[split] Obtaining Animal Blood

[Nicholas]

High five to fellow vampires! Animal blood is strictly regulated around here, so things like blood pudding are pretty difficult to make. I usually just go with very rare steaks.

I really need to learn how to bow hunt. Then I could get everything fresh.

 Think of the suffering you would cause otherwise.  

This is the first controlling statement I have come across on this thread. 

[Nicholas]

i have chronic anemia. taking iron isn't enough. 




i request there be no vegetarian attempts here to judge or debate meat eating. this is a thread about all things blood in its edible forms and their benefits. thank u.

Consuming blood cannot be separated from the fact that a sentient being had to die, in order to get their blood.

You can choose to interpret that any way you like, but I'm just stating a fact.

Despite ignoring Bluebells request, are you done with your emotionally manipulative and not so subtle attempts of judging and degrading the natural way of things?

You have openly admitted on these Forums Monica to having a "holier than thou" attitude. What do you think that implies?

I feel qualified here because I can personally relate to ideological attachment. You are clearly showing this type of attachment on this thread, you would not use emotionally loaded words if you were not. True?

Just making myself clear hear Monica. Firstly, what is Death? What is murder? Furthermore, who made you an authority on truth???

It seems to me you prefer to evade the deeper philosophical queries on life..

[Minyatur]

@Bluebell

Sorry for derailing the thread.

I don't have much attraction to blood. 

[Reaper]

So...why was an on-topic post of mine split into ANOTHER war-on-meat thread, raped of its context, so I could be collectively be hung out to dry? I was commenting on a post about consuming blood, after that post's author had already connected the topic to vampires. I was on topic. It's not my fault that some other individuals decided to turn it into yet another outlet for their ongoing crusade, and for the record I think this is bull. 

I have purposefully avoided the meat vs. veg debate for years now because I feel that an individual's personal eating habits are their business. I do not owe anyone an explanation of the ethics behind my mode of consumption (and believe it or not, I do actually have ethics), nor do I feel a need to get others to share in my ethics, nor do I feel owed an explanation of anyone else's ethics. However, since I've been FORCED in, here is my two cents on the matter:

I don't care what anyone else thinks of my eating habits. I eat meat, as raw as I can get it, and I will likely keep doing so until the day I die. If I had access to animal blood via hunting, I would drink it (and you have no idea how careful or not careful I would be while hunting because, well, you don't know me at all). If I had access to clean human blood from a willing donor, yes (collective gasp), I would drink that, too. Call me evil, STS, non-compassionate, whatever. I do not care. Eat whatever you feel comfortable eating, but don't for a minute think you know me well enough for your judgment of my character to mean a thing to me. My conscience is totally clean. 

[Bluebell]

i thought u were totally on topic. i asked the mods to delete everything off topic or at least split the thread and i guess Plenum thought this was a topic on it's own. my thread's all clean now though, maybe u could post again? honestly, i didn't know people could even drink raw blood. it sounds really interesting.

[Diana]

High five to fellow vampires! Animal blood is strictly regulated around here, so things like blood pudding are pretty difficult to make. I usually just go with very rare steaks.

I really need to learn how to bow hunt. Then I could get everything fresh.

 Think of the suffering you would cause otherwise.  

This is the first controlling statement I have come across on this thread. 

The controlling aspect of this thread was in the OP. If anyone wants to raise subject matter for consideration, then be open to the responses. Ignore any that you want to ignore—that is your option. I can't, and certainly don't want, to control anyone. On the other hand, I am here to discuss subject matter loosely within the context of the LOO, or at least with a mind to higher concepts—not to indulge 3D human behaviors, which can be done in a plethora of sites that don't focus on evolving consciously and spiritually..

[ree]

I do not understand here is why Monica keeps labeling STS when Ra said it's not ethics that polarizes someone negative. A person hunting and eating animals doesn't necessarily intentionally energize certain ray centers (orange/yellow/blue) and inhibit others (green)? If your service is in protecting animals is your thing that's great. Yet this labeling of others as StS/STO is inane. When you don't like something others' do you say they are STS?

It's like saying for every person who seems over the top you label them histrionic or whatnot. That's probably why people react. Seems like negative interpretation of catalyst. Which is de-polarizing or polarizing neg. 

[Minyatur]

I do not understand here is why Monica keeps labeling STS when Ra said it's not ethics that polarizes someone negative. A person hunting and eating animals doesn't necessarily intentionally energize certain ray centers (orange/yellow/blue) and inhibit others (green)? If your service is in protecting animals is your thing that's great. Yet this labeling of others as StS/STO is inane. When you don't like something others' do you say they are STS?

It's like saying for every person who seems over the top you label them histrionic or whatnot. That's probably why people react. Seems like negative interpretation of catalyst. Which is de-polarizing or polarizing neg. 

She considers the slaugthering of animals as infridgment of their free will, hence the STS. At least that's how I perceived it.

IMO, everyone is being true to themselves which is perfectly fine.

[Diana]

So...why was an on-topic post of mine split into ANOTHER war-on-meat thread, raped of its context, so I could be collectively be hung out to dry? I was commenting on a post about consuming blood, after that post's author had already connected the topic to vampires. I was on topic. It's not my fault that some other individuals decided to turn it into yet another outlet for their ongoing crusade, and for the record I think this is bull. 

I have purposefully avoided the meat vs. veg debate for years now because I feel that an individual's personal eating habits are their business. I do not owe anyone an explanation of the ethics behind my mode of consumption (and believe it or not, I do actually have ethics), nor do I feel a need to get others to share in my ethics, nor do I feel owed an explanation of anyone else's ethics. However, since I've been FORCED in, here is my two cents on the matter:

I don't care what anyone else thinks of my eating habits. I eat meat, as raw as I can get it, and I will likely keep doing so until the day I die. If I had access to animal blood via hunting, I would drink it (and you have no idea how careful or not careful I would be while hunting because, well, you don't know me at all). If I had access to clean human blood from a willing donor, yes (collective gasp), I would drink that, too. Call me evil, STS, non-compassionate, whatever. I do not care. Eat whatever you feel comfortable eating, but don't for a minute think you know me well enough for your judgment of my character to mean a thing to me. My conscience is totally clean. 

I assume that you are referring to me as I was the one to respond to your post. I detest dishonesty and cowardice (which I am not directing at you, Yera) and prefer to address this post with transparency and directness.

I don't care what you eat, either. From my standpoint, the whole so called "war on meat" conflict here has been completely misunderstood. It's not about telling anyone what to do or what they "should" do. It, for me, has only been about compassion, and I don't feel compassion is only for other humans.

To refer to the subject of eating meat as the "war on meat" is in itself a judgment. There is much irony to me in the accusations directed toward those trying to include animals in the idea of the LOO and compassion as being controlling, when I see control happening the other way—it is controlling to not allow opinions that conflict with what is, opinions that are out of the box with general societal, cultural, and human accepted behaviors.

The idea that humans have free will is not the end-all of everything in the universe. It is so utterly egocentric to me to think this way.

No one has forced you Yera, by the way, to respond. No one has forced anyone here at B4 to react, respond, be offended, or feel judged concerning the "meat" issue. It's not possible to MAKE anyone feel anything. Feelings, reactions, attitudes are a person's own responsibility. 

You are in alignment totally with what I think about individuals: it is their personal business and responsibility concerning what they choose to do in every aspect of their lives. Yet here we are, participating in a forum that canvasses subject matter beyond 3D. We are exploring concepts from Ra and higher densities and conscious expansion. What we discuss here goes BEYOND 3D human concerns, so to limit everything here to only honor free will is not in alignment with exploring outside of 3D. Within this context, why was my post which responded to your post (and I address everyone here not you particularly) inappropriate? Because I didn't stay in the box? Because I perceived aspects of the topic that were not just about humans and their free will, and I wanted to include those in the discussion? Many here may have pigeonholed my responses to be about the tired subject of meat-eating. This is both incorrect and closed-minded. 

Frankly I think drinking human blood would actually be better than animal blood. My reason is that I think there is a collective consciousness in a species; so for humans, whatever suffering they cause in order to evolve through the process of free will, might well be limited to the species only rather than lesser evolved beings who haven't developed free will. I am opposed to all suffering, but recognize it as a necessary component in evolution at least at this time (unfortunately).

So if I, who have a different mindset from the vast majority of humanity, cannot express my opinions about compassion here, at B4, then what is this site for? Does it exist so members can perpetuate human limitations, or does it exist to expand our views on, and awareness of, the infinite universe? 

[AnthroHeart]

I love your avatar Minyatur.

[ree]

I do not understand here is why Monica keeps labeling STS when Ra said it's not ethics that polarizes someone negative. A person hunting and eating animals doesn't necessarily intentionally energize certain ray centers (orange/yellow/blue) and inhibit others (green)? If your service is in protecting animals is your thing that's great. Yet this labeling of others as StS/STO is inane. When you don't like something others' do you say they are STS?

It's like saying for every person who seems over the top you label them histrionic or whatnot. That's probably why people react. Seems like negative interpretation of catalyst. Which is de-polarizing or polarizing neg. 

She considers the slaugthering of animals as infridgment of their free will, hence the STS. At least that's how I perceived it.

IMO, everyone is being true to themselves which is perfectly fine.

Still confused around free will of animal-STS connection. How are we to know an animal's free will, if they are capable of making such choices? In 3D we have a challenging time understanding free-will (not all the time, of course) due to our veil. It would be more of a big deal if a higher density being like Ra SMC were to violate our free will bc they are able to understand situation w/ more 'clarity' due to their scope of understanding. We're 3D, we don't know 2D free will, only project our will onto them. I don't agree with the methods used to slaughter them for sure... But I can't see how free will and animals are in operation as per confederation philosophy? 

It sounds more like Monica's projection of her free will onto animals than knowing 2D free will?

[Minyatur]

I do not understand here is why Monica keeps labeling STS when Ra said it's not ethics that polarizes someone negative. A person hunting and eating animals doesn't necessarily intentionally energize certain ray centers (orange/yellow/blue) and inhibit others (green)? If your service is in protecting animals is your thing that's great. Yet this labeling of others as StS/STO is inane. When you don't like something others' do you say they are STS?

It's like saying for every person who seems over the top you label them histrionic or whatnot. That's probably why people react. Seems like negative interpretation of catalyst. Which is de-polarizing or polarizing neg. 

She considers the slaugthering of animals as infridgment of their free will, hence the STS. At least that's how I perceived it.

IMO, everyone is being true to themselves which is perfectly fine.

Still confused around free will of animal-STS connection. How are we to know an animal's free will, if they are capable of making such choices? In 3D we have a challenging time understanding free-will (not all the time, of course) due to our veil. It would be more of a big deal if a higher density being like Ra Social Memory Complex were to violate our free will bc they are able to understand situation w/ more 'clarity' due to their scope of understanding. We're 3D, we don't know 2D free will, only project our will onto them. I don't agree with the methods used to slaughter them for sure... But I can't see how free will and animals are in operation as per confederation philosophy? 

It sounds more like Monica's projection of her free will onto animals than knowing 2D free will?

Pershaps. 

I personally think that outside that the scope of how one polarizes himself within the illusion of time and separateness, there is no such thing as free will indrigment as free will is the first and foremost distortion.

As such 2D knows not their own free will and neither does 3D consciousnesses. It's more like the illusion of free will infridgment as an experience.

[Rhayader]

My cousin who is thai, always loved to eat chicken or pigs blood (i forget which) and tried to get it at every opportunity. The only place was in a bigger city quite far away from us. I never cared for it, still bit iffy on the idea, but in my understanding it ought still be very nutritious.

[Bluebell]

i read some article that said blood has too much iron for everyone but vampire bats lol. i don't know though, i don't think generalizing is very scientific.

[AnthroHeart]

I heard that if you get a hole in your stomach and blood leaks in you will suffer from potassium poisoning, and possibly die.

[Billy]

So...why was an on-topic post of mine split into ANOTHER war-on-meat thread, raped of its context, so I could be collectively be hung out to dry? I was commenting on a post about consuming blood, after that post's author had already connected the topic to vampires. I was on topic. It's not my fault that some other individuals decided to turn it into yet another outlet for their ongoing crusade, and for the record I think this is bull. 

I have purposefully avoided the meat vs. veg debate for years now because I feel that an individual's personal eating habits are their business. I do not owe anyone an explanation of the ethics behind my mode of consumption (and believe it or not, I do actually have ethics), nor do I feel a need to get others to share in my ethics, nor do I feel owed an explanation of anyone else's ethics. However, since I've been FORCED in, here is my two cents on the matter:

I don't care what anyone else thinks of my eating habits. I eat meat, as raw as I can get it, and I will likely keep doing so until the day I die. If I had access to animal blood via hunting, I would drink it (and you have no idea how careful or not careful I would be while hunting because, well, you don't know me at all). If I had access to clean human blood from a willing donor, yes (collective gasp), I would drink that, too. Call me evil, STS, non-compassionate, whatever. I do not care. Eat whatever you feel comfortable eating, but don't for a minute think you know me well enough for your judgment of my character to mean a thing to me. My conscience is totally clean. 

I assume that you are referring to me as I was the one to respond to your post. I detest dishonesty and cowardice (which I am not directing at you, Yera) and prefer to address this post with transparency and directness.

I don't care what you eat, either. From my standpoint, the whole so called "war on meat" conflict here has been completely misunderstood. It's not about telling anyone what to do or what they "should" do. It, for me, has only been about compassion, and I don't feel compassion is only for other humans.

To refer to the subject of eating meat as the "war on meat" is in itself a judgment. There is much irony to me in the accusations directed toward those trying to include animals in the idea of the LOO and compassion as being controlling, when I see control happening the other way—it is controlling to not allow opinions that conflict with what is, opinions that are out of the box with general societal, cultural, and human accepted behaviors.

The idea that humans have free will is not the end-all of everything in the universe. It is so utterly egocentric to me to think this way.

No one has forced you Yera, by the way, to respond. No one has forced anyone here at B4 to react, respond, be offended, or feel judged concerning the "meat" issue. It's not possible to MAKE anyone feel anything. Feelings, reactions, attitudes are a person's own responsibility. 

You are in alignment totally with what I think about individuals: it is their personal business and responsibility concerning what they choose to do in every aspect of their lives. Yet here we are, participating in a forum that canvasses subject matter beyond 3D. We are exploring concepts from Ra and higher densities and conscious expansion. What we discuss here goes BEYOND 3D human concerns, so to limit everything here to only honor free will is not in alignment with exploring outside of 3D. Within this context, why was my post which responded to your post (and I address everyone here not you particularly) inappropriate? Because I didn't stay in the box? Because I perceived aspects of the topic that were not just about humans and their free will, and I wanted to include those in the discussion? Many here may have pigeonholed my responses to be about the tired subject of meat-eating. This is both incorrect and closed-minded. 

Frankly I think drinking human blood would actually be better than animal blood. My reason is that I think there is a collective consciousness in a species; so for humans, whatever suffering they cause in order to evolve through the process of free will, might well be limited to the species only rather than lesser evolved beings who haven't developed free will. I am opposed to all suffering, but recognize it as a necessary component in evolution at least at this time (unfortunately).

So if I, who have a different mindset from the vast majority of humanity, cannot express my opinions about compassion here, at B4, then what is this site for? Does it exist so members can perpetuate human limitations, or does it exist to expand our views on, and awareness of, the infinite universe? 

I've seen this used a couple of time on bring4th and it's made me question, if true, does that mean that individuals don't have any responsibility in how they make other's feel and that we are each entirely responsible for our feelings (I believe Spaced brought up this point in another thread)?  Have I misunderstood something?  If true, I've got some serious work to do.

[Matt1]

So...why was an on-topic post of mine split into ANOTHER war-on-meat thread, raped of its context, so I could be collectively be hung out to dry? I was commenting on a post about consuming blood, after that post's author had already connected the topic to vampires. I was on topic. It's not my fault that some other individuals decided to turn it into yet another outlet for their ongoing crusade, and for the record I think this is bull. 

I have purposefully avoided the meat vs. veg debate for years now because I feel that an individual's personal eating habits are their business. I do not owe anyone an explanation of the ethics behind my mode of consumption (and believe it or not, I do actually have ethics), nor do I feel a need to get others to share in my ethics, nor do I feel owed an explanation of anyone else's ethics. However, since I've been FORCED in, here is my two cents on the matter:

I don't care what anyone else thinks of my eating habits. I eat meat, as raw as I can get it, and I will likely keep doing so until the day I die. If I had access to animal blood via hunting, I would drink it (and you have no idea how careful or not careful I would be while hunting because, well, you don't know me at all). If I had access to clean human blood from a willing donor, yes (collective gasp), I would drink that, too. Call me evil, STS, non-compassionate, whatever. I do not care. Eat whatever you feel comfortable eating, but don't for a minute think you know me well enough for your judgment of my character to mean a thing to me. My conscience is totally clean. 

I assume that you are referring to me as I was the one to respond to your post. I detest dishonesty and cowardice (which I am not directing at you, Yera) and prefer to address this post with transparency and directness.

I don't care what you eat, either. From my standpoint, the whole so called "war on meat" conflict here has been completely misunderstood. It's not about telling anyone what to do or what they "should" do. It, for me, has only been about compassion, and I don't feel compassion is only for other humans.

To refer to the subject of eating meat as the "war on meat" is in itself a judgment. There is much irony to me in the accusations directed toward those trying to include animals in the idea of the LOO and compassion as being controlling, when I see control happening the other way—it is controlling to not allow opinions that conflict with what is, opinions that are out of the box with general societal, cultural, and human accepted behaviors.

The idea that humans have free will is not the end-all of everything in the universe. It is so utterly egocentric to me to think this way.

No one has forced you Yera, by the way, to respond. No one has forced anyone here at B4 to react, respond, be offended, or feel judged concerning the "meat" issue. It's not possible to MAKE anyone feel anything. Feelings, reactions, attitudes are a person's own responsibility. 

You are in alignment totally with what I think about individuals: it is their personal business and responsibility concerning what they choose to do in every aspect of their lives. Yet here we are, participating in a forum that canvasses subject matter beyond 3D. We are exploring concepts from Ra and higher densities and conscious expansion. What we discuss here goes BEYOND 3D human concerns, so to limit everything here to only honor free will is not in alignment with exploring outside of 3D. Within this context, why was my post which responded to your post (and I address everyone here not you particularly) inappropriate? Because I didn't stay in the box? Because I perceived aspects of the topic that were not just about humans and their free will, and I wanted to include those in the discussion? Many here may have pigeonholed my responses to be about the tired subject of meat-eating. This is both incorrect and closed-minded. 

Frankly I think drinking human blood would actually be better than animal blood. My reason is that I think there is a collective consciousness in a species; so for humans, whatever suffering they cause in order to evolve through the process of free will, might well be limited to the species only rather than lesser evolved beings who haven't developed free will. I am opposed to all suffering, but recognize it as a necessary component in evolution at least at this time (unfortunately).

So if I, who have a different mindset from the vast majority of humanity, cannot express my opinions about compassion here, at B4, then what is this site for? Does it exist so members can perpetuate human limitations, or does it exist to expand our views on, and awareness of, the infinite universe? 

I've seen this used a couple of time on bring4th and it's made me question, if true, does that mean that individuals don't have any responsibility in how they make other's feel and that we are each entirely responsible for our feelings (I believe Spaced brought up this point in another thread)?  Have I misunderstood something?  If true, I've got some serious work to do.

Its an interesting point. I think we can effect others emotionally, even through words or text. Although its only likely to have an deep effective if someone already has a strong bias towards something that is being said. On another note, haggis is the national food of Scotland. It contains blood and all types of other things.

[Jade]

I think if something someone says bothers you, they are pointing you towards a blockage/negative thoughtform of some sort. It is possible to have little or no emotional reaction to something, even if it's something in the past that has always bothered you.

Q'uo has stated that in social situations, a balanced entity has the obligation to act with no filter. Even if that means that what someone says in the moment is offensive, if a *balanced* entity is attempting to behave with love, but still steps on someone's toes, it is the one with the bruises who must look inside themselves to understand why the event was so painful. Now, if someone is actively and intentionally stepping on toes to get a rise out of people, it is less on the one who was intentionally injured to deal with the catalyst, but still the injured one must look inside to see where their beliefs put them in situations where they are being abused. Lack of self-worth? Pure habit from being abused most of your life?

We all have a choice with how we deal with catalyst in the moment. Forums are ripe with experience because it's near impossible to discern someone's tone accurately through text (though not entirely impossible...) But even if you think someone is being snarky, we have the choice in the moment to frame their words with a different meaning and tone, (as long as their words aren't entirely hateful.)

Another thing to remember is that if someone is picking on you, that they are picking at a distortion that they see within you that they know they have themselves. This is where training oneself to have the reaction of compassion is extremely valuable. We're all mirrors and how we interact with each other is a direct result of how we feel about ourselves. If we learn to love and accept ourselves we lose the negative filter.

[Aion]

I admit, for myself, in all of this discussion what I find most interesting is that most people don't seem to question their impulses and attractions towards certain foods. 'I like what I like' is usually the answer (or something to do with ethics) but I believe that there is a reason that each person is attracted to certain kinds of food which either satisfy a mental image or fulfill some craving of the body (which I tend to presume it got from the mind).

[Minyatur]

I admit, for myself, in all of this discussion what I find most interesting is that most people don't seem to question their impulses and attractions towards certain foods. 'I like what I like' is usually the answer (or something to do with ethics) but I believe that there is a reason that each person is attracted to certain kinds of food which either satisfy a mental image or fulfill some craving of the body (which I tend to presume it got from the mind).

What does carving for candies imply about the mind? That's my favorite foodstuff.

[Aion]

I also have a lot of sugar cravings and I've always taken it that I crave excitement in my life.

[Diana]

No one has forced you Yera, by the way, to respond. No one has forced anyone here at B4 to react, respond, be offended, or feel judged concerning the "meat" issue. It's not possible to MAKE anyone feel anything. Feelings, reactions, attitudes are a person's own responsibility. 

I've seen this used a couple of time on bring4th and it's made me question, if true, does that mean that individuals don't have any responsibility in how they make other's feel and that we are each entirely responsible for our feelings (I believe Spaced brought up this point in another thread)?  Have I misunderstood something?  If true, I've got some serious work to do.

All individuals are responsible for themselves—their words, actions, intentions, reactions etc. If I say something hurtful to another person, I am responsible for my words. The person I said the hurtful words to is responsible for their reaction to the words. 

This is not to say it's okay for me to hurt another with words. But I must go within and recognize my actions within the context of my path (STO or STS), and work on my own evolution accordingly. The person who reacted to my words must go within and work on themselves and why they reacted. In this way we are mirrors—but I disagree with some here that the mirror is a simple reflection. One person might need to learn compassion (balancing with the "all"), and the other to learn self-confidence (reaching higher potentials of self-realization), and in this way we have helped each other to bring awareness of self to the surface.

[Jade]

I think our society has been taught/learned that food is an analog for excitement, which is why food has become so addictive and why it's difficult for people to fathom limiting their diet ("excitement") for health or moral reasons. I do think there has been acknowledgement that a craving for blood comes from an underactive (or possibly overactive) root chakra. Of course, blood is not the only therapeutic treatment for a lack of red-ray activity, but I don't deny that it probably has the quickest acting time.

[Aion]

Well that's one way to look at it, but on the other hand isn't cuisine a huge expression of creative energy?

Plus it's possible to limit oneself in an unhealthy way too.

[Plenum]

Well that's one way to look at it, but on the other hand isn't cuisine a huge expression of creative energy?

Plus it's possible to limit oneself in an unhealthy way too.

I think that's an extremely valuable point Farseer.

In 3d, food serves many catalytic purposes, as the many discussions on even what we choose to eat has demonstrated.

But apart from the actual food itself, the function of food as a bonding agent (family meals, thanksgiving), as a way of survival for some people who don't have adequate access to it (the poor, and the homeless), the skill and effort that goes into preparing a meal for oneself ... there's so much catalytic potential.

Compare this with what Ra offered about 4d bodies and their relationship to food.  There really is only one function: to maintain the physical vehicle, and to take time out from serving others to do so.  Food (as a catalyst) is pretty much non-present in 4d and above.  The food eaten is in harmony with the physical vehicle, and so things like malnutrition or obesity as catalyst don't exist.

43.18 Questioner: The mechanism of, shall we say, social catalyst due to a necessity for feeding the body then is active in fourth density. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect. The fourth-density being desires to serve and the preparation of foodstuffs is extremely simple due to increased communion between entity and living foodstuff. Therefore, this is not a significant catalyst but rather a simple precondition of the space/time experience. The catalyst involved is the necessity for the ingestion of foodstuffs. This is not considered to be of importance by fourth-density entities and it, therefore, aids in the teach/learning of patience.

43.19 Questioner: Could you expand a little bit on how that aids in the teach/learning of patience?

Ra: I am Ra. To stop the functioning of service to others long enough to ingest foodstuffs is to invoke patience.

The relationship to food for a 4d entity would be like us breathing air; it's transparent, and a non-topic.

Unlike it is for us 3d entities, and there are huge nutritional and ethical considerations that are bound up in our food.  And I'm not just referencing meat.  I'm talking about some of the slave-labor conditions that exist for the people who harvest fruit and veggies, as has recently been documented in Australia.  I'm sure such cases have also been exposed in the US, for migrant/itinerant workers as well.

[Aion]

Never mind massive monoculture conditions which is like the factory farming of plants. Plants are enslaved just as much as animals.

We can however realize that fundamentally consumption is one thing - an energy transfer.

[Jade]

It's increasingly more and more possible to eat food that doesn't come from enslavement. This is a huge goal of mine. It does require being educated about all aspects of our food production.

And of course food is a creative expression. Plant some seeds, grow a tomato, cook some pasta sauce. I think that's pure creative expression. I think the more involved we are with the energy transfer from start to finish, we have more control over the quality of that energy transfer. The more love and energy we give to consume energy, the more love and energy we receive from that source. Ie, if you are going and buying off the McDonald's dollar menu for dinner and barely acknowledging the human existence of the voice through the order box, or the untold number of cows' existences you are consuming in your ground beef patty, you are consuming energy without offering much of your own energy into the process. The other extreme would be again to plant a seed, tend your garden, and prepare your own food with love and grace. Of course toward this extreme it becomes less "practical" but as with anything, the energy we put in is what we receive in return. Some people are willing to spend an hour a day meditating but not an hour a day preparing food. I'm not pointing fingers because I hardly know anyone's cooking or meditating habits, I'm just trying to draw the comparison. On the whole, humans are extremely neglectful of their body, which leads to imbalance in the M/B/S totality.

[Minyatur]

It's increasingly more and more possible to eat food that doesn't come from enslavement. This is a huge goal of mine. It does require being educated about all aspects of our food production.

And of course food is a creative expression. Plant some seeds, grow a tomato, cook some pasta sauce. I think that's pure creative expression. I think the more involved we are with the energy transfer from start to finish, we have more control over the quality of that energy transfer. The more love and energy we give to consume energy, the more love and energy we receive from that source. Ie, if you are going and buying off the McDonald's dollar menu for dinner and barely acknowledging the human existence of the voice through the order box, or the untold number of cows' existences you are consuming in your ground beef patty, you are consuming energy without offering much of your own energy into the process. The other extreme would be again to plant a seed, tend your garden, and prepare your own food with love and grace. Of course toward this extreme it becomes less "practical" but as with anything, the energy we put in is what we receive in return. Some people are willing to spend an hour a day meditating but not an hour a day preparing food. I'm not pointing fingers because I hardly know anyone's cooking or meditating habits, I'm just trying to draw the comparison. On the whole, humans are extremely neglectful of their body, which leads to imbalance in the M/B/S totality.

In my case you nailed it about food and meditation, and the one dollar menu...

Although, I do not think it causes imbalances so much, might be heavier and help imbalances to remain stagnant pershaps, might also be a rather less efficient way to work with the body but I do not think it prevents in itself any kind of work or spiritual growth.

Whatever I eat is still Light.

[Jade]

I agree that it doesn't prevent spiritual work or growth at all, in fact it gives a different opportunity. As long as we are using the situation to polarize, we are using the catalyst. If one recognizes the food's "slave" origins, and blesses it all the same, they have worked the catalyst to be of service. If you consume unconsciously you are not processing the catalyst at all and will likely experience it in the body, by form of digestive pains, headaches, weakened immune system, etc. Cues to consciousness.

Ra summarizes it by saying it boils down to us treating our own body complexes with respect and not abuse:

40.14 Questioner: In dietary matters, what would be the foods that one would include and what would be the foods that one would exclude in a general way for the most or the greatest care of one’s bodily complex?

Ra: I am Ra. Firstly, we underline and emphasize that this information is not to be understood literally but as a link or psychological nudge for the body and the mind and spirit. Thus it is the care and respect for the self that is the true thing of importance.