can take it and transmute it many times faster than would happen in the natural process of nature so I see it that through transmutation I am raising the vibration of suffering. Without this transmutation then yes I would agree that you are simply consuming this energy and it is processed at a low energy level.

There is an old saying of the alchemist, 'Nature unaided fails.' This means that evolution must be taken to a conscious level for nature to grow beyond its base levels and functions.

Thus, what happens to the energy in the body is of prime importance, perhaps moreso than the state of the energy coming in. Even good, positive energy can be made negative once it is inside your system. Receiving 'good' energy doesn't necessarily mean it will stay as good energy, just as 'bad' energy won't necessarily stay as bad energy.

Of course not. But to the unconscious, there are analogs. Not everyone can vibrate at such a steady point and hold their own vibrations with such ease - you have worked very long and hard to be able to produce such results. Others who are less protected can be very affected by the energy exchange.

Do you enjoy your service of transmutation so much that you wish to see factory farms perpetuated? Do you think the only/best/or most efficient way to transmute the trauma is to first consume it literally? I don't mean these questions to be loaded, I'm just curious to what your motivations are to continue this service, as it is a unique one.

Well, yes, I can acknowledge that I have worked intentionally for a long time on my practices and like I have said before I want to be clear that I am not making a 'recommendation' of method, rather just showing that the spectrum is wide in terms of possible methods and sharing my own discoveries. My intention here isn't to convince people of my practices but rather to share genuinely my experience.

Although I know you do not intend it, your questions are a little convoluted, but they are reasonable for what you are asking. I have no desire to see factory farming of either plants or animals. I do not do my service out of pleasure but out of love. I do this because I believe it is effective.

I can't say the overall 'best' method because it would vary from individual to individual. Everyone's system of energy works a bit differently. However, I can explain to you why that is my approach. You may be familiar with the Christian concept of 'sacramental wafers', consecrated food which is supposed to represent the purified flesh of Christ. Without any of the Christian elements I believe that all food can be consecrated and made sacred.

There are two methods for doing this, either externally or internally. I actually use both but internally is my main method. I can transmute the trauma externally but that only completes half of the work. That just harmonizes the energy with itself, but doesn't necessarily integrate it with the collective field. That is something I can do internally is put the energy 'back in the matrix' fresh, but with some new intentions.

This is a bit of a long winded explanation so forgive me.

The energy that comes from anywhere begins in the Creator. That is the first thing that must be recognized. The second thing that must be recognized is that energy always ends up back with the Creator. What we know of as form is the process of energy traveling from Creator to Creator. Everything in existence is a microcosm of this process.

Thus the same is true for eating. I could maybe try to draw the energy out or to push and project it in order to bring it back in to communion with the Creator but the quickest and most direct way is to go within, thereby unifying the energy and food with myself, completing the circuit of Creator to Creator. In doing so, I temporarily take on the suffering of the animal and it is reflected in my personal consciousness.

This is where it gets a little confusing and perhaps uncomfortable. I believe that you cannot actually get rid of trauma or suffering, but rather they are actually energies which are only seemingly negative in the lower end of the spectrum. When we say trauma, what do we mean? We mean that the entity is enduring ongoing suffering catalyzed by an experience. Trauma is always related to an event.

As it has been said before, what is the energy that is in animals or plants when they are treated poorly? The energy tends to be highly distorted red and orange ray energies, usually twisted in to fear and emotional pain. However, these energies are not 'stuck' like that, they are just operating at a particular level. So the first work is to untangle and undistort the energy as much as possible. This involves taking my consciousness and translating the energy through it. In this way I can 'filter' the contents of the energy through my system and relate it to myself.

This would be a good point to mention that consumption is the quickest way to merge an energy with yourself. In otherwords, once you take that energy in, the universe then recognizes it as your own energy. Thus, if it becomes your energy and you take in that trauma without any transmutation then the energy of that trauma will also go towards compounding and energizing your own traumas and pain. Hence why I believe so many unfortunate health issues have been linked to meat is because the individual's blockages are being added to by the distorted energy.

So, in taking in that energy and it becoming myself I then can transmute it by balancing its opposites. I start by first addressing the red-ray and its form of suffering which is survival based. Then I address the orange-ray form of suffering which are issued of self with self and then so on to yellow where I will address the social level of suffering. As you can see I don't ignore or try to change the suffering but rather suffering is something which can be experienced on all levels of the self. So instead I seek to apprehend the suffering on all the levels it exists.

All of this is basically the set up to the actual transmutation which takes place in the heart and happens through forgiveness. In taking on all of the suffering of the creature I have created within myself a microcosm of the suffering of all other creatures who suffer. That is recognized by the Creator and by the higher self of the animal whom has experienced the trauma. Across space and time the universe recognizes us as One.

In this, there is forgiveness, both of myself and from the animal. The key thing is that once this transmutation has taken place I do not keep the energy for myself but rather I send it back to the soul of the animal. The energy I return to the soul of the animal is its own energy which is now untangled. The higher self of the animal will usually receive this and it will basically catalyze the healing process for the animal in an instant rather than it taking much time in between lives. This allows the animal to resume its experience, but with the added awareness of the balancing of energy which has taken place. Thus when the creature incarnates next it will be able to do so without the distortions of trauma and also will not have to go through that experience again because the catalyst will have been used.

In a nutshell, I've basically learned that investment in the lower densities by higher densities doesn't have to just be an interaction of incarnate entities but can happen from any level to any level. So, what I am actually doing is investing in the consciousness of animal souls so that they can progress more quickly to third density while also offering opportunity in doing so to be drawn towards the positive polarity. Thus, I take the suffering and turn it in to a catalyst for self-awareness and positive polarization and then offer it back to the souls who experienced the suffering. The only way for any soul to cease suffering is through forgiveness. I think there are lots of animals which seek forgiveness of their traumas but due to a lack of awareness are unable to apprehend how. As such, I provide the process as a proxy. I cannot actually destroy or remove suffering, no one can, all we can do to stop the wheels of karma is to work towards forgiveness. In forgiveness we let go of suffering.

So by the end of my transmutation I have forgiven myself, the animal has forgiven me, and the Creator unifies with itself in bliss in recognition of its Oneness.

This service is functional. The purpose is to transmute suffering in the planetary mind so that lower levels of suffering are no longer needed. This may be a strange thought to some. The sufferings that animals and plants experience are mainly of the lower rays but suffering exists up through all the levels.

The level I bring it to is the fourth because the suffering of the heart is that of lack of forgiveness and lack of love. It is here that trauma is truly healed. However there is also suffering of the higher centers too. Suffering of the blue-ray may be that of a difficulty expressing oneself. You see, I in many ways correlate 'blockages' with forms of suffering.

The problem is that the world is still suffering at the very low levels, red and orange ray and so these become the dominant events through which suffering occurs on the planet. Suffering will not cease, but it can be balanced. A balanced center is no longer suffering. The next center is then prioritized. The suffering of the next center is then balanced and so on and so forth.

Therefore, I am working to raise the 'average level of suffering' up out of the red and orange rays and in to higher rays by taking those lower levels of suffering in, transmuting them to higher levels, then inserting them back in to the planetary mind. Doing this once or twice may not seem very significant or impactful but when you begin to do it every day it accumulates.

You may ask, how will this help to improve the conditions for animals? Well, the reason humans treat animals so poorly is because they are suffering on the same levels. The reason humans cause suffering to others on red and orange is because they are suffering that way. I mean this on a planetary scale as obviously it varies from individual to individual, but you could basically put it that I am reading the violet ray of the planet.

Thus, by transmuting the lowest levels to be higher I am slowly helping to raise the spectrum or bandwidth of the average consciousness in to higher centers of awareness and thus working to resolve the suffering in the human species mind which will mean less charge towards behaviour which reflects that suffering on to others.

The thing is though is that I am working on a large timescale. While the approach of abstinence does appear to be more effective for changing behaviours short term, I see it that I am dealing with the long term mental health of the planet. At this point I am just trying to 'catch up' because the mental health of the planet is already very low level. However, in the long run the hope and idea is to assist the planet through its transition period which is difficult because of the trauma of the planet.

In the end, I think I believed that eating was in itself a negative consumption of love but that is negative wisdom of separation. In truth there is only one system, one way and one continuous flow from Creator to Creator. That flow is always happening. It always begins and ends of the Creator. In truth, we are all parts of a body which are learning our functions, or at least that's how I feel.

You could see it that I am like the liver or kidneys. When there are toxins in the blood or bile they are taken in, processed and then sent on their way out of the body. I do this with sorrow and suffering. I do not trying to escape them but rather I embrace them and draw them in to my heart where they are processed and then returned.

The perk for me is that my body gains the nutrition it needs to keep it alive so I can continue the Great Work. Were the sufferings I work with to cease tomorrow I would then move on to the next levels of suffering to transmute.

However, paramount is free will and that is the ultimate kicker is that I can offer healing but only offer, for it to be effective it needs to be accepted. That it may not be accepted 100% of the time is no reason to stop offering.

I would like to see the end of all factory and heartless production because on a planetary level that would mean we're beginning to take responsibility for our own suffering rather than continuing to project it on to other selves such as plants and animals. I want it out of compassion and love for Creatures as well, but that point to me seems to be so obvious I don't really see any larger explanation, it's all one system, when one suffers, all suffer.

There is also the distinct fact that the reason we are suffering so much is because of the veil. Without the veil everything and everyone would just know everyone and everything is the Creator so, as Ra said, no love would be terribly important and no suffering would be terrible painful, it would just be a sea of neutral bliss.

[Shemaya]

That's a beautiful and great service, Aion. Thank you for sharing. Breaking it down to fundamental concepts of energy exchange, giving and receiving energy, and flow of energy is helpful for anyone who wants a deeper understanding of our evolutionary phase.

A Body is all about energy exchange and transmuting of energies. since we are One body, and that understanding is coming into consciousness, all energy is given and received within our one Body.

I think 2D beings have a better connection to that truth than us as humans, which makes sense to me.

[Monica]

The green ray is one which has been discussed extensively I think. Could you give your own thoughts on that chain of cause and effect and how say choosing to eat meat or plants from a factory farm/uncompassionate environment as opposed from more 'humane' sources?

(Not sure whom these questions were directed to.)

Quite simply, our choices matter, both holographically and literally. It makes No sense to talk about energetically transmuting suffering, while still physically contributing to it. That is like taking 1 step forward, 2 steps back.

Due to the efforts of activists, as well as increased awareness about the detrimental effects of animal 'foods' (sic) on health, meat consumption has been plummeting (in the words of a NY Times blogger):

...considering the fairly steady climb in meat consumption over the last half-century, you might say the numbers are plummeting. The department of agriculture projects that our meat and poultry consumption will fall again this year, to about 12.2 percent less in 2012 than it was in 2007. Beef consumption has been in decline for about 20 years; the drop in chicken is even more dramatic, over the last five years or so; pork also has been steadily slipping for about five years.

...

I can add, anecdotally, that when I ask audiences I speak to, “How many of you are eating less meat than you were 10 years ago?” at least two-thirds raise their hands. A self-selecting group to be sure, but nevertheless one that exists.

In fact, let’s ask this: is anyone in this country eating more meat than they used to?

We still eat way more meat than is good for us or the environment, not to mention the animals. But a 12 percent reduction in just five years is significant, and if that decline were to continue for the next five years — well, that’s something few would have imagined five years ago. It’s something only the industry could get upset about. The rest of us should celebrate. Rice and beans, anyone?

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/201...-meat-why/

Specifically the idea of being the one to cause the  sufferings. Where does that causal chain start and how does it become linked to polarity?

I just showed that meat consumption has declined sharply in the last few years and is continuing to decline (despite the popularity of Paleo). This proves that our choices DO have an impact on the collective in a very literal sense. It doesn't matter who started the cycle of enslavement and violence. We all did, on some level. I think it's simply residue from our lower vibrational state. Well that is (presumably) changing, and we have to start with ourselves. We can't expect to just go Poof into 4D or back to a higher density, while merrily continuing to behave like cavemen! (and attempting to justify it based on the fact that cavemen did it!)

So how does it become linked to polarity? The same way any other choice does. When presented with a choice between serving ALL (which includes self AND other-self) vs serving ONLY self at the exclusion of other-selves or even harming other-selves, we will either polarize in the direction of STO or STS, respectively.

For one not yet awakened to the reality of where that meat/dairy came from, it isn't a polarizing decision. But for one who is aware, then choosing to support the continued enslavement/torture/rape/killing of other-selves, just because they like the taste, is obviously choosing to serve self at the expense of other-self. In fact, it is impossible to eat meat without harming other-selves (and very difficult to eat dairy/eggs without harming other-selves) for the simple, inescapable fact that animals must be killed (against their will) in order to produce meat, and animals are usually raped, tortured and killed in order to produce milk.

I don't really know how to make it any clearer as to why this choice is polarizing. I hope this clarifies.

...

[Aion]

The green ray is one which has been discussed extensively I think. Could you give your own thoughts on that chain of cause and effect and how say choosing to eat meat or plants from a factory farm/uncompassionate environment as opposed from more 'humane' sources?

(Not sure whom these questions were directed to.)

Quite simply, our choices matter, both holographically and literally. It makes No sense to talk about energetically transmute suffering, while still physically contributing to it. That is like taking 1 step forward, 2 steps back.

Due to the efforts of activists, as well as increased awareness about the detrimental effects of animal 'foods' (sic) on health, meat consumption has been plummeting (in the words of a NY Times blogger):

...considering the fairly steady climb in meat consumption over the last half-century, you might say the numbers are plummeting. The department of agriculture projects that our meat and poultry consumption will fall again this year, to about 12.2 percent less in 2012 than it was in 2007. Beef consumption has been in decline for about 20 years; the drop in chicken is even more dramatic, over the last five years or so; pork also has been steadily slipping for about five years.

...

I can add, anecdotally, that when I ask audiences I speak to, “How many of you are eating less meat than you were 10 years ago?” at least two-thirds raise their hands. A self-selecting group to be sure, but nevertheless one that exists.

In fact, let’s ask this: is anyone in this country eating more meat than they used to?

We still eat way more meat than is good for us or the environment, not to mention the animals. But a 12 percent reduction in just five years is significant, and if that decline were to continue for the next five years — well, that’s something few would have imagined five years ago. It’s something only the industry could get upset about. The rest of us should celebrate. Rice and beans, anyone?

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/201...-meat-why/

Specifically the idea of being the one to cause the  sufferings. Where does that causal chain start and how does it become linked to polarity?

I just showed that meat consumption has declined sharply in the last few years and is continuing to decline (despite the popularity of Paleo). This proves that our choices DO have an impact on the collective in a very literal sense. It doesn't matter who started the cycle of enslavement and violence. We all did, on some level. I think it's simply residue from our lower vibrational state. Well that is (presumably) changing, and we have to start with ourselves. We can't expect to just go Poof into 4D or back to a higher density, while merrily continuing to behave like cavemen! (and attempting to justify it based on the fact that cavemen did it!)

So how does it become linked to polarity? The same way any other choice does. When presented with a choice between serving ALL (which includes self AND other-self) vs serving ONLY self at the exclusion of other-selves or even harming other-selves, we will either polarize in the direction of STO or STS, respectively.

For one not yet awakened to the reality of where that meat/dairy came from, it isn't a polarizing decision. But for one who is aware, then choosing to support the continued enslavement/torture/rape/killing of other-selves, just because they like the taste, is obviously choosing to serve self at the expense of other-self. In fact, it is impossible to eat meat without harming other-selves (and very difficult to eat dairy/eggs without harming other-selves) for the simple, inescapable fact that animals must be killed (against their will) in order to produce meat, and animals are usually raped, tortured and killed in order to produce milk.

I don't really know how to make it any clearer as to why this choice is polarizing. I hope this clarifies.

...

I get what you are saying although I don't agree with all your logics. The idea is there and with self-substance but this one particular image you present is not total representative of the whole picture in my eyes. I appreciate your passion though. I just don't agree on the way the 'wheels of karma' work it seems.

[Monica]

I don't care about agreement, I am just being honest with my disagreement. If anything I am just trying to not give in to the fear of expressing myself honestly because of how I may be perceived.

That's a risk we all take when we engage in an internet discussion. Any time we type any words, we run the risk of being misunderstood, and others form skewed opinions of us based on their limited perceptions from typed words only, without the benefit of tone of voice, facial expressions, body language, and all the other tools we have when communicating in person. This is a very limited mode of communication, to be sure!

For the record, I think you have expressed yourself very well, and much more fully in these last couple of posts.  

To Monica, I think we may disagree on exactly how the mechanics of the heart chakra works and I feel that may be closer to the root of our misunderstanding. You likely will not agree, but I see us as having very similar desires but we have chosen very different ways to approach the matter.

The thing is, the approach I am taking has been studied and explored considerably less than the approach you are taking, or so it appears to me and for that reason I can not 'toe to toe' with you because my experience has informed me in such a dramatically differing way it is mind blowing.

OK.

However, you have often asked about walking on the lawn and the response of the grass. My answer is that it depends what I am listening for. If I listen for agony, I find and hear agony. If I listen for bliss, I find and hear bliss. Thus, in my understanding plants don't seem to precisely experience emotions in the same way we do but rather seem to experience all emotions simultaneously at once which can be 'picked out' by a perceiving consciousness. Thus, if you are looking for bliss, you will find bliss. This is in regards to plants.

So, really, I think plants both suffer incredibly and experience the most profound bliss without any paradox because they still dwell largely within the unity of the Creator. Thus, they are all things. What we see in them is the reflection of ourselves.

OK I'll go along with that.

The same is true for animals and humans as well, the difference is that as you come in to third-density you gain veiled conditions. Second-density doesn't have the veil, every plant and animal is aware of itself as the Creator, it is only when it crosses into third that it obscures this awareness.

For example, 'lower' second-density creatures such as insects, worms and other such invertebrates are just as well aware of themselves as the Creator as a pig, sheep or dog. The veil isn't put on until the beginning of a third density incarnation so a second density being will always end its second density experience in full awareness of itself as the Creator and as its group and then it will begin to realize self-awareness and individuate.

Creatures, as they move through second density, gain all the understandings of tribal self as they see themselves as one with the family or species. When they individuate they start again except rather than being focused on species as self, the self is individual and the ladder is climbed again.

Here's the sticky part: You say and then it will begin to realize self-awareness and individuate. At what point does this happen? Ra didn't give a precise answer on that.

But, extrapolating from what we know about the criteria for graduation into other densities, we can make an educated guess.

We know that the criteria for graduating to 4D is a certain percentage of a certain attribute. So it logically follows that graduation to 3D would also require a certain percentage of a certain attribute.

In the case of going from 3D to 4D, that attribute is love, either of self AND other-self, or self only.

Now, I ask you this: Is it possible for entities to experience love, while still in 3D?

The answer is clear: Of course!

Look around you. Nearly all humans have the capacity to love, to some degree. Maybe not enough to be harvestable yet, but they sure do love, even if only selectively, even if it's only their children or spouse and they haven't yet learned to love freely. But they can and do love!

The objective for 3D is to refine that attribute of love!

So clearly, the attribute required for graduation to the next density is displayed, expressed and developed in the previous density!

Extrapolating from this, it makes sense that the attribute for graduation from 2D to 3D - self-awareness as an individual, or sentience - would also be found in varying amounts during the course of 2D, while being developed and refined over time.

So yes, while they're still 2D, animals do have the advantage of still being One with All. But I suspect - and this is just an educated guess based on my understanding, being that Ra didn't specify an exact point - that it's more of a ratio shift taking place. In other words, it makes sense to me that the more sentient they become, the less Oneness they feel. It's a process.

Just as we are building the structure for a SMC, even though that is an attribute of 4D. We are still building it in 3D. So too, it seems to me, do late 2D entities build the structure for individuality, which presupposes being cut off from the collective.

Therefore, I contest your assertion that animals are still 100% aware of their Oneness, and your implication that this somehow reduces their anguish.

If that were true, then we wouldn't be seeing such obvious signs of anguish, quite simply! If that cow totally knew she was just getting merged back into the collective, she wouldn't be showing such terror in her eyes, and she wouldn't be valiantly, desperately struggling to escape the executioner.

If anything, your observations support my contention that early 2D entities have a collective consciousness, with full awareness of their Oneness with All, while late 2D entities (usually indicated by a face and pain receptors) have varying degrees of individual awareness, with less awareness of Oneness, as they are very close to losing that awareness of Oneness altogether.

Thus, early 2D entities, such as plants, do indeed reflect back myriad emotions and vibrations, as you observed. Why? Because they dwell in the group mind, undifferentiated. This is why a field of corn that has been violated with pesticides exudes sadness, while a lovingly tended garden may exude bliss, as you observed. But each individual stalk of corn isn't a sentient being. It is part of the collective. Monoculture farming, with its poisonous chemicals and disrespectful, even torturous machinery for harvesting, obviously harms the field of corn. No question about it. This is why those of us who care about such things make a point to buy organic and local whenever possible, to minimize our contribution to such abominable practices.

It is the same when comparing meat from cows who were allowed to graze in the pasture, vs buying meat from factory farms or eating in a restaurant (which uses meat from factory farms). Obviously, it is more of an abomination to first torture the animal, before killing him/her.

But, in the case of animals, you then have the added complication of individual sentience, on top of the offense made to the collective.

When supporting monoculture and chemical farming practices, one is supporting an offensive way of treating plants, and the plant collective is surely harmed.

But when supporting ANY meat or dairy, one is supporting Not only the offensive way of treating animals as a collective (as with plants), but also the direct enslavement and overpowering of a sentient being who clearly wants to live.

It is a much deeper, graver offense than that done to plants.

This is Not to minimize or demean the offenses to plant life! But it is of a different nature, because plants have a different nature. Plus, if one truly wanted to reduce those offenses done to plant life, then the logical way to do that is...to quit eating animals! Because many orders of magnitude MORE plants are killed, in order to feed farm animals!

In fact, the #1 cause of monoculture and chemical farming is...the meat/dairy industry!

You are right that simply going vegan isn't going to magically fix the whole food production system. Certainly, many vegans still support the poisonous and offensive system of monoculture. But they support it much LESS than their meat-and-dairy-eating counterparts.

Our food production system is very f***** up, no doubt about it. We have a verrrrrry long ways to go, towards living in harmony with the planet. Eliminating meat is the first step. It's the most important step, because everything else is a by-product of that.

Plus, look at how difficult it has been for even self-professed '6D Wanderers' to care about the suffering of beings who have faces, emotions, pain receptors and who bleed like humans. Do you really think we'd have better luck if we switched to a campaign to save the plants?

I mean seriously, people can't even muster up some compassion for a being that struggles, cries out in pain, and bleeds. Are they seriously going to care about the plight of the corn? Sorry, but the idea is absurd.

And it's useless anyway, because the main reason all that corn is grown the way it is, is to feed the cows!

At the end of the day, the best way - no, the only way - to help the corn is to quit eating the cows.

Maybe in a couple of decades, when we've accomplished that, there will be less need for farmers to use toxic chemicals, because the demand for corn will be so much less, because only humans will be eating corn and they won't have to artificially produce such huge amounts of it.

No matter how you slice it, the first step is always to quit eating animals. That is the lynchpin. Remove that and the rest will start falling away too.

However, the best way for second density to get to third is by investment by third or above.

Maybe not necessarily the 'best' but certainly the most expedient.

Farm animals are being invested by 3D humans, but Not in a good way. They're being invested by being enslaved, tortured, raped and killed.

This is the real problem for second density when the investment is one of suppression. Rather, these second density entities will be very, very slow in moving towards third density because they will perpetually be stuck in the lower sub-densities of second, due to no social interaction or self-reflection to build from orange to yellow.

I disagree. Remember, the criteria for moving towards 3D is self-awareness. There are many other ways to become self-aware besides being invested by humans.

First of all, humans aren't the only ones with social structures. Animals have social interactions too! They have complex social structures and have been observed having best friends and even playing jokes on others. We overestimate our importance when we think we are the only ones who can invest the animals. They can do just fine on their own, without us, thank you very much.

Think about the deer who stepped in a hole and broke her ankle, and now cannot keep up with the herd. She is easy prey for the wolves. Separated from the other deer, and stalked by wolves, she is alone and suddenly is very acutely aware of her predicament. That is self-awareness! Her body registers pain as they tear into her flesh. Her emotions surge in a sudden flare of panic and terror.

Oh yes, she has just taken a huge leap towards sentience!

I personally think it's a very crude system for triggering sentience, and being that this planet is an experiment, I like to think that most planets didn't evolve that way. Ra said that they didn't have violence on Venus. That sounds to me like they probably didn't have 2D entities killing one another for survival, like we have here. It makes sense to me that the very design of this planet, based on so much bloodshed, is a major factor in the continued bloodshed among 3D humans. The whole planet is awash in blood.

If we are evolving, then we must be the ones to stop the bloodshed. We can't expect the lion to lie beside the lamb, when we are still eating the lamb! We are, presumably, the elders on this planet. We must start with ourselves.

However, since the species shares a mind and experience it is questionable what happens to the souls of these creatures. I get the sense that there is a balancing mechanism so that an animal soul that experiences trauma will then incarnate to heal that trauma through a more peaceful life. This then alternates back and forth between difficult lives and easy lives so a full spectrum of individual content can be experienced to the point that there is enough dynamic in the consciousness to spark the sudden moment of self-awareness.

Good heavens, do you not think that having one's throat slit, or being scalded alive in boiling water, would spark a sudden moment of self-awareness?

As for alternating traumatic with peaceful lifetimes, that is an interesting speculation, but I see nothing to back it up. It's speculation, at best.

Now, this is where my theory will probably be infuriating to some. I believe that the animal souls that experience such trauma actually become more likely to be compassionate and more likely to choose the positive polarity in third density on a species level because they will already be empathetic and acquainted with both suffering and victims,

I  have expressed this idea before and in fact I agree that it is happening, at least some of the time. See my thread '2D Animals Evolving?' There are more and more instances of animals showing compassion for other animals being recorded. Yes, some of them are displaying signs of accelerated development.

But those cases are few and far between. I've seen maybe a couple of dozen of them, at least that were captured on video. Undoubtedly there are many more that weren't captured on video, but at best, that small number still pales in comparison to the many billions of animals who are being literally tortured and killed every year by the meat/dairy industry.

Where are all those souls going? Yes, some seem to be coming back as more highly-evolved beings. But what about all the others?

Here's what we know about humans who are severely abused as children: Many of them grow up to be sociopaths. There is a clear pattern that increases the likelihood of being a sociopath: Abuse as a child, without any love shown to them before age 7. If they still never got a chance to heal and bond with another human before age 7, that child has a high risk of being a sociopath because their character is pretty much 'set' before age 7. (I'm sure there must be some exceptions, but this is just what statistics show, based on studies of sociopaths.)

Does this mean that ALL abused children will be sociopaths? Thankfully, No. But a large percentage of them do.

Does this mean that ALL sociopaths will be psychopaths? Thankfully, No. Many sociopaths exist in society. But many of them do turn into psychopaths.

Extrapolating from that, it makes sense that it would work the same way with late 2D entities. I have been saying for awhile that the meat/dairy industry might be populating some dark planet somewhere...a society of sociopaths. I shudder at the thought.

On top of that, I think that most souls which go through those experiences only do so at most a few times but I think typically only once.

What is the basis of your speculation?

Honestly, I've glanced at your past lives a couple times, Monica and it appears that you had multiple animals lives with suffering but the reason it is so vivid for you is because you were actually a higher density being incarnating as an animal to see what it's experience actually was like. Needless to say you were rather affected by the experience. I think there are certain species which are connected to your own consciousness and they are ones you experienced bodies as.

Maybe so. If that's true, then there's a reason I took on this assignment.

I spent a good deal of time as a tree, so that maybe explains why I feel more defensive of plants. Honestly I think I just find it unfair that the animals get a crusade but the plants don't. I'm horrified by large-scale, hydroponic growing of plants for food. It's the exact same as a meat factory in my mind, never getting to be free or experience ecosystem and the diversity of nature only to be consumed, often without thanks. It's tough for second density all around it seems.

Then perhaps we should be working together. The best way to help the plants is to quit eating the animals.

...

[Monica]

This would be a good point to mention that consumption is the quickest way to merge an energy with yourself.

Perhaps. But it's Not the only way.

So, in taking in that energy and it becoming myself I then can transmute it by balancing its opposites.

Would your system work with human rape victims? Could one rape a woman in order to directly experience her trauma, and then transmute it?

What about war? That's a biggie. Or mass shootings? Would your system work for that? Could one shoot and kill 20 humans, in order to transmute the trauma of mass shootings?

This is an honest question. I commend your efforts and intentions, but you are leaving out the minor little detail that you are actually supporting the very suffering that you are attempting to alleviate, by actually eating the animal's flesh.

In a nutshell, I've basically learned that investment in the lower densities by higher densities doesn't have to just be an interaction of incarnate entities but can happen from any level to any level.

If it can happen at any level, then why not do it from afar? Why not do it without actually supporting the very thing you're trying to heal? Why not transcend physical matter and just work to heal the energies of trauma, without actually perpetuating it? Why not just take 2 steps forward, instead of 2 steps forward 1 step back?

The perk for me is that my body gains the nutrition it needs to keep it alive so I can continue the Great Work.

The human body doesn't need meat or dairy. So is the perk really about needed nutrients, or about the pleasure of eating?

There is also the distinct fact that the reason we are suffering so much is because of the veil. Without the veil everything and everyone would just know everyone and everything is the Creator so, as Ra said, no love would be terribly important and no suffering would be terrible painful, it would just be a sea of neutral bliss.

I agree with this.

...

[The_Tired_Philosopher]

I'd agree with Monica in the specific sense that there are now various alternatives to meat that are meat-like enough to fulfill that desire.

I saw that some scientists found a way to turn specific portions of Plants into a meat-like substance that worked essentially as a vegan burger patty.

Meat does depolarize you, especially so if you're aware of it.  Not sure how?  You'll feel it in your stomach, it's not the happiest with that 'food'.  Even so, I care, so I will still stick by what I say that it's subjective.  If another isn't even aware of what they're doing it shouldn't effect them nearly as powerfully (intensely) as if they were aware, or more, cared.  Similarly, plants do meet similar criteria.

So thank your food regardless.

But some places do have a...dependency issue, and a portion of consumption issue.  I cite America strongly as one such place.  Activism might end it completely one day, but not soon enough, similarly to how nuclear energy is worked against by activists but half an ocean irradiated later and we still have many people who aren't even aware that JUST economically speaking nuclear energy doesn't make sense long term; the cost of nuclear waste disposal on a budget: Infinity.

And no offense to the animals, but fish matter too, and they're essentially wiped clear from over half the pacific ocean from Fukushima.

I miss my hemp seeds now...

[Minyatur]

(Not sure whom these questions were directed to.)

Quite simply, our choices matter, both holographically and literally. It makes No sense to talk about energetically transmute suffering, while still physically contributing to it. That is like taking 1 step forward, 2 steps back.

Due to the efforts of activists, as well as increased awareness about the detrimental effects of animal 'foods' (sic) on health, meat consumption has been plummeting (in the words of a NY Times blogger):

...considering the fairly steady climb in meat consumption over the last half-century, you might say the numbers are plummeting. The department of agriculture projects that our meat and poultry consumption will fall again this year, to about 12.2 percent less in 2012 than it was in 2007. Beef consumption has been in decline for about 20 years; the drop in chicken is even more dramatic, over the last five years or so; pork also has been steadily slipping for about five years.

...

I can add, anecdotally, that when I ask audiences I speak to, “How many of you are eating less meat than you were 10 years ago?” at least two-thirds raise their hands. A self-selecting group to be sure, but nevertheless one that exists.

In fact, let’s ask this: is anyone in this country eating more meat than they used to?

We still eat way more meat than is good for us or the environment, not to mention the animals. But a 12 percent reduction in just five years is significant, and if that decline were to continue for the next five years — well, that’s something few would have imagined five years ago. It’s something only the industry could get upset about. The rest of us should celebrate. Rice and beans, anyone?

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/201...-meat-why/

Specifically the idea of being the one to cause the  sufferings. Where does that causal chain start and how does it become linked to polarity?

I just showed that meat consumption has declined sharply in the last few years and is continuing to decline (despite the popularity of Paleo). This proves that our choices DO have an impact on the collective in a very literal sense. It doesn't matter who started the cycle of enslavement and violence. We all did, on some level. I think it's simply residue from our lower vibrational state. Well that is (presumably) changing, and we have to start with ourselves. We can't expect to just go Poof into 4D or back to a higher density, while merrily continuing to behave like cavemen! (and attempting to justify it based on the fact that cavemen did it!)

So how does it become linked to polarity? The same way any other choice does. When presented with a choice between serving ALL (which includes self AND other-self) vs serving ONLY self at the exclusion of other-selves or even harming other-selves, we will either polarize in the direction of STO or STS, respectively.

For one not yet awakened to the reality of where that meat/dairy came from, it isn't a polarizing decision. But for one who is aware, then choosing to support the continued enslavement/torture/rape/killing of other-selves, just because they like the taste, is obviously choosing to serve self at the expense of other-self. In fact, it is impossible to eat meat without harming other-selves (and very difficult to eat dairy/eggs without harming other-selves) for the simple, inescapable fact that animals must be killed (against their will) in order to produce meat, and animals are usually raped, tortured and killed in order to produce milk.

I don't really know how to make it any clearer as to why this choice is polarizing. I hope this clarifies.

...

You transform something which is very very indirect into something which is very direct. Black and white logic.

Truth is Monica, if you'd go into a restaurant and order a steak and eat it. Your action would have close to no chance whatsoever of even creating further suffering to any animal. So no it is not impossible to eat meat without harming because the harm is already done, in this scenario you'd take already existing stagnant energy upon yourself. Currently they produce more meat than is needed, so individual action don't add on their own. (I still do agree at your group logic, but don't see myself as part of one)

I had told you I do not eat so much and buy fron various sources. If on a saturday I go into a restaurant and buy a burger, there isn't a number that magically goes up where they need to kill one more animal because an additional pre-heated burger was consumed that day.

I wouldn't mind being made aware of when my actual action have an impact on a living being and avoid those instances as it'd mean something in term of polarity. Other than that, I am simply consuming heavy and stagnant energy into myself and very of little of these events have potential in themselves alone to create further suffering. I do not feel I am causing suffering whatever you say, 

I think my habits are more centered in hurting myself than others.

Regarding what I eat, I've held the same beliefs as Tanner that all food can be consecreted and seen as sacremental. I've had these beliefs along with inner alchemy since the very beginning of my spiritual path.

[Monica]

You transform something which is very very indirect into something which is very direct. Black and white logic.

I attempt to distill the concepts into their essence, leaving out the magnificent hoops that are often constructed to attempt to justify that which cannot be justified.

Truth is Monica, if you'd go into a restaurant and order a steak and eat it. Your action would have close to no chance whatsoever of even creating further suffering to any animal. So no it is not impossible to eat meat without harming because the harm is already done, in this scenario you'd take already existing stagnant energy upon yourself.

That particular animal is already dead, but one's actions do indeed affect the pool of supply and demand, and collectively, our choices all contribute to the end result.

That's not even getting into the holographic and energetic aspects of transcending linear time!

(I still do agree at your group logic, but don't see myself as part of one)

If you inhabit a human body, and eat, then you are part of the group, like it or not.

I think my habits are more centered in hurting myself than others.

It's both. (A clue!)

Regarding what I eat, I've held the same beliefs as Tanner that all food can be consecreted and seen as sacremental. I've had these beliefs along with inner alchemy since the very beginning of my spiritual path.

That is from the perspective of Self.

...

[Jade]

Regarding what I eat, I've held the same beliefs as Tanner that all food can be consecreted and seen as sacremental. I've had these beliefs along with inner alchemy since the very beginning of my spiritual path.

The issue comes where we think that the perpetuation of the sacrifice of the animals (their death in trauma to be transmuted into greater life) is a distortion of STO polarity in the Law of One.

As in our experience the teachings were, for the most part, greatly and grossly perverted to the extent in later times of actual human sacrifice rather than healing of humans.

Ra here is talking of human sacrifice, as that was the great extent it was perverted towards. However, Ra implies that sacrifice is incongruent with healing.

Billions of animals are killed in this country per year, and that equals to many dozens killed per meat consumer per year. I saw a facebook post recently, "Chinese food for dinner! Pork eggrolls, mongolian beef, shrimp lo mein, and crab rangoon!" Is it even possible to create a tally of the conscious lives that were consumed in that meal? No, but by abstaining from meat, we reduce that number that has to be produced. It's not an in the moment alleviation of a death, but a slow process that lowers the demand and therefore the mass quantities of trauma that we are producing.

Those that eat meat: Please continue your transmutation efforts. I know they are not in vain. But to think that by not eating meat you aren't directly saving lives, is nonsense. If you prefer to continue your service so that animals can continue to incarnate in these traumatic situations, as they desire, then by all means, continue your great service. I get it. There is no judgement. Everything is perfect, as is. I personally just can't ever do it again, ever, so thank you sincerely for taking that burden upon yourselves.

[Monica]

Clarification for Aion: I appreciate your efforts. I just question your assertion that it's necessary to actually eat the animal's flesh in order to transmute the suffering. You say it's the 'best' way but it seems to me the opposite. It seems crude and inefficient. (Not the technique itself! I respect your overall technique! but I'm referring to the idea of using the animals' actual flesh in order to access the trauma.)

More and more new technologies are being created and refined, that work with energetic signatures of substances. There are various devices on the market, along with homeopathic remedies and other vibrationals that work by energetic signature alone. There are now devices that can create vibrational substances using only a small piece of cardboard with a design imprinted on it, which carries the vibrational signature of a substance. I have worked extensively with these and they most definitely DO work! In fact, some clinics and even hospitals in India use these medicines quite effectively, even in acute, emergency situations.

The point being that, the more we learn abut the energetic properties of this reality, the less we need to rely on actual, physical substances. This is being demonstrated with these vibrational healing modalities, in addition to what we know of spiritual practices. Higher magick takes place on the inner planes and physical substances aren't even necessary to access the energetic signatures of what the Magician is trying to transmute. There are many ways to access the traumatized souls without adding to the demand that is causing them to be traumatized in the first place!

You seem to be a gifted alchemist and I think you are capable of transmuting the suffering without actually adding to it. Just a thought.

...

[Monica]

Note: In general, when I say plants I am referring to plants in general, most specifically plants used for food, such as carrots, lettuce, rice, beans, fruit, etc. Not referring to grandfather trees who are thousands of years old and have had much more time to potentially develop sentience than a single 1-month-old carrot.

...

[Diana]

Aion, what you wrote about transmutation is very beautiful, sincere, and interesting. I especially like that you are bringing these energies up through the lower chakra centers to the heart for forgiveness. I agree that forgiveness is at "the heart" of karma and evolution at this point. I am dubious though, that we can directly assist others in forgiveness. 

I suppose that is where study in alchemical mysteries helps. It has been my observation that one must forgive one's self, because no matter who or what else forgives you, the need for forgiveness persists until you can forgive yourself—which I think is why the karmic wheel even turns. I do understand that we may forge energetic pathways that now make it "easier" for others to follow (which is at the core of living master work). I would like to explore this concept further, if you would care to elucidate. 

What about free will in the context of what you are doing, specifically transmuting the energy of the "food" you eat? I gravitate to the idea of free will being returned to the natural world—animals and plants and the planet. By free will I mean not controlling it—let the natural world do what it will, freely. Just as we suggest through the Law of One that all humans be allowed to experience their own free will. And from my perspective, there is a level of free will in the natural world and it's not just for humans. For example, an animal in a zoo has lost its ability to go where it will and experience its full range of animal-ness, and a plant controlled by a farm has lost its ability to interact with the environment freely, seeking sunlight, having relationships with insects and animal life. 

By transmuting energy in the food, it seems to me that you are 1) participating in its production, and 2) trying to "fix" it. While I do align with the idea of loving support, I'm not sure I align with "fixing." In this matter, fixing the results of suffering seems like a lot of work (especially if one is contributing to the suffering by participating in its production) as opposed to supporting the traumatized energies with the love in your heart and not adding to the trauma in any way. I am speaking to the matter of transmutation, and not to the idea of food in general and the specifics of this food or that food, and which suffers most etc.

I don't mean this in a derogatory fashion, and I commend your intentions and knowledge, and level of commitment and practice. In fact, I find it pretty amazing. But I find it to be too controlling and contradictory. Though I can see the practicality of directly interfacing with the "food," Monica's suggestion of working with these energies without participating in their production seems more efficacious.

And one more aspect: the taking on of suffering. This is very messiah-like. Of course this is supposedly what Jesus did. But it seems to me that it takes away the opportunity for the entities to resolve the issues (possibly chosen) themselves. In the case of Jesus in the bible (and assuming the veracity of the stories), his taking on the sins of the world may have relieved the burden of sin, but denied those who had committed the sins their own accountability. So weren't they robbed of their own evolution in a way? 

In the case of animal and plant life, it is very attractive to me to think I might be able to help in the way you do and transmute their suffering. But I am inclined to do this by not causing it in the first place. That way I can allow the free will of humans and not get enmeshed with the horror that goes on here, in line with "prime directive" idea. It is hard though, to bear it and not take direct action. I can understand working "in the trenches" down here, as you are doing. But the practice seems convoluted, rather like a Christian priest causing suffering (torture) to relieve suffering (to be united with God)—(Spanish Inquisition). I don't mean this comparison as an insult to you in any way; it's just the only—albeit it gross and extreme—example I could come up with to illustrate my thoughts.

I am just exploring these ideas. I would love to hear others' viewpoints on this.

[Aion]

There are a lot of thoughts for me to digest here so I won't comment to them yet, but I will just address that I specifically did not say it is the 'best' way, I said I do not know a best way, but it is the most direct way in my experience.

I will ponder more on how to express myself accurately and continue from there. I appreciate your considerations. My main disagreement seems to be the 'guilty by association' aspect that you often express. It reminds me of the Cold War. I will look to this and consider it in light of myself and respond further.

Also, just a note to Diana's post, I don:t believe we can actually 'help' others with forgiveness. However we can generate a catalyst which offers the opportunity for forgiveness.

The entirety of my practice revolves around this process of making offerings in respect to free will. If free will cannot be respected I experience resistance and have to work on the distortion.

[Monica]

There are a lot of thoughts for me to digest here so I won't comment to them yet, but I will just address that I specifically did not say it is the 'best' way, I said I do not know a best way, but it is the most direct way in my experience.

OK

I will ponder more on how to express myself accurately and continue from there.

I appreciate your considerations.

And I appreciate yours!

My main disagreement seems to be the 'guilty by association' aspect that you often express.

There's a reason I tend to emphasize that point, and that is that it has frequently been stated here that "Oh that's just the way this planet is...they must need that experience so who am I to interfere...they chose it...just accept it..." blah blah blah all of which conveys an attitude of apathy, at best, or callous disregard, at worst.

But it's much more than that. It's an attitude that completely ignores the distinction that the meat/dairy industry is built upon a system of supply and demand.

Saying "it's their karma...it happens" about someone murdering someone across town, that we had No direct involvement with, is one thing.

Saying that about about an industry that we are directly affecting, by contributing to the demand, is quite another.

Also, just a note to Diana's post, I don:t believe we can actually 'help' others with forgiveness. However we can generate a catalyst which offers the opportunity for forgiveness.

The entirety of my practice revolves around this process of making offerings in respect to free will. If free will cannot be respected I experience resistance and have to work on the distortion.

[Monica]

[quote='Aion' pid='191135' dateline='1440439075']
There are a lot of thoughts for me to digest here so I won't comment to them yet, but I will just address that I specifically did not say it is the 'best' way, I said I do not know a best way, but it is the most direct way in my experience.

OK

I will ponder more on how to express myself accurately and continue from there.

I appreciate your considerations.

And I appreciate yours!  

My main disagreement seems to be the 'guilty by association' aspect that you often express.

There's a reason I tend to emphasize that point, and that is that it has frequently been stated here that "Oh that's just the way this planet is...they must need that experience so who am I to interfere...they chose it...just accept it..." blah blah blah all of which conveys an attitude of apathy, at best, or callous disregard, at worst.

But it's much more than that. It's an attitude that completely ignores the distinction that the meat/dairy industry is built upon a system of supply and demand.

Saying "it's their karma...it happens" about someone murdering someone across town, that we had No direct involvement with, is one thing.

Saying that about about an industry that we are directly affecting, by contributing to the demand, is quite another.

Also, just a note to Diana's post, I don:t believe we can actually 'help' others with forgiveness. However we can generate a catalyst which offers the opportunity for forgiveness.

Ra had a great deal to say about forgiveness. That would be a great topic for another thread, to really explore exactly what forgiveness is, and how/why it stops the cycle of karma.

The entirety of my practice revolves around this process of making offerings in respect to free will. If free will cannot be respected I experience resistance and have to work on the distortion.

What about the free will of the animals?

...

[Monica]

However, you have often asked about walking on the lawn and the response of the grass. My answer is that it depends what I am listening for. If I listen for agony, I find and hear agony. If I listen for bliss, I find and hear bliss.

These seems to support my assertion that late 2D entities are very different from early 2D entities.

You will never find bliss at a slaughterhouse.

Nor at a 'humane' farm, at the moment the cow or chicken realizes s/he is about to be slaughtered.

No bliss there.

...

[Minyatur]

You transform something which is very very indirect into something which is very direct. Black and white logic.

I attempt to distill the concepts into their essence, leaving out the magnificent hoops that are often constructed to attempt to justify that which cannot be justified.

What you consider that cannot be justified resolves only around your perspective of things, there isn't any consensus as you can see right on this very forum of spiritual seekers that study the LOO. Each his own truth and each truth cannot speak for others' as that would be attempting to learn/teach for others rather than teach/learn. So I do agree that in your case eating meat for example would create a very strong loss of polarization whereas it could also has no impact whatsoever on another and even some could get an inscrease in postive polarization in the right mind set. Not black and white, reality is a great subjectivity of awareness which endlessly distorts it further and further into something more complicated.

Truth is Monica, if you'd go into a restaurant and order a steak and eat it. Your action would have close to no chance whatsoever of even creating further suffering to any animal. So no it is not impossible to eat meat without harming because the harm is already done, in this scenario you'd take already existing stagnant energy upon yourself.

That particular animal is already dead, but one's actions do indeed affect the pool of supply and demand, and collectively, our choices all contribute to the end result.

That's not even getting into the holographic and energetic aspects of transcending linear time!

I have no strong time/space desire for meat and I wouldn't care if this world is vegetarian. But it is not and the slaugthering already is happening even if I weren't on this planet. As you and Diana described, the foodstuff energy is stagnant and heavy yet I do not mind taking what's already there as it is a 1D entity at this point and not a 2D one that I am dealing with.

About affecting the pool of supply and demand, I do think there are ways for one not to have an impact. In my current habits I seriously doubt I have one as I have very little impact on any compagny's sells of a day or week. In a week whether I eat a meal at one place or not, it won't have any impact in their supply/demand stock of that week or month. If I'd eat there everyday, perhaps but probably not even then.

(I still do agree at your group logic, but don't see myself as part of one)

If you inhabit a human body, and eat, then you are part of the group, like it or not.

The human group is composed of many subgroups, I am part of none that tries to change the ways of others as of now.

I think my habits are more centered in hurting myself than others.

It's both. (A clue!)

I can agree that the possibility of there being cases of causing harm exist, I disagree that you can take any of it and say it hurts something somewhere each times. I do believe one can eat meat while not causing any harm from his actions. As a whole surely not but as an individual it is possible under the right circumstances.

Regarding what I eat, I've held the same beliefs as Tanner that all food can be consecreted and seen as sacremental. I've had these beliefs along with inner alchemy since the very beginning of my spiritual path.

That is from the perspective of Self.

...

My perspective is what it is in the circumstances it is put into. If I'd have to hunt for meat I wouldn't, I do dislike the thought of causing harm to a 2D entity. But in the present context I also am indifferent that other-selves have the need of that experience which creates the current system we are experiencing and have no desire to change what already is. I'd rather put my focus on something that does want to change.

I also did talk about my beliefs about the free will of the animal that goes through that path and also my view of how it acts as a building block of it's future self which cannot be any other way that it is meant to be. As each soul seeks what provides them that exact experience they need in what they incarnate within the illusion of separateness. In my view this earth is a play, and in this play each are put into different conditions to care about different things while not caring about other things as to provide and receive experiences we are meant to face. If this earth wouldn't eat meat, I do believe the souls that sought that experience would have found another time/space possibily to incarnate this exact resonance of an exeprience.

---

Old point but if you look at the Earth which stands above us all in awareness, it lets it all happen so why would a wanderer who is lesser than the world he wanders into be more rightful in knowing what needs to changed and what needs not? My answer : you change in others what you need to change for yourself and as such no one can expect others to be having the exact same needs for themselves.

[Minyatur]

Regarding what I eat, I've held the same beliefs as Tanner that all food can be consecreted and seen as sacremental. I've had these beliefs along with inner alchemy since the very beginning of my spiritual path.

The issue comes where we think that the perpetuation of the sacrifice of the animals (their death in trauma to be transmuted into greater life) is a distortion of STO polarity in the Law of One.

As in our experience the teachings were, for the most part, greatly and grossly perverted to the extent in later times of actual human sacrifice rather than healing of humans.

Ra here is talking of human sacrifice, as that was the great extent it was perverted towards. However, Ra implies that sacrifice is incongruent with healing.

Billions of animals are killed in this country per year, and that equals to many dozens killed per meat consumer per year. I saw a facebook post recently, "Chinese food for dinner! Pork eggrolls, mongolian beef, shrimp lo mein, and crab rangoon!" Is it even possible to create a tally of the conscious lives that were consumed in that meal? No, but by abstaining from meat, we reduce that number that has to be produced. It's not an in the moment alleviation of a death, but a slow process that lowers the demand and therefore the mass quantities of trauma that we are producing.

Those that eat meat: Please continue your transmutation efforts. I know they are not in vain. But to think that by not eating meat you aren't directly saving lives, is nonsense. If you prefer to continue your service so that animals can continue to incarnate in these traumatic situations, as they desire, then by all means, continue your great service. I get it. There is no judgement. Everything is perfect, as is. I personally just can't ever do it again, ever, so thank you sincerely for taking that burden upon yourselves.

What I want to share is that there is not anyone who is being any less truer to itself than any other.

I will be vegan when I feel called to do so as I do with anything else. Calls come and go bringing myself to different focuses, each having a purpose of it's own for others and for myself.

The reason I do think everything ever is perfect, is that to not think so means to me to not focus on the greater causes and effects that made each things spring as it is. The Love of the Creator is behind all things, even those we think are without love. There is LOVE and there are myriads of distortions of that LOVE, none more meaningful and none more meaningless.

[Monica]

So I do agree that in your case eating meat for example would create a very strong loss of polarization whereas it could also has no impact whatsoever on another

It's impossible for it to have 'no impact' on another because another must be killed in order to eat it.

I have no strong time/space desire for meat and I wouldn't care if this world is vegetarian. But it is not and the slaugthering already is happening even if I weren't on this planet. As you and Diana described, the foodstuff energy is stagnant and heavy yet I do not mind taking what's already there as it is a 1D entity at this point and not a 2D one that I am dealing with.

It's Not about the substance called meat.

It's about the sentient being who was killed in order to produce that meat.

Why is this other-self, this sentient entity, left out of the discussion? Why is what happened to produce that meat - the spilling of another's blood - left out?

About affecting the pool of supply and demand, I do think there are ways for one not to have an impact. In my current habits I seriously doubt I have one as I have very little impact on any compagny's sells of a day or week. In a week whether I eat a meal at one place or not, it won't have any impact in their supply/demand stock of that week or month. If I'd eat there everyday, perhaps but probably not even then.

I just showed that meat consumption has plummeted. Each of us CAN make a difference, together. Why remain in the sinkhole of indifference?

The human group is composed of many subgroups, I am part of none that tries to change the ways of others as of now.

However, you are part of one that contributes to the demand for animal slaughter.

I can agree that the possibility of there being cases of causing harm exist, I disagree that you can take any of it and say it hurts something somewhere each times. I do believe one can eat meat while not causing any harm from his actions. As a whole  surely not but as an individual it is possible under the right circumstances.

No, it's impossible. Unless you know of a way to obtain meat without killing anyone...?

...

[upensmoke]

Elros Tar-Minyatur, do you eat meat and do you see your own personal meeting eating as a STS action or a STO action? depending on which one you pick could you explain why ? if you answered this question already or dont eat meat my apologies

[Minyatur]

It's impossible for it to have 'no impact' on another because another must be killed in order to eat it.

If you eat what is killed or have leave it to rot over in some dump, the damage is done. I do believe there's a lot of meat which is thrown everyday which could be considered worse than being consumed in my perspective.

I have no strong time/space desire for meat and I wouldn't care if this world is vegetarian. But it is not and the slaugthering already is happening even if I weren't on this planet. As you and Diana described, the foodstuff energy is stagnant and heavy yet I do not mind taking what's already there as it is a 1D entity at this point and not a 2D one that I am dealing with.

It's Not about the substance called meat.

It's about the sentient being who was killed in order to produce that meat.

Why is this other-self, this sentient entity, left out of the discussion? Why is what happened to produce that meat - the spilling of another's blood - left out?

I do share love with any animals (mostly..) that I come across. I do believe this would be happening like I said whether I partake or not. I do agree that this earth is a mad and sad place but that's how this silly Universe is. An experience machine that goes further and further away from the orginal thought and which is intended to do so.

About affecting the pool of supply and demand, I do think there are ways for one not to have an impact. In my current habits I seriously doubt I have one as I have very little impact on any compagny's sells of a day or week. In a week whether I eat a meal at one place or not, it won't have any impact in their supply/demand stock of that week or month. If I'd eat there everyday, perhaps but probably not even then.

I just showed that meat consumption has plummeted. Each of us CAN make a difference, together. Why remain in the sinkhole of indifference?

I would not try to make any other person follow me in my foot steps, as an individual alone I doubt I'd plummer it further. If I feel called to do so I might one day, so far I do not feel what I do to be wrong.

The human group is composed of many subgroups, I am part of none that tries to change the ways of others as of now.

However, you are part of one that contributes to the demand for animal slaughter.

I always am open to perceiving differently, else I wouldn't partake in these threads.

I can agree that the possibility of there being cases of causing harm exist, I disagree that you can take any of it and say it hurts something somewhere each times. I do believe one can eat meat while not causing any harm from his actions. As a whole  surely not but as an individual it is possible under the right circumstances.

No, it's impossible. Unless you know of a way to obtain meat without killing anyone...?

Well this is a world where it is happening whether I want it or not. I would not create a world like this to eat meat nor do I feel in the wrong to feed on what already is sacrificed. I consider my desire for meat a lesser influence to myself and my polarity, one day it could be perceived as a greater influence which I could not be indifferent toward and lead me to make change.

Now it seems not the case and perhaps it is simply because I do not want to view myelf as a champion of the opressed. If I did maybe I'd be open to hear more callings that need the change I could bring with my actions. I still do want to point out that as I do not hear this one, there are still others do hear.

[Minyatur]

Elros Tar-Minyatur, do you eat meat and do you see your own personal meeting eating as a STS action or a STO action? depending on which one you pick could you explain why ? if you answered this question already or dont eat meat my apologies

I do eat meat and perceive it as currently non-polarized. I simply do not feel anything toward it and am you could say testing whether it remains that way or not.

If i were to not eat meat, I'd also perceive it as non-polarized. It would not bring any STO feelings within me either nor affect my polarity from my current perspective.

[Aion]

Before I respond further, I would like to highlight that I haven never had to explain in detail the processes of my practice so there are times where I may use words or descriptions which are not quite but are just the way it flows. I am learning as well as teaching so bear in mind that I'm not coming in the pre-set ideas and laying them out, I am actually discovering the truth of my practices through exploring these explanations.

I do feel a little guilty though, not in regards to food, but because the comments that have been made, from Monica, Diana and TTP, have actually helped me to better understand my choice and actually helped me become more comfortable with it. That may be frustrating for you that your efforts had the opposite effect but you have given me the opportunity to have the utmost honesty with myself and I'm learning I have many expectations of myself based on how I believe I will be perceived by others. I'm learning to trust myself.

Let me just say, I am aware I polarize both negatively and positively at different times and that is one point that is relevant to my practice. As you said Diana, I was displaying some very martyr-like traits, but that was before when I would only try to do things in service to others and avoid service to myself at all costs. I've realized now that I am negatively polarizing towards myself because service to others excluding yourself is NOT service to ALL.

I am learning I have to both accept the results of self-service and service to others for service to be polarizing for me.

[upensmoke]

Elros Tar-Minyatur, do you eat meat and do you see your own personal meeting eating as a STS action or a STO action? depending on which one you pick could you explain why ? if you answered this question already or dont eat meat my apologies

I do eat meat and perceive it as currently non-polarized. I simply do not feel anything toward it and am you could say testing whether it remains that way or not.

If i were to not eat meat, I'd also perceive it as non-polarized. It would not bring any STO feelings within me either nor affect my polarity from my current perspective.

K i disagree with the idea that one must feel something for their actions to be polarized. Could you use that same logic in a different scenario and reach the same conclusion?  Also this is just my opinion but the action or concept of feeling nothing when you are aware of suffering is STS. you Feel nothing because it is separate from you. Separation is a STS concept and mindstate. You would feel something if you truly saw it as one with yourself. this is just my opinion thru my understanding of course 

[Minyatur]

Elros Tar-Minyatur, do you eat meat and do you see your own personal meeting eating as a STS action or a STO action? depending on which one you pick could you explain why ? if you answered this question already or dont eat meat my apologies

I do eat meat and perceive it as currently non-polarized. I simply do not feel anything toward it and am you could say testing whether it remains that way or not.

If i were to not eat meat, I'd also perceive it as non-polarized. It would not bring any STO feelings within me either nor affect my polarity from my current perspective.

K i disagree with the idea that one must feel something for their actions to be polarized. Could you use that same logic in a different scenario and reach the same conclusion?  Also this is just my opinion but the action or concept of feeling nothing when you are aware of suffering is STS. you Feel nothing because it is separate from you. Separation is a STS concept and mindstate. You would feel something if you truly saw it as one with yourself. this is just my opinion thru my understanding of course 

I acknowledge sufferings as part of existence and not all sufferings do move my heart in the same manner as another catalyst might. I do not believe I would be any more right in trying to help than someone else who is partaking in creating suffering. What moves me and what I work upon relate to my own distortions.

If we want to speak of indirectly causing sufferings, then no one would be free of the guilt when existing within any society like ours.