In regards to eating meat

[Monica]

the material for your understanding is the self: the mind/body/spirit complex.

I could easily counter with countless quotes about service to others. Serving others requires reaching out beyond just self.

In fact, it's so important to serve others, that it's even the criteria for graduation!

---

This jumps out at me to reveal a major imbalance in communicating mutual understanding.

Really now.

Teach/learn, to me and using your language example, is like if I teach someone Spanish, by teaching them I am learning a greater scope of the Spanish language itself by placing myself in a seat of co-creation with the student. Likewise, as the student learn/teaches they are learning Spanish at the same time they teach a broader perspective to the teacher by revealing a new perspective that the teacher had not experienced prior to teach/learning.

Yes, but the greater understanding about the scope of Spanish comes from the act of teaching, because the Spanish speaker must delve more deeply into their own knowledge in order to teach it to another person.

It doesn't come from the student of Spanish. Therefore, the student of Spanish cannot teach Spanish.

Therefore, they are learning/teaching different things to the other.

And we could plug anything into the example. For instance, 'to learn compassion is the same as to teach compassion unless you are not actively being compassionate as you have considered yourself to be learned in; in which case you have done you/they little or no good'.

Your implication is quite clear.

---

I see it unfruitful to claim compassion for animals at the same time non compassion is displayed for the persons that slaughter animals as their choice. Or justified non compassion for plant life as plants are "justified" as "less than animals".

groan

What I see as the teaching of a movement away from animal killing is not a teaching of compassion but a teaching of justifications. This is because I am witnessing not the active practice of compassion but rather the active practice of justifying through perceived reasoning.

LOL!!! This entire thread has been full of justifications from the meat-eaters about why it's "ok" for them to eat animals.

Justification is something that's done by someone who is defensive.

If someone feels totally good about their choice, there's no reason to be defensive.

To say that the vegetarians are the ones being defensive? LOL!

---

And yet, each is still attempting to find solutions to the suffering rather than finding space and time within to allow each portion of experience, including suffering, to have a hospitable room to dwell in while it visits you.

I needed to hear those things again, but especially the above.

An assumption seems to be made that vegetarians are trying to end suffering instead of going within. That may be true in some cases, but not in the case of the vegetarians participating in this thread. We work outwardly in addition to working inwardly. Both are important.

Secondly, my opinion is that this Q'uote has been misapplied. Context must be taken into consideration, to understand what Q'uo meant. Q'uo was speaking of one's own suffering, not serving others who are suffering.

STO = Service to Others. It's a minor little concept sprinkled liberally throughout the Law of One.

---

If you love them unconditionally, however, you align yourself gradually with a reality where the meat eating is less and less present

Absolutely! I agree totally.

Loving unconditionally does not, however, preclude being honest regarding our convictions. Especially in a discussion about this very topic.

I do find it ironic that it is the meat-eaters who are having trouble "loving unconditionally" the vegetarians. So much so that the conversation keeps shifting to a critique of the vegetarians, instead of the actual topic.