In regards to eating meat

[Monica]

The point about trees was that, according to Ra, members of the vegetable kingdom can become enspirited (not just trees). You had said that they couldn't.

Ra said trees, and even locations. My read of that is that, this happens in exceptional conditions, like the grandfather oak being loved by generations of children. That doesn't mean that every tree is individuated.

As I attempted to clarify, I was referring to vegetables, not trees, when I said an individuated entity wouldn't incarnate into the body of a carrot.

I would futher speculate that, once a tree has achieved individuation, it won't likely incarnate into a tree again, but will choose a body that is mobile, to give it more opportunity for exploring its new sentience.

You look at the eating of meat from a specific point of view. In particular, you equate eating meat with slaughterhouses and industrial agriculture. Austin and I and others have tried to point out that there are other models out there.

Animals raised humanely, ie. not tortured, before they are killed, is obviously preferable to being tortured then killed.

But they are still being killed.

In my experience, raising and eating animal products, including meat, can be a deeply healing activity for the individual, the community, the environment, and the planet.

You mentioned everyone except the animal!

And eating industrial vegetables, as Austin also pointed out, is not necessarily good for the vegetables, the humans, or the environment.

I agree with that. But what does that have to do with killing animals?

It takes many more plants to feed animals. By eating plants directly, less plants are killed, than if you eat the animals. Also, the meat industry is highly inefficient.

I think it's indicative of a flaw, to some extent, in your thought process that you think you know better than our Logos how second-density should be structured.

Ouch.

What is the purpose of life? We are told that each entity gathers information for the Creator. Well, I am gathering information and intend to offer it to the Creator. We are each important and our perspectives and insights important.

As I've pointed out, each offers itself to each. That can be a deeply spiritual realization, if you will let it. Consider the Native Americans, who Ra said were spiritually advanced. They ate meat (and still do), but they did so with honor and reverence for the sacrifice the animal was making.

I have mentioned the Native Americans several times during the course of this discussion. I said that if one is going to eat an animal, it should be done with reverence and gratitude, the way the Native Americans did. Also, present, as the animal dies.

But here is the distinction:

The Native Americans had to kill animals to survive.

We don't.

The killing of animals was justifiable in their case. Not in ours.

In my opinion, it's about consciousness, not about picking and choosing the correct set of actions. Yes, we should know how our food is raised and how it is harvested. Yes, we should do as much of it ourselves as we can. Those are areas where we can easily agree, and I think it might make more sense to focus on agreements rather than disagreements.

But the idea that eating blue-green algae out of a can is more evolved than eating a cow, chicken, goat, or pig one has raised oneself, or a deer one has shot oneself, is not a very compelling claim, in my opinion.

The choice between imposing my will over an obviously individuated animal, who makes his choice clear that he doesn't want to be killed, by runnig away from me, vs. harvesting a primitive lifeform out of a pristine eco-system capable of feeding the planet? You see no difference between those?