Human body is built to eat animals also - explained by a Muslim

[bhaktajan]

7. Hinduism was influenced by other religions --[This is like saying "Shakespeare was influenced by ebonics"]

 

The arab-culture invented the Zero? --And then did what with it?

 

The arab-culture formulated the the present day western symbols for numbers, 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10? --And then . . . did what with it? I have noticed that arabic script does NOT use the "Arabic Numerals" presently [Am I correct?].

 

The arab-culture caused Europe's expeditions & Colonisation of the east? --And then . . . did what with it?

 

The arab-culture invented the word Arayan? --And then, did what with it?

 

Western history seems to start where aniquity ended, No? --And then . . . what did the Middle East & Muslim Conquests do to the Ancient Wonders of the Ancient World?

 

What is overlooked in the formation of the western history is "migration of manpower & industry" east to west over the topography from the Ganges in the east --past the Middle --on ward to the west --and then west again to the Pacific --and then west again to Japan's eastern shores.

 

Also, What is overlooked in the formation of the western history is how invading "Hordes of Barbarians into Imperial Roman Territories" --was composed of "fortune-hunters".

 

Such "Fortune-Seekers" were outside the jurisdiction of any ruling body except their War-lords schemes ---this was the status quo of the ancient world . . . except for regions occupied by orderly 'civilisation' and thus, metropolises.

 

"Fortune-Seekers" of the ancient world --when hoarded together form giant wolf-packs with a 'Mob-mentality' --seeking to overthrow the status quo for self-enrichment.

[bhaktajan]

Christians eat animal meat simply because [it was part of their local culture]

 

Jesus taught his disciples that what goes inside the mouth isn`t sinful but that which comes from the heart [this is a reference to Kosher food rules --the kind that WE find oxyomoronic/self-contraditory/without much merit as to "accruing-good-Karma" ---the reference is to the mocking & persecution from the Upper-Caste Priest Class of Jesus's Person & Teachings].

 

 

But there`s not a verse in the New Testament of the Bible that says Jesus ate animal meat but fish [WHICH VERSE? PLEASE POST IT . . . I will find the exact word in Aramaic or Greek or Hebrew . . . and I will Post it --and I wager that it is not written that Jesus "partook of flesh" eating . . . tbc . . . ]

 

Confusing isn`t it?

[bhaktajan]

In most civilizations since Ancient times, we could see that relying on . . . but, did you all know that Roman & Greek Armys were maintained routinely on beans & lentles, and not flesh food, espcially when traveling on expeditions & War campaigns?

[Sephiroth]

 

In most civilizations since Ancient times, we could see that relying on . . . but, did you all know that Roman & Greek Armys were maintained routinely on beans & lentles, and not flesh food, espcially when traveling on expeditions & War campaigns?

 

Roms drink intoxicating Wine (which influence the Wine drinking tradition in churches) and consume bread (made of flours). This is hardly "vegetarian" dietary if that is what you are trying to imply.

 

Plus meat get rotten easily, so it is not suitable for travel, expeditions and war campaigns.

 

Rom at that time was one of the few places on the Planet where the land is worked to produce commercial products (like grapes to make wine) at that time. In most CIVILIZED societies, the land is worked to produce food which sustained the communities individually without the need to export or import anything.

[Sephiroth]

 

Would we then consider that eating fish, crabs, shrimps, clams etc. a lesser evil than eating animal meat and vegetables?

 

The difference between seafood (fish, crabs etc) and animals such as cows and goat is, when you take seafood out of water, they DIE. Even so the action of taking them out of water does kills them, you do not use "weapons" to inflict pain and suffering onto them.

 

But when comes to cows, goat and chicken, they are very much alive and you must kill them with weapons such as a knife in order to end their existence and allow you to take their flesh.

 

In that context, which do you think is more evil?

[lokeshvara]

 

The difference between seafood (fish, crabs etc) and animals such as cows and goat is, when you take seafood out of water, they DIE. Even so the action of taking them out of water does kills them, you do not use "weapons" to inflict pain and suffering onto them.

 

But when comes to cows, goat and chicken, they are very much alive and you must kill them with weapons such as a knife in order to end their existence and allow you to take their flesh.

 

In that context, which do you think is more evil?

 

When you take the fish out of the sea, the weapon used is your very hands and the fishing equipment. Sea life suffocate on land, does that not sound like a terrible death to experience?

[theist]

 

10. Killing a living creature with two senses less is not a lesser crime

Once a vegetarian argued his case by saying that plants only have two or three senses while the animals have five senses.

Therefore killing a plant is a lesser crime than killing an animal. Suppose your brother is born deaf and dumb and has two senses less as compared to other human beings. He becomes mature and someone murders him. Would you ask the judge to give the murderer a lesser punishment because your brother has two senses less? In fact you would say that he has killed a masoom, an innocent person, and the judge should give the murderer a greater punishment.

In fact the Qur'an says:

"O ye people! Eat of what is on earth, lawful and good"

[Al-Qur'an 2:168]

 

Yes killing a plant is a lesser crime than killing an animal just as killing a human is more of a crime than killing an animal.They are all crimes but it is a question of degrees and situation.

 

For example, it is no crime killing a human or animal that is trying to kill you. Or to kill an animal if you have no choce for surviving without eating it's flesh.

 

It is however a great crime to enslave, abuse and then slaughter an animal just for the pleasure of the senses as in wanting to taste it's blood and fill your belly with it's flesh.

 

Your quoted verse makes no objective sense outside of your belief system.

"Eat all that is on the earth...", Oh, humans too?

 

."...that is lawful...." It may be "lawful...", under mans law's perhaps but not under the higher law of God which uses compassion as a instrument of measurement.

 

"...and good." Check out the following video and show me wherein lies the goodness.

 

http://www.nonviolenceunited.org/veganvideo.html

[bhaktajan]

 

Originally Posted by Sephiroth:

Roms drink intoxicating Wine (which influence the Wine drinking tradition in churches) and consume bread (made of flours).

 

This is hardly "vegetarian" dietary if that is what you are trying to imply.

 

 

"Wine & bread" is not vegetarian??? {Are you feigning some sly reference to The Body & Blood of Christ? ala Prasadam is transformed into Sat-cit-nanda foodstuff?}

 

What are you trying to say? You have mangled Your own statement. I cannot recognise what you are saying.

 

I said:

"did you all know that

Roman & Greek Armys

were maintained

routinely on

beans & lentles"

 

. . . Learn any thing new lately from ME???????????? Yet? I am not 'implying' I am informing you.

 

 

Originally Posted by Sephiroth:

Plus meat get rotten easily . . .

 

I posted earlier on this thread: The History of "Raw-Curing" of meats/fish. Eating such things are what you'd expect & require of Men who volunteer to fight brigands, highway robbers & homocidal marauding maniacs emerging from the wilderness or frontiers who are invading, raping & pillaging the outskirts of the city.

 

Nowadays, that would translate into "the un-washed masses" who provide the cheap manpower labor in-abundance.

 

 

Originally Posted by melvin

Would we then consider that eating fish, crabs, shrimps, clams etc. a lesser evil than eating animal meat and vegetables?

 

 

1) . . . and vegetables? {You have mangled Your own statement.}

 

2) Manu samhita says that "Fowl" has the least Ugra-Karma reaction --does that put the concientious meat eater's mind to rest?.

[melvin]

Here`s another tricky question: Which is the lesser evil eating vegetables or sea weeds?

[bhaktajan]

"Which is the lesser evil eating vegetables or sea weeds?"

 

Where is evil in this Question?

 

Sea Weed is a vegetable. {Which reminds me of a sea weed product, "Spirolina" --which reminds me of my request of you: To verify the 'pH' measurement of the human body --as a fool-proof way of insuring complete & proper functioning of the bodies 'purification' organs, ie: Liver, Kidneys, pancreas, lymphs etc . . . but apparently you are too busy, so far}

 

Ekadasi fasts are designed to make up for the consumption of micro-organisms & insects --in grains etc.-- that we accidently eat.

[theist]

 

11. Over population of cattle

If every human being was a vegetarian, it would lead to overpopulation of cattle in the world, since their reproduction and multiplication is very swift. Allah (swt) in His Divine Wisdom knows how to maintain the balance of His creation appropriately. No wonder He has permitted us to have the meat of the cattle.

 

 

This is another absurd statement.

It is the factory farm industry and the demand for meat that is the reason there is already a severe over abundance of cattle. We don't see them in the west because they are kept penned up in vast cattle prisons called feed lots.

There are so many in fact that the over abundance of cattle is by far the #1 cause of environmental damage in the world today.

 

And why do you suppose that unless humans eat some species it will go out of control and take over the world? Each species have their natural predators in the animal world to keep the balance.

 

Human life is meant for cultivating spiritual , that is godly qualities and one of the most important is compassion. Muslims should stop wasting time trying to convert Hindus to meat eating and spend more on themselves developing compassion.

[theist]

 

12. Cost of meat is reasonable since all aren't non-vegetarians

I do not mind if some people are pure vegetarians. However they should not condemn non-vegetarians as ruthless. In fact if all Indians become non-vegetarians then the present non-vegetarians would be losers since the prices of meat would rise.

 

You have not factored all the environmental damage into the cost let alone the karmic reaction that awaits you for all this cruelty. "What we sow we reap."

 

Sow acts of compassion brothers.

[santdasji]

Although some historians and anthropologists say that man is historically omnivores, our anatomical equipment ­ teeth, jaws, and digestive system ­ favors a fleshless diet. The American Dietetic Association notes that “most of mankind for most of human history has lived on vegetarian or near-vegetarian diets.”

 

 

And much of the world still lives that way. Even on most industrialized countries, the love affair with meat is less than a hundred years old. It started with the refrigerator car and the twentieth-century consumer society. But even with the twentieth century, man’s body hasn’t adapted to eating meat. The prominent Swedish scientist Karl von Linne states, “Man’s structure, external and internal, compared with that of the other animals, shows that fruit and succulent vegetables constitute his natural food.”

Comparison between carnivores, herbivores and humans

When you look at the comparison between herbivores and humans, we compare much more closely to herbivores than meat eating animals. Humans are clearly not designed to digest and ingest meat.

 

• Meat-eaters: have claws
  Herbivores: no claws
  Humans: no claws

 

• Meat-eaters: have no skin pores and perspire through the tongue
  Herbivores: perspire through skin pores
  Humans: perspire through skin pores

 

• Meat-eaters: have sharp front teeth for tearing, with no flat molar teeth for grinding
  Herbivores: no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding
  Humans: no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding

 

• Meat-eaters: have intestinal tract that is only 3 times their body length so that rapidly decaying meat can pass through quickly
  Herbivores: have intestinal tract 10-12 times their body length.
  Humans: have intestinal tract 10-12 times their body length.

 

• Meat-eaters: have strong hydrochloric acid in stomach to digest meat
  Herbivores: have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than that of a meat-eater
  Humans: have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than that of a meat-eater

 

• Meat-eaters: salivary glands in mouth not needed to pre-digest grains and fruits.
  Herbivores: well-developed salivary glands which are necessary to pre-digest grains and fruits
  Humans: well-developed salivary glands, which are necessary to pre-digest, grains and fruits

 

• Meat-eaters: have acid saliva with no enzyme ptyalin to pre-digest grains
  Herbivores: have alkaline saliva with ptyalin to pre-digest grains
  Humans: have alkaline saliva with ptyalin to pre-digest grains

Based on a chart by A.D. Andrews, Fit Food for Men, (Chicago: American Hygiene Society, 1970)

Clearly if humans were meant to eat meat we wouldn’t have so many crucial ingestive/digestive similarities with animals that are herbivores.

Why do people eat meat?

Many people ask me, “If we weren’t supposed to eat meat than why do we?”. It is because we are conditioned to eat meat. Also, the ADA (American Dietetic Association) tells us that “most of mankind for most of human history has lived on a vegetarian or Lacto-ovo vegetarian diet.

A popular statement that meat eaters say is; “In the wild, animals kill other animals for food. It’s nature.” First of all, we are not in the wild. Secondly, we can easily live without eating meat and killing, not to mention we’d be healthier. And finally, as I have already shown, we weren’t meant to eat meat. Meat and seafood putrefies within 4 hours after consumption and the remnants cling to the walls of the stomach and intestines for 3-4 days or longer than if a person is constipated. Furthermore, the reaction of saliva in humans is more alkaline, whereas in the case of flesh-eating or preying animals, it is clearly acidic. The alkaline saliva does not act properly on meat.

The final point I would like to make on how we as humans were not meant to eat meat is this. All omnivorous and carnivorous animals eat their meat raw. When a lion kills an herbivore for food, it tears right into the stomach area to eat the organs that are filled with blood (nutrients). While eating the stomach, liver, intestine, etc., the lion laps the blood in the process of eating the dead animals flesh. Even bears that are omnivores eat salmon raw. However, eating raw or bloody meat disgust us as humans. Therefore, we must cook it and season it to buffer the taste of flesh.

If a deer is burned in a forest fire, a carnivorous animal will NOT eat its flesh. Even circus lions have to be feed raw meat so that they will not starve to death. If humans were truly meant to eat meat, then we would eat all of our meat raw and bloody. The thought of eating such meat makes one’s stomach turn. This is my point on how we as humans are conditioned to believe that animal flesh is good for us and that we were meant to consume it for survival and health purposes. If we are true carnivores or omnivores, cooking our meat and seasoning it with salt, ketchup, or tabasco sauce would disguise and we as humans would refuse to eat our meat in this form

[melvin]

 

"Which is the lesser evil eating vegetables or sea weeds?"

 

Where is evil in this Question?

 

My View: What I meant is that if you kill a vegetable( grown on land) and a sea weed for food which vegetables reap less bad karma if it is proven that they, too, feel pain like the animals when they are butchered.

 

Sea Weed is a vegetable

 

My View: (Now I know. Thanks.) It`s said that extracts from sea weeds are used as stabilizers, gelling agents, or emulsifiers, for pet food and dental moulds,dyes, toothpaste, salad dressing, welding rods and pizza toppings. Agar, the jelly found in sea weeds is irreplaceable as a medium on which to culture fungi and bacteria for medical testing and research in microbiology.

 

 

Whereas the sea weeds industry in the West is based mainly on these chemicals, in the East there are vast farms where sea weeds are grown for food. It`s a pity that Westerners have so little interest in eating sea vegetables( sea weeds) for so many are highly nutritious and particularly rich in some vitamins and trace elements.

 

 

Orignial Texts are taken from Rob Anderson of the Seafood Fisheries Reaserch Institute.

 

.

[Narasingh]

One can't deny the possibilities of the human body's capacity. Humans have been eating meat for quite some time, with ancient Vedic texts confirming this, as well all of the world's other historic records.

 

The human body can digest meat, but this isn't the argument of Buddhist and Hindu reasoning for a vegetarian diet.

[Sephiroth]

 

When you take the fish out of the sea, the weapon used is your very hands and the fishing equipment. Sea life suffocate on land, does that not sound like a terrible death to experience?

 

Dying itself IS a terrible experience to have.

 

Even so we do use our hands and fishing equipments to take the fish out of the water, we do not kill it directly. It dies of suffocation. This contrast with when a person takes a knife and use it on a living, breathing creature.

 

Yes, I know - KILLING IS KILLING. No excuses there. Both are Evil acts. But what I'm saying here is Lesser of Two Evils. It is less Evil action to take a fish out of water and let it suffocate then it is to put an animal to the knife and watch it bleed to death.

 

And hopefully, in time, we can repeat this argument to those who consume seafood and a World where vegetarian dietary is the ONLY dietary available could come to be.

[Sephiroth]

by santdasji

 

 

When you look at the comparison between herbivores and humans, we compare much more closely to herbivores than meat eating animals. Humans are clearly not designed to digest and ingest meat.

 

Meat-eaters: have claws

Herbivores: no claws

Humans: no claws

 

Meat-eaters: have no skin pores and perspire through the tongue

Herbivores: perspire through skin pores

Humans: perspire through skin pores

 

Meat-eaters: have sharp front teeth for tearing, with no flat molar teeth for grinding

Herbivores: no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding

Humans: no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding

 

Meat-eaters: have intestinal tract that is only 3 times their body length so that rapidly decaying meat can pass through quickly

Herbivores: have intestinal tract 10-12 times their body length.

Humans: have intestinal tract 10-12 times their body length.

 

Meat-eaters: have strong hydrochloric acid in stomach to digest meat

Herbivores: have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than that of a meat-eater

Humans: have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than that of a meat-eater

 

Meat-eaters: salivary glands in mouth not needed to pre-digest grains and fruits.

Herbivores: well-developed salivary glands which are necessary to pre-digest grains and fruits

Humans: well-developed salivary glands, which are necessary to pre-digest, grains and fruits

 

Meat-eaters: have acid saliva with no enzyme ptyalin to pre-digest grains

Herbivores: have alkaline saliva with ptyalin to pre-digest grains

Humans: have alkaline saliva with ptyalin to pre-digest grains

 

 

Based on a chart by A.D. Andrews, Fit Food for Men, (Chicago: American Hygiene Society, 1970)

 

Superb explainations and quotations.

I will put this in another site where I'm active in.

[primate]

The total length of the human intestinal tract ranges from 7.5 to 8.5 meters. So, with an average height of 1.6 meter, the human intestinal tract is on average 8.0 / 1.6 = 5.0 times the body length, which is a ratio closer to carnivores (3 times the body length) than herbivores (10 times the body length).

 

Basically this means that we are not able to digest tough vegetation like (uncooked) grass or leaves, but are better suited to digest fruits. Moreover, the fact that humans and Resus monkeys are the only two species of mammal on Earth that cannot synthesize their own vitamin C, strongly indicates that fruits and vegetables must have been a major part of the diet of our ancestors, thus allowing for this capability to disappear.

 

Nevertheless, we have sharp front teeth, suggesting that raw meat was at least part of our ancestral diet. Chimpanzees, our closest relatives, regularly hunt down and kill other primates for consumption. And they also eat insects as a protein rich food source.

 

In conclusion, we are omnivores, built to survive on a variety of foods including meat. This contributes to our overall adaptability as a species, and relates to the opportunistic way of life of our ancestors as hunter gatherers. However, we are not depending on meat to survive, and as modern humans we can choose not to eat meat, which seems to be simply a matter of culture and civilization..

[melvin]

 

Dying itself IS a terrible experience to have.

 

Even so we do use our hands and fishing equipments to take the fish out of the water, we do not kill it directly. It dies of suffocation. This contrast with when a person takes a knife and use it on a living, breathing creature.

 

Yes, I know - KILLING IS KILLING. No excuses there. Both are Evil acts. But what I'm saying here is Lesser of Two Evils. It is less Evil action to take a fish out of water and let it suffocate then it is to put an animal to the knife and watch it bleed to death.

 

And hopefully, in time, we can repeat this argument to those who consume seafood and a World where vegetarian dietary is the ONLY dietary available could come to be.

 

 

It reminds of me of a young man possessed by evil spirits whom Lord Jesus was able to exorcise .To escape from the Lord`s wrath after leaving the young man`s body they managed to find shelter inside dozens of hogs and swines which created a stampede as they hurled themselves over a cliff into the sea to drown. What a festive mood it was when the people made roasted meat out of these pigs without using knives to kill them. Was drowning therefore a much better way of slaughtering these unclean animals in Jesus time without having to slash and chop these animal`s throats and necks using knives and axes? Or inversely proportionally take out a school of fish and other marine life from the water using nets to die instead of spearing, harpooning, and blasting them with dynamites?

[chandu_69]

 

. Was drowning therefore a much better way of slaughtering ....? Likewise takie out a school of fish and other marine life out of the water using nets to die instead of spearing, harpooning, and blasting them with dynamites.

 

Hold your breath for 2 minutes and experience the pain.If you didn't pass out increase the time

[melvin]

 

Hold your breath for 2 minutes and experience the pain.If you didn't pass out increase the time

 

If Krsna Bhaktas with finality decide to Go Home Back to Godhead all they have to do is hold their breaths for 10 minutes. This is not a joke. The first one to attempt this feat but failed ( he ended up in Sisumara instead of Goloka Vrndavan)) was Dhruva Maharaj. Drowning, however, is more effective.

[primate]

 

Hold your breath for 2 minutes and experience the pain.If you didn't pass out increase the time

Actually, this pain is caused by our breathing reflex, trying to force us to start breathing again. Fish don’t have lungs, and consequently no breathing reflex. They have gills that can take up oxygen from the water that flows through. When taken out of the water, fish die a painless death from lack of oxygen, much like when you would breath in and out into a small plastic back for 10 minutes. Furthermore, drowning would be a relatively painless death for a human, because in the end you will simply be forced to breath water in and out, and you will die from lack of oxygen..

[chandu_69]

I was referring to melvin's statement on pigs drowning.

 

Actually, this pain is caused by our breathing reflex, trying to force us to start breathing again. Fish don’t have lungs, and consequently no breathing reflex. They have gills that can take up oxygen from the water that flows through. When taken out of the water, fish die a painless death from lack of oxygen, much like when you would breath in and out into a small plastic back for 10 minutes. Furthermore, drowning would be a relatively painless death for a human, because in the end you will simply be forced to breath water in and out, and you will die from lack of oxygen..

Fish do feel neurological pain when they are caught by hooks and when they are out of water.The latest study suggests that it is much more than simple neurological pain.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090430161242.htm

 

With regards to pain of humans , i would personally prefer a bullet to the brain rather then agonizing and thrashing for air while drowning, even though it is for a few minutes;)

[melvin]

 

. Furthermore, drowning would be a relatively painless death for a human, because in the end you will simply be forced to breath water in and out, and you will die from lack of oxygen..

 

 

Other kinds of drowning besides being forced to breath water in and out is a patient dying of severe pneumonia ( the lungs are filled with phlegm) or a patient dying of severe congestive heart failure ( the luings are filled with water). The only thing that`s keeping them alive are from the tanks placed at their bedsides filled with oxygen they`re inhaling. Deaths due to breathlessness are painless.

[primate]

 

... With regards to pain of humans , i would personally prefer a bullet to the brain rather then agonizing and thrashing for air while drowning, even though it is for a few minutes;)

I don't know.. I'm not sure whether the last thing you would think about is Krishna, or pulling the trigger..