Eating

[Guest guest]

>> With regard to Maharaj. I know he smoked and ate meat etc. Whether

he was realised or not, I don't know. If he was then what he ate and

smoked would be irrelevant. God eating God in a non existant dream.

My point originally was that meat eating and the killing of animals is

an indication of a lack of awareness, and not conducive to it. >>

I don't know about realized folks eating or not eating meat. The ones

I have met don't, and it is because of the concept of ahimsa. (I am

referring here specifically to Amritanandamayi and Shree Maa.) But

what I would like to share with the group is much more personal, and

I will preface by saying that for nearly 15 years, I did not eat much

red meat (except for the occasional bacon, which I was not able to

give up). This was mostly however, due to the folks I was hanging out

with at the time, and a politically correct behavior became a

habit...until I moved to the west and lived with my meat eating folks

for awhile. However...the other day (once upon a time)...

....I was having a conversation over the phone with my (31 year old)

daughter, Amy. She has always been a sensitive child and woman,

caring and compassionate, but not religious in any particular way or

according to any particular form. She informed me that she had

stopped eating "cows." (She also told me that a couple of times,

restaurants where she had ordered something slipped up, and she chose

to go ahead and eat the meat rather than make a point.) She said she

was going to give up eating "pig" also, but not until after her visit

here, where she will be staying with me, and we will be spending time

with my meat eating folks. She felt her non eating of beef would be

enough for them to accommodate in one visit. Her reason: "I decided I

can't eat anything with eyelashes." This response startled me, so I

asked her to tell me more about it. Her feelings were very subtle,

yet made a great deal of sense to me. They had to do with the degree

to which an animal interacts, makes contact of the self and the Self

through the eyes. (I will also say that it is a personal belief that

everything that exists is Spirit.) Years ago, when my sister

attempted to give up meat eating (she has done so in fits and starts,

but is never able to completely stop, though she eats little of it)

her reason was: "I can't eat anything that I can't imagine killing

myself. I can imagine wringing a chicken's neck, but I can't imagine

going up to a cow and taking a bite." Again, this made alot of sense

to me.

My daughter also referenced a tv program she had seen about the

slaughter industry, and it is difficult to know about any of this and

not wish there were some other way. This, of course, is also not to

mention the consequences of lacing meat with antibiotics or the land

for food exchange and its relation to overpopulation, starvation,

etc. that is implied and inherent in our MickyD's. (I also recently

read in the latest "Hinduism Today" magazine, for anyone here who is

a non meat eater, that a spokesperson for McDonalds stated that their

french fries are laced with beef broth for the added flavor it gives.)

Again, to me these are thorny issues that I haven't resolved for

myself. If I hunted for my food, or raised it myself, and had a

personal relationship to the animal, I could perhaps more easily

follow the teaching of Don Juan and make the kill with integrity,

giving thanks to the animal and knowing that I also am part of the

food chain. (Hard to do this with a slab of beef or chicken lying on

a bed of styrofoam beneath a blanket of saran wrap.) Or, I simply

refer to one of my favorite passages from the the Upanishads:

"...verily is this universe either food or eater." Shanti ~ Linda

[Guest guest]

Dear Linda,

 

Imho, issues are only "issues" if they are made into issues.

 

When ahimsa arises naturally -- when vegetarianism arises naturally

out of a sense of compassion, then spontaneously it is the proper

action.

 

When it arises out of a sense of duty or out of a sense of fear

or "ethics," then it is artificial, as seen here. Only what arises

spontaneously and naturally (effortlessly) in the course of events is

worth paying attention to.

 

The mind creates all problems. By giving up all 'beliefs' and the

need for beliefs (surrendering), problems are ended.

 

When solutions aren't imagined possible, where did the problems go?

In fact, there are no problems at all... but in order to continue a

never-ending cycle, non-existent problems are created by the mind

and "solutions" are searched for. Question/answer --

Problem/solution -- ad infinitum.

 

Everything is just right as it is, nothing is "wrong" at all -- just

this moment, everything is *perfect*. This kind of acceptance is

like a "golden key."

 

Namaste,

 

Omkara

 

, nierika@a... wrote:

> Tony wrote:

>

>

> > >> With regard to Maharaj. I know he smoked and ate meat etc.

Whether he was

> > realised or not, I don't know. If he was then what he ate and

smoked would

> > be irrelevant. God eating God in a non existant dream.

> >

> > My point originally was that meat eating and the killing of

animals is an

> > indication of a lack of awareness, and not conducive to it. >>

>

> I don't know about realized folks eating or not eating meat. The

ones I have

> met don't, and it is because of the concept of ahimsa. (I am

referring here

> specifically to Amritanandamayi and Shree Maa.) But what I would

like to

> share with the group is much more personal, and I will preface by

saying that

> for nearly 15 years, I did not eat much red meat (except for the

occasional

> bacon, which I was not able to give up). This was mostly however,

due to the

> folks I was hanging out with at the time, and a politically correct

behavior

> became a habit...until I moved to the west and lived with my meat

eating

> folks for awhile. However...the other day (once upon a time)...

>

> ...I was having a conversation over the phone with my (31 year old)

daughter,

> Amy. She has always been a sensitive child and woman, caring and

> compassionate, but not religious in any particular way or according

to any

> particular form. She informed me that she had stopped

eating "cows." (She

> also told me that a couple of times, restaurants where she had

ordered

> something slipped up, and she chose to go ahead and eat the meat

rather than

> make a point.) She said she was going to give up eating "pig" also,

but not

> until after her visit here, where she will be staying with me, and

we will be

> spending time with my meat eating folks. She felt her non eating of

beef

> would be enough for them to accommodate in one visit. Her

reason: "I decided

> I can't eat anything with eyelashes." This response startled me, so

I asked

> her to tell me more about it. Her feelings were very subtle, yet

made a great

> deal of sense to me. They had to do with the degree to which an

animal

> interacts, makes contact of the self and the Self through the eyes.

(I will

> also say that it is a personal belief that everything that exists

is Spirit.)

> Years ago, when my sister attempted to give up meat eating (she has

done so

> in fits and starts, but is never able to completely stop, though

she eats

> little of it) her reason was: "I can't eat anything that I can't

imagine

> killing myself. I can imagine wringing a chicken's neck, but I

can't imagine

> going up to a cow and taking a bite." Again, this made alot of

sense to me.

>

> My daughter also referenced a tv program she had seen about the

slaughter

> industry, and it is difficult to know about any of this and not

wish there

> were some other way. This, of course, is also not to mention the

consequences

> of lacing meat with antibiotics or the land for food exchange and

its

> relation to overpopulation, starvation, etc. that is implied and

inherent in

> our MickyD's. (I also recently read in the latest "Hinduism Today"

magazine,

> for anyone here who is a non meat eater, that a spokesperson for

McDonalds

> stated that their french fries are laced with beef broth for the

added flavor

> it gives.)

>

> Again, to me these are thorny issues that I haven't resolved for

myself. If I

> hunted for my food, or raised it myself, and had a personal

relationship to

> the animal, I could perhaps more easily follow the teaching of Don

Juan and

> make the kill with integrity, giving thanks to the animal and

knowing that I

> also am part of the food chain. (Hard to do this with a slab of

beef or

> chicken lying on a bed of styrofoam beneath a blanket of saran

wrap.) Or, I

> simply refer to one of my favorite passages from the the

Upanishads:

> "...verily is this universe either food or eater." Shanti ~ Linda

[Guest guest]

, "Omkara" <coresite@h...> wrote:

>

> Dear Linda,

>

> Imho, issues are only "issues" if they are made into issues.

>

> When ahimsa arises naturally -- when vegetarianism arises naturally

> out of a sense of compassion, then spontaneously it is the proper

> action.

>

> When it arises out of a sense of duty or out of a sense of fear

> or "ethics," then it is artificial, as seen here. Only what arises

> spontaneously and naturally (effortlessly) in the course of events

 

 

Namaste All,

 

Yes that is put better than I do but it means the same thing.

Spontaneously is when the Vijnamayakosa is purified enough to

understand compassion as it is, not as it is painted. Which is what I

have been saying all along. Purification of the body and intellect is

necessary for the enhancement of this 'awareness sheath'.

 

There are several types of humans.

1. Human animal, carnivore and eats, sleeps, mates, defends.

 

2. Aspiring human, someone who is on the spiritual path and is

purifying the intellectual sheath.

 

3. Human Being, A person who has made it so to speak, to the true

human level, as opposed to the animal human.

 

4.Divine Human, or Jivanmukti, essentially no longer a human ego at

all.

 

Those in the first category cannot easily accept spiritual values, and

I would never attempt to influence them at all.

 

Those in category 2. can be influenced by teachers but usually their

egos get in the way. The paradox of the spiritual path is that as it

makes one think about oneself, it initially develops the ego more.

They go through a stage of spiritual materialism and become 'grim

reamers', with lots of scriptures etc, but not much personal

experience at this stage. At the latter stage of this, they start to

drop the intellectualising and realise they and they alone are

responisible for themselves and what they do.

 

True meditation helps a lot at this stage, for now empty words are

useless, thought word and deed have to be the same. This is the

disvestment stage, where attachments and pleasures of the world are

recognised to be what they are. Dying now one would hope at least to

be in meditation, and if not then repeating some concentration mantra,

so as not to think of things of the world.

 

For one's last thoughts effect the next incarnation and are a

continuing of such. This has to be a daily practice for the deathbed

is just as likely to have distrations as any other time.

 

Yes Como hopefully Tony is predictable!!

 

Om Namah Sivaya......Tony.

[Guest guest]

, nierika@a... wrote:

> Tony wrote:

or eater." Shanti ~ Linda

 

Namaste All,

 

Yes I visited Mata Amritanandamayi several times, and found her to be

loving in the true sense of sacrifice and a beautiful person. At one

stage she was wearing braces due to back problems from all the

hugging.

 

Again it is not my judgement to say whether Ammachi is 'realised', or

not. Her own descriptions, indicate some kind of enlightenment.

 

Although she went through various sadhanas and bhavas during her life.

Which I won't mention here for good taste's sake, and the chance it

would be misunderstood. She is good for those who need a physical guru

and some work to do physically.

 

Om Namah Sivaya....Tony.