Animal or non-animal based diet?

[Sunclarity]

Ra in one of the books, I believe the second, appeared to say that eating animals for sustainance wasn't an undesireable action. What he said exactly was that its instrument at the time would benefit from higher comsumption of foodstuffs, and in that he directly included meat.

It is only logical for me to kill an animal and nourish my being from its carcass, after all, I didn't really kill, I only transformed him into him, as I am him. There is the suffering aspect from his part as he perceived himself in second density, but sufference is love for all is love and it's unavoidable.

Plants are alive too and recent research shows they scream when being hurt. It's just in too high a frequency for us to hear. So, eating a plant-based diet is not more righteous and it seems it doesn't involve less pain. In other words, it is not necessarily to be preferred over a meat-based diet.

Again, this all makes sense, but then comes Oashe, who supposedly belongs to the same confederation of Ra and is therefore similarly knowledgeable, saying one is to be vegetarian. This seems to go against reality. Could it be that the message was distorted that much by the instrument?

Or maybe I'm misinterpreting. Maybe plants are more spiritually nutritious despite the sufference involved in their consumption. That could be, but I don't think Ra would recommend meat if it was detrimental.

[sillypumpkins]

I think some benefit more from a vegetarian diet, and I think some benefit more eating meat than vegetables. Everyone is different. I don't know why some gravitate more towards veggies than meat, or vice versa.

I wouldn't think too hard about the "spiritual" or "moral" implications of eating either. Just eat what feels right to you. What's right for someone else might not be right for you. I find the whole notion that "eating meat is death and you are a killer/wrong if you eat meat" to be silly. Likewise, I find it silly when people diss vegetarians for preferring vegetables.

One thing I like about a lot of native cultures is how some will hunt food, and give a moment of praise/thankfulness before consuming/after killing the animal. It's a sacred thing.

Personally, I eat mostly vegetarian but do enjoy fish and meat on occasion, depending on where it comes from. The main issue I have with store-bought meat is the means in which it's sourced. Imo, there's nothing "wrong" with killing an animal for food, however, for me, the problem arises when that "sacredness" described above, is tarnished by the way the majority of slaughterhouses are run. That is, inhumanely. I can't eat meat if it's produced in that way, at least with a clear conscious I can't. But that's just me.

All in all, there are no 'rules' for what you can and can't eat. Everyone is different. Use your own discernment when it comes to what you put into your body (mentally, spiritually, and physically.) There is no right or wrong. Even if I wanted to eat store-bought meat, I wouldn't be wrong, nor would anyone else be

take care

[Agua]

removed

[Diana]

I wouldn't think too hard about the "spiritual" or "moral" implications of eating either. Just eat what feels right to you.

I agree that everyone should do what they think is best, as we are what we are along the steps of evolution of consciousness. But what is wrong with thinking about the implications of this very important subject?

What's right for someone else might not be right for you. I find the whole notion that "eating meat is death and you are a killer/wrong if you eat meat" to be silly. Likewise, I find it silly when people diss vegetarians for preferring vegetables.

Silly? I agree that to say something is "wrong" is not the way to perceive this issue.

It's not only about what you prefer, or what tastes good. It's also about respect for other life forms and the planet itself. For example: animal factory farms is the biggest contributor to greenhouse gases. Much suffering is caused from our meat industry. This is the tip of the iceberg regarding our culture of meat eating (and dairy).

If you want to be a responsible and accountable being in this existence, the question of what you take in for nourishment is very, very important.

---

Regarding what Ra said in the books: that was for Carla specifically. One must remember that Ra did not ever infringe upon free will. They recommended to Carla based on her paradigm and habits, and would not have imposed information that countered her (or the general) belief system. The attachment humans have to food is very strong.

[sillypumpkins]

@Diana

Let me rephrase: I think it's silly to say that under any circumstances, no exception, eating meat = you are a murderer.

Personally, I find animal/dairy factory/farms to be abhorrent and for that reason I don't consume meat that is "manufactured" through those means.

My point was: use your own discernment to determine what is right for you in regards to what you put in your body. Not all meat/dairy is 'produced' through factory/dairy farms. I think there needs to be some clarification that there is a way to consume those things without promoting the suffering of animals. The language of "consuming meat/dairy = bad" is much too absolute in my opinion.

Sunclarity seems to be weighing whether one "should" eat meat, or one "should" be vegetarian. When I say "eat what feels right to you," I am attempting to convey that it doesn't need to be either/or, and you should eat what makes you feel right, generally. One doesn't "need" to be a vegetarian in order to progress spiritually, and vice verse with meat. That's sort of what I'm trying to say.

I'm not trying to diminish the issues you speak of. I was speaking generally, in terms of diet, it doesn't have to be meat or veggies. Apologies if my language conveyed indifference... hope this clears up my intentions a little bit...

I'd also like to add that I am not a source of authority on this subject. While I do try to be mindful of what I eat, I am by no means perfect, and that is perhaps being conveyed in my views on the subject. If someone would like to help me heighten my perspective on the issue, i'd be happy to engage in conversation. If not, that's okay too.... I don't wish to do any harm in sharing my perspective

be well

[Asolsutsesvyl]

The old Christian idea, which set it apart from Judaism, was that the important thing is not what you put into your body, but rather what comes from you - what you do, how you are. It makes sense to me as a philosophical idea to extract.

It is more difficult to take care of the body eating only plants. Evolutionarily, a sufficient intake of animal products correspond the most straightforwardly to what the body needs. If people take care and remain healthy as vegetarians, that's one thing, but it would be counterproductive, I think, to neglect the body in what becomes a kind of soft martyrdom, as some do, viewing it rigidly as the only right thing to do.

Very generally, I think that dogmas concerning physical things and activities - viewing them as very spiritually significant - distract and remove focus from what matters. Spirituality is, for the most part, not about the details of how life is physically lived, but rather about the psychosocial and about more abstract things.

Some may however feel strongly about such matters, and strongly disagree when I view a strong focus on physical details as merely superstition.

To round out the above, I do care strongly about ethics. And I strongly disagree with practices such as factory farming, because they are unethical, whether or not you eat the meat from them. And I do not wish to support such practices. If you eat meat, it is a kind of contribution to support healthier, more ethical alternatives.

[Agua]

removed

[Diana]

@ sillypumpkins: I meant no offense to you. I just endeavor to share my point of view on this subject. One reason I do is because I think animals are also other-selves. There are many things that distinguish plants from animals to support the idea that a plant-based diet is indicated.

It is more difficult to take care of the body eating only plants. Evolutionarily, a sufficient intake of animal products correspond the most straightforwardly to what the body needs. If people take care and remain healthy as vegetarians, that's one thing, but it would be counterproductive, I think, to neglect the body in what becomes a kind of soft martyrdom, as some do, viewing it rigidly as the only right thing to do.

It is not more difficult to take care of the body eating plants only. I am healthier than most people half my age, and I have been vegetarian since 1993, and vegan most of that time.

To say it is soft martyrdom has nothing to do with why I am vegan (I can't vouch for others). I do not neglect my body, and unlike many "spiritual" people who think the physical doesn't matter, I do think it matters. I take care of the body I have, and the best way to do that in my opinion is to feed it the healthiest food (healthiest on every level including mental/emotional and for the spirit along the evolutionary journey).

Beyond all the obvious reasons which are easy to look up (physical heath, animal abuse), imagine a time in the future when we have evolved to the point of existing on "light" or drinking the ambrosia Ra mentions. Now draw a line to that point. What steps might one take along that line regarding nourishment of the body? 

[Infinite]

Well, I’ve been a vegetarian for a few years now and I’ve studied this subject to a great extent. I will share some topics about this:

- From a material point of view, we don't need to eat meat to survive and we are not weak when cutting it from the diet. This is a myth. There are even high-performance vegan athletes.

- Energetically speaking, at the moment of death the animal goes through terror and fear. This energy ends up being transmitted to the meat. When we eat meat, we are eating this heavy energy. As a result, our energy field becomes denser. There are some consequences of these heavy energies, such as anger. It's notable that after a period without meat and without food with any trace of meat, the acquisition of a natural repulsion for meat. It gets to nausea. I have already read that there are black magicians who don't eat meat in order not to interfere with their magical work.

- Spiritually speaking, I see the act of eating some animal as absurd. I can't even watch videos where animals are mistreated. It hurts me deep in my soul as if I am being cut and stabbed myself. I don't judge who does it, especially indigenous populations that survive from fishing and livestock. My problem is more with the meat industry. Now, I honestly think it is part of the spiritual path to become vegetarian at some point in the journey. There are many spiritual sources that speak of this. In reality, you don't even have to eat or drink anything, because the prana (intelligent energy) that sustains us, can be obtained directly without eating food and water. But of course, there are many levels on the spiritual path. I always wondered what Ra would answer when asked about the consequences of eating meat.

[sillypumpkins]

There are many things that distinguish plants from animals to support the idea that a plant-based diet is indicated.

Would you be willing to share those distinctions?

Part of my hang-up on the subject is that I don't see plants as being necessarily more worthy to eat than animals. To me, plants are just as much other-selves as animals.

[Navaratna]

A lot of Hindus are ok with killing chickens.

When you think of how small their brains are, it kind of does compare to how you kill mosquitoes/roaches pests like locusts attacking your food.

Cows I understand a bit more as being sacrilege because of the size of their brains. I've also read some details about how there's the idea that it's more difficult for a human to break down the cells of animals larger than them compared to smaller ones like chickens.

I've been thinking later about Jains because of some of the discussions on here. A religion in India which has only several million adherents and how they are a good example of how trying to be a perfect spiritual being can make people look nonsensical.

Like wearing no clothing because they are material attachments in completely celibate life of monasticism
Not harming even the tiniest of insects.
Strongly against violence of any kind even towards the lowest level, like omg you psychopath you HURT THAT BLADE OF GRASS!?
They also have some attitudes which don't compare men and women as equals. Feudal, but that kind of summarizes all kinds of attitudes towards women in old religions. A lot of stuff I've read makes no mention of the role women had in some of these places where people followed monk lifestyles. Why? The taboo of speaking about female sensuality, and the fact that they were probably just dismissed as being stuck in the kitchen. It's a sad reality, not the one I prefer but I can't help but think for the most part that it's why Jains for example didn't give them roles.

[Diana]

There are many things that distinguish plants from animals to support the idea that a plant-based diet is indicated.

Would you be willing to share those distinctions?

Part of my hang-up on the subject is that I don't see plants as being necessarily more worthy to eat than animals. To me, plants are just as much other-selves as animals.

Yes. I have done so many times here but no problem doing so again. I don't have the time right now, but I will get back with you soon.

[Asolsutsesvyl]

@Agua: In part, we are (currently) on different footings about spirituality, but in part, I think personal differences in language use make that difference look bigger than it is.

The biggest difference in our thinking is that I separate things into some large categories. I see a distinction between living life in a more "automatic" way, without choices that matter, and a life which distinctly goes somewhere, spiritually. From that, I separate things into things which matter and things which do not matter. The "merely physical" being spiritually neutral.

There's not a simple binary division between physical and "abstract spirituality", however. I used a single word, "psychosocial", to express a lot. The meaning: how people relate to and interact with both themselves and one another (and other beings, including animals). That word was there as the glue between the abstract and the concrete. Sometimes I put things too shortly for others to be able to see the thinking.

The topic of factory farming ties into the psychosocial, since it has to do with how other beings are treated. Hoping that this won't get too annoying, I'll further tie that back to the opening philosophical idea, noting that what comes from people has plenty to do with factory farming, it being an example of something very bad. Something worth not supporting, and worth supporting a better way than.


@Diana: In the modern day, there's certainly the resources to put together healthier vegetarian diets. Since you basically take care of yourself, you are not among the people with a particular kind of body-damaging lifestyle I mentioned. (In some other ways, by the way, like lack of exercise, I myself don't really live a truly healthy life. I don't think the bad habits I have make me more spiritual, unlike some who lead unhealthy lives, however.)

I think that, in relation to a life of "living on light", 3D biological life is a dead end. Such a thing is not of the world of the physical senses. I think that the future is one of ultimately no longer incarnating into bodies like this one, and instead existing in a different type of living structure.

[Navaratna]

I wonder what diehard vegans would do if there turns out to be a serious disruption in the global food supply and the only effective way to eat is to fish.

lol

[Navaratna]

I wonder what diehard vegans would do if they didn't have any food but meat

[Infinite]

I wonder what diehard vegans would do if there turns out to be a serious disruption in the global food supply and the only effective way to eat is to fish.

lol

They would eat fish. To have discernment is to be realistic and to do what is within your reality. I think this is better than making excuses for not leaving the comfort zone.

[Navaratna]

I wonder what diehard vegans would do if there turns out to be a serious disruption in the global food supply and the only effective way to eat is to fish.

lol

They would eat fish. To have discernment is to be realistic and to do what is within your reality. I think this is better than making excuses for not leaving the comfort zone.

I hope I don't reincarnate as a tuna.

[Louisabell]

Everytime you eat meat, you are wasting an opportunity to eat legumes.

Legumes are the stuff of life. Not only are they a good source of protein, but good sources of the minerals that are usually found in animal products (zinc, iron and calcium), very low GI carbs and powerful pre-biotics in the form of resistant starch. Science is now showing how important the microbiome in our gut is. To top it all off, they are great sources of anti-oxidants (meat has none), keeping you young and healthy.

They are good for the soil as they are nitrogen fixing AND so cheap, everyone in the world can live off of them. The blue zone populations that have the longest living peoples all have legumes as a significant portion of their diets.

So I ask, have you had your legumes today?

[Navaratna]

Thanks for your opinions

[Louisabell]

BTW, the whole survival of a mammalian species is based on attachment because the young need to stay close to the adults for safety, warmth, nourishment and learning.

We share the same attachment hormones to all mammalian species, that's why when you cuddle a dog, oxytocin gets released in both the human's and dog's brains.

You can make abstractions all you want, but a mother cow will still scream for days when her calf is snatched from her.

The reason we farm and eat mostly mammals is because they are easy to tame. We use these attachment hormones against them, when they bond to humans they don't attack us, then the humans (us) betray them. Humans are the only species which can betray, because we have the ability to make justifications for our actions.

Couldn't imagine an alligator farm would be very easy to manage.

Plants do not have pain receptors or attachment hormones. Many plants we eat are annuals (i.e their life cycle is a year/season before they release seeds and die) and some plants exist in massive networks (i.e bananas aren't grown from seeds but cuttings, therefore all bananas come from the same mother plant). Also plants have a symbiotic relationship with animals, relying on certain parts of the plant to be eaten for their seeds to be spread.

[sillypumpkins]

So I ask, have you had your legumes today?

Lol, yes, actually. For lunch and dinner

[Navaratna]

The Indian diet I was referring to said chicken is an occasionally thing, as in a few slices for lunch/dinner so you could say it is plant based

The liver diet is an element of sahaja yoga which revolves around purifying the liver.

meaning

minimize
cream, fried foods, coffde, tobacco, fish, red meats. Heavy foods that will tax the liver. processed foods [coffee for example] and animal products.

chicken is white meat so doesn't apply to these rules..

maximize
fruits, vegetables, ghee, ginger [huge emphasis on ginger], and an indian fruit named kokum [mangosteen family] which can even be prepared as a tea for the benefits.
olives are spoken of graciously, and a salt-olive oil combo is recommended for oral hygiene

this cleanses the liver which is involved in a lot of natural chemical metabolism for the body and is the second largest organ [after your skin]. this is said to keep the body pure and helps the effects of meditation feel more pronounced.

there is even a treatment around using ice packs to cool down the liver so meditations will be felt more. other than this the other tool they recommend is soaking feet in salt water and using candles/ while meditating on bodies of water
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPUi4Ijl-Ww

the drained feeling of eating ice cream and french fries for example.. I bet comes from the higher level of stress and heat it puts on your liver trying to break down these unnatural foods.

[Louisabell]

The Indian diet I was referring to said chicken is an occasionally thing, as in a few slices for lunch/dinner so you could say it is plant based

The liver diet is an element of sahaja yoga which revolves around purifying the liver.

meaning

minimize
cream, fried foods, coffde, tobacco, fish, red meats. Heavy foods that will tax the liver. processed foods [coffee for example] and animal products.

chicken is white meat so doesn't apply to these rules..

maximize
fruits, vegetables, ghee, ginger [huge emphasis on ginger], and an indian fruit named kokum [mangosteen family] which can even be prepared as a tea for the benefits.
olives are spoken of graciously, and a salt-olive oil combo is recommended for oral hygiene

this cleanses the liver which is involved in a lot of natural chemical metabolism for the body and is the second largest organ [after your skin]. this is said to keep the body pure and helps the effects of meditation feel more pronounced.

there is even a treatment around using ice packs to cool down the liver so meditations will be felt more. other than this the other tool they recommend is soaking feet in salt water and using candles/ while meditating on bodies of water
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPUi4Ijl-Ww

the drained feeling of eating ice cream and french fries for example.. I bet comes from the higher level of stress and heat it puts on your liver trying to break down these unnatural foods.

Some ashrams in India will only eat dairy for animal products, and they produce it themselves from resident cows that they aim to take very good care of. They do not steal their calfs.

It is a delicacy, not a staple.

They have not lost the art of preparing legumes in delicious ways.

[Louisabell]

Healing is not some nebulous magical thing

40.13 Questioner: Then you are saying that cancer is quite easily healed mentally and is a good teaching tool because it is quite easily healed mentally and once the entity forgives the other-self at whom he is angry cancer will disappear. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is partially correct. The other portion of healing has to do with forgiveness of self and a greatly heightened respect for the self. This may conveniently be expressed by taking care in dietary matters. This is quite frequently a part of the healing and forgiving process. Your basic premise is correct.

Yep, sometimes healing is just about dealing with your crap from the past, putting your big girl/boy pants on, giving up your food addictions, putting down the pepperoni pizza, and eating your vegetables!

[ada]

I also feel that it is in each's circumstances and there is no right or wrong.

And I think that if we have an option to different dietary options then there is no reason why we shouldn't at least try, thankfully we've advanced so much that we don't need it to survive. Some in other places most likely still do.

But we have been raised in certain ways, in certain cultures, and most of us have been used to consuming it, perhaps even our bodies have.

So if you feel you would like to try, then try in moderation, if you eat it daily then try to cut it down to once every few days, weeks, etc. See how you feel, what you learn.

And if you find yourself back to consuming it, then that's how it is and it is okay, because we are all one, the one who consumes, the one who doesn't, the one who consumes less. We all eventually came to learn and share, help each other grow and understand.

[Navaratna]

Healing is not some nebulous magical thing

40.13 Questioner: Then you are saying that cancer is quite easily healed mentally and is a good teaching tool because it is quite easily healed mentally and once the entity forgives the other-self at whom he is angry cancer will disappear. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is partially correct. The other portion of healing has to do with forgiveness of self and a greatly heightened respect for the self. This may conveniently be expressed by taking care in dietary matters. This is quite frequently a part of the healing and forgiving process. Your basic premise is correct.

Yep, sometimes healing is just about dealing with your crap from the past, putting your big girl/boy pants on, giving up your food addictions, putting down the pepperoni pizza, and eating your vegetables!  

Something I remember about the texts is that there is rarely any reference to objects that an individual can hold.

There's references to rubies and diamonds strung around chains, maybe you could say Tarot cards but those conversations are about the imagery.

It does back to how they didn't want to give humans a bias. You could say they talk about locations like the pyramids but you're not walking off with the pyramids any time soon.

Something you can hold. That's why the part where they mention diamonds and rubies is so significant to me. As a human you can't help but think "how can I materially benefit off this" or is it just a big book on philosophy for the most part...I don't think so, and it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks of your acknowledgment of a Venetian extraterrestrial intelligence..lol but does anyone know? Is there anything Ra talks about that you can grab a part of other than the objects I mentioned?

maybe someone is thinking of reminding me "everything is transitory we're all just dandelions! aha! the truth you don't know" [which I do..] but as a male I can't think of any response you'd get from guys other than so fucking what does that do for me? One of the main reasons why I think there aren't million of people in to this. People think materialisticly. I read Ra years and years ago and moved on to explore other things because there are plenty of new ideas people develop and reading about archaeology is interesting discovering what objects people considered valuable. Whether it's Jade in Asia/Mesoamerican or Lapis lazuli in S. America or the Mideast it's been fascinating understanding what objects people interred themselves with because it's how they made themselves wealthy. Whoever had all the diamonds and rubies in Egypt must have been da boss. Inca chieftans on piles of Lapis. Sumerian tombs with thousands of pieces also. Mexicans with all varieties of greenstone/turquoise.

[Louisabell]

Something I remember about the texts is that there is rarely any reference to objects that an individual can hold.

There's references to rubies and diamonds strung around chains, maybe you could say Tarot cards but those conversations are about the imagery.

It does back to how they didn't want to give humans a bias. You could say they talk about locations like the pyramids but you're not walking off with the pyramids any time soon.

This is probably why:

60.16. Ra: I am Ra ... it is our observation that due to the complexity of influences upon the unmanifested being at this space/time nexus among your planetary peoples it is best that the progress of the mind/body/spirit complex take place without, as you call them, training aids because when using a training aid an entity then takes upon itself the Law of Responsibility for the quickened or increased rate of learn/teaching. If this greater understanding, if we may use this misnomer, is not put into practice in the moment by moment experience of the entity, then the usefulness of the training aid becomes negative.

The wisdom teachings were lost when the libraries were burnt. The age of Essentialism is upon us.

[Sunclarity]

I dont think its so much about which is better.
Your dietary needs depend on your very situation and makeup at a given time.

No matter if you eat animals or plants, you always eat consciousness, and you always end the physical incarnation of it.

A huge difference however makes how animals are being held.
Especially in the industrial farming (sorry, not my native language), life vircumstances are horrible and the animals suffer a great deal.
This obviously IS much worse than eating plants.

For two reason:

The obvious reason that we cause tremendous suffering in sentient beings.
The second reason, all this energy that the animal experiences is being stored in his system. When you ingest it, you also ingest the energy.
So eating meat from animals that suffered a lit obviously puts massive negative energy in your system.

I believe animals that we eat should have a life that they enjoy.
If that is so, I see nothing wrong with eating meat.
If its not so, I do not eat it.

As stated, plants seem to suffer too. If you wish to learn more about it, simply google "plants scream". Maybe animals suffer more though due to its somewhat increased array of senses? This could be a reason.

[Sunclarity]

BTW, the whole survival of a mammalian species is based on attachment because the young need to stay close to the adults for safety, warmth, nourishment and learning.

We share the same attachment hormones to all mammalian species, that's why when you cuddle a dog, oxytocin gets released in both the human's and dog's brains.

You can make abstractions all you want, but a mother cow will still scream for days when her calf is snatched from her.

The reason we farm and eat mostly mammals is because they are easy to tame. We use these attachment hormones against them, when they bond to humans they don't attack us, then the humans (us) betray them. Humans are the only species which can betray, because we have the ability to make justifications for our actions.

Couldn't imagine an alligator farm would be very easy to manage.

Plants do not have pain receptors or attachment hormones. Many plants we eat are annuals (i.e their life cycle is a year/season before they release seeds and die) and some plants exist in massive networks (i.e bananas aren't grown from seeds but cuttings, therefore all bananas come from the same mother plant). Also plants have a symbiotic relationship with animals, relying on certain parts of the plant to be eaten for their seeds to be spread.

If I may ask, are you sure yours is an informed opinion? What gives you certainty that plants don't feel pain and they don't attach? In a level you can say they surely do as there is no separation in creation. It is illosory if perceived. You might say they don't in as conscious of a manner as we humans do, but that's still would be questionable due to the oneness of all. If you may, watch the following video and tell me how your view stands after.

https://youtu.be/mucAJW6qEvk

[Sunclarity]

Something I remember about the texts is that there is rarely any reference to objects that an individual can hold.

There's references to rubies and diamonds strung around chains, maybe you could say Tarot cards but those conversations are about the imagery.

It does back to how they didn't want to give humans a bias. You could say they talk about locations like the pyramids but you're not walking off with the pyramids any time soon.

This is probably why:

60.16. Ra: I am Ra ... it is our observation that due to the complexity of influences upon the unmanifested being at this space/time nexus among your planetary peoples it is best that the progress of the mind/body/spirit complex take place without, as you call them, training aids because when using a training aid an entity then takes upon itself the Law of Responsibility for the quickened or increased rate of learn/teaching. If this greater understanding, if we may use this misnomer, is not put into practice in the moment by moment experience of the entity, then the usefulness of the training aid becomes negative.

The wisdom teachings were lost when the libraries were burnt. The age of Essentialism is upon us.

I failed to grasp why the training aid becomes negative in such an usage.