Why I am not a vegan

[Monica]

From this weeks L/Lresearch newsletter (originally channeled on October 16, 2010 http://www.llresearch.org/transcripts/is..._1016.aspx ):

Now, how shall an entity whose consciousness is that of pure love feed its body? We notice that you focus upon meat and the eating of it as the arena of choice. And before we address that question we would note that not only the animals but the plants also are growing within the creation of the Father, blooming and dying at a rhythm of their own. In a very real way, it is as much of an offense, one may say, to pluck a bean or dig a potato from the ground as it is to slaughter an animal, for you have interrupted the cycle of its life and its dancing with the Creator as you do so. But to focus upon this is to digress from your query. And so we would focus upon the slaughter of animals and the responsibility that an entity has if he chooses to eat meat.

One valid choice that many of those who have awakened have made is not to eat meat and to find ways to furnish the body with the protein that meat offers by eating other substances, such as legumes, which contain protein. [1]

Another choice that an awakened entity has, as the questioner said, is to move to the purchase only of meats that have been humanely slaughtered. There are two sources of such meats that are generally available to entities within a reasonable amount of distance from where they live. One is to seek out a kosher store [2] which sells meat, knowing that the priests of that religion have treated animals well and have slaughtered them in a sacred ritual which is taken most seriously by those priests.

The other is to find a biodynamic source where the same feeling of sacredness surrounds the appreciation of mammals while they live and the humane slaughter of them when it is time for them to feed their humans.

And as the one known as J said, barring those choices, there is always the metaphysically correct choice of relating to the animal in that timeless condition which is called “metaphysical time” wherein all things occur simultaneously, so that you are able to contact any animal, before you eat it, no matter how abused or how slaughtered. And as you contact this animal, you express your love of this animal and your appreciation for all that the animal has gone through in order to give you its energy, its consciousness, such as it is, and its love, which is very real. So, in praise, prayer and thanksgiving you heal the division between you and the meat and the animal from which that meat came.

And as you do this to your meat, dancing with the meat, becoming one with the meat, you are in effect lifting that energy to the infinite Creator, blessing it and healing all that has gone before, for the animal and for you.

Indeed, we would note that it is not only the eating of meat, but every single action undertaken by you, no matter how humble or small, that has the capability and potentiality of becoming sacred, so that you at all times are giving thanks, offering praise, and opening to the experiences that have been given to you to walk in.

How timely!

I have chosen the Law of One as my spiritual foundation because it resonates deeply, and I have found almost nothing in the Ra Material that didn't resonate. Carla, Jim and Don did a fabulous service in allowing this material to be channeled virtually UNdistorted.

However, I don't feel the same way about the Q'uo material, though it surely has many gems! For starters, it was consciously channeled by Carla, and although she has done her utmost to be as clear a channel as possible, any conscious channeling is going to have some degree of distortion.

Just as the Edgar Cayce material had a 'Christian' flavor because Cayce was a Christian, so too does the Q'uo material have Carla's own flavoring, due to her biases and distortions. (We all have biases and distortions.)

This doesn't take away from my love and appreciation for Carla! But I wouldn't take everything in the Q'uo sessions as absolute authoritative. Anyway, Q'uo has always encouraged us to use discernment. This is definitely one of those times when discernment is important! It's an easy one because it is easily verifiable: a mainstream, popular myth is attributed to Q'uo, when surely Q'uo would have known the truth about kosher.

Pablisimo said it best:

I think we need to keep in mind the potential for distortion in consciously channeled messages. Unlike in the Ra contact, Qu'o is channeled with full waking consciousness and thus, in my view, there is far more potential for distortion due to bias of the group.

We may never settle the veg vs animal flesh issue in the context of the spiritual life on this thread. It is not a simple matter. However, what I believe is undeniable is that this topic arouses fierce passions in people. Discussing the consumption of animal flesh, especially in a spiritual context, causes intense reactions in many of us, on both sides of the issue. There is an ardor, a passion, an almost uncontrollable urge to speak one's mind and perspective on the issue that the topic provokes. It's all too easy to dismiss a vegetarian stating their cause as deluded and self-righteous...the same as one could dismiss one who chooses to eat animals as just guilty and deluded. I hope we can be more mature than that, but with this post I'm not stating a position. What I AM trying to establish most of all is that this topic is one that is hard to have an ambiguous view on -- the vast majority of us tend to have a strong bias one way or the other.

So it would seem to me that any area where passions are this strong would be a prime candidate for distortion in conscious channeling. How could the channel and the group NOT have a strong opinion on something like this? This de-tuning due to bias would degrade the quality of the channeled information. Let's examine the next part of that quote in this context:

Quo Wrote:
....One is to seek out a kosher store [2] which sells meat, knowing that the priests of that religion have treated animals well and have slaughtered them in a sacred ritual which is taken most seriously by those priests....."

This is simply not true. Jewish rabbis generally do not raise these animals and so one cannot say that they "have treated animals well", nor do they normally slaughter them directly so one also cannot say it is done in "a sacred ritual which is taken most seriously by those priests". Kosher rules refer to how an animal is slaughtered and how the flesh is handled afterwards. There is no guarantee that an animal was treated well during their LIFETIME, any more than an organic label necessarily means that an animal was treated well. There are many common misconceptions about this topic, but the slaughter does not have to be done by a rabbi, it can be (and usually is) done by an agent that they approve of. There is no sacred blessing that goes on during the ceremony. The ritual is basically that a sharp knife is used to cut the throat of the animal and it is allowed to bleed to death through the neck. The animal is not stunned beforehand.

So you can raise an animal in typical, terrible, agri-business factory farm conditions, and as long as an approved agent slashes their neck with a sharp knife and allows the animal to bleed to death, it's Kosher. Of course, there are also post-slaughter handling rules that are very strict involving inspection of the carcass and sanitation, but in no way does purchasing Kosher meat tell the seeker anything about how the animal was treated.

And in regards to the slaughter method, proponents of this approach maintain that it is a more humane way to kill the animal, that they lose consciousness within a few seconds. There is a fierce debate on this topic as opponents of the practice say that stunning the animal first would be more humane and that animals killed in the Kosher fashion often survive for several minutes in agony. It's far from settled, but you can read more about Kosher topics and watch graphic videos of this method of slaughter here:

http://www.peta.org/features/kosher-vegetarian.aspx
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HZnQmc3U9I

-----------

Of course Qu'o would know all of this about animal flesh killed in the Kosher fashion, and I'm sure Carla didn't make up the channeled message. What I'd like to offer for consideration is that perhaps because of her own personal bias that eating animal flesh is acceptable, and her own personal beliefs that Kosher or "biodynamic" animal flesh is more acceptable, that some de-tuning occurred in this contact. That's the only explanation I have for why something so factually inaccurate would have made it into a Qu'o transcript. It's also why I suspect the topic was not explored in any depth in the Ra material. Strong bias detunes contact.

That said, let's not judge the channel, nor anyone else as we debate this topic further, respectfully and with care. We all have our own biases, myself included, and we are all struggling to find balance and do what's right in the confusing phase of existence we find ourselves in. None of us has all the answers and should remember to be humble and kind to our other-selves as we discuss this issue. However, I think we owe it to ourselves to use our own discernment when evaluating channeled information, even when the source is well known and with established purity. Discernment.

Pablisimo said it well. I would take it a step further and suggest that this particular channeling session got more than just detuned, but even infiltrated.

And as you do this to your meat, dancing with the meat, becoming one with the meat, you are in effect lifting that energy to the infinite Creator, blessing it and healing all that has gone before, for the animal and for you.

Dancing with a younger other-self's violated, dead body? How would we perceive this Q'uote if it said:

And as you do this to your murdered human victim, dancing with her dead body, becoming one with the corpse, you are in effect lifting that energy to the infinite Creator, blessing it and healing all that has gone before, for your human victim and for you.

How does that work?

---

As you said, people haven't made the choice, and that is why there is such an immense amount of suffering.

Precisely!!! Are you acknowledging that our choices can help alleviate suffering?

Why, then, would we not want to do that, if we can? This is what baffles me. How can we expect the world to suddenly go poof and be 4D, when we aren't even making nonviolent, compassionate choices ourselves?

In my mind, suffering is part of a polarity, a duality. What might the opposite of suffering be?

Peace, happiness, joy, bliss...cool stuff like that.