Jerry/Thanks Tim. G/Nondual diet

[Guest guest]

At 11:51 AM 5/19/99 -0300, you wrote:

>umbada (Jerry M. Katz)

>Thank you so much, Tim, and for the truth of your words. Also, I

>appreciate your most nondual stance on the the and

>ACOWPAL lists with regard to diet and concern for the body. The nondual

>perspective may have been implied in that thread, but it needed to be

>made explicit, which you did simply and directly.

 

You're very welcome... I hope nobody was insulted by my "Direct Approach

Method" (Pat. Pending) on regarding diet. It just seemed to

me that the conversation had wandered into "no-man's land" and was looking

more like Dietician than anything else. The issue had become

very unbalanced, focusing mainly on the physical body. I could have stayed

out of the conversation completely, but I'll admit, it was driving me nuts :-)

>The conversation could be carried-over to this list.

 

<Groan>... if you say so... ;-)

>What is the

>relationship between diet and nondual perspective? Do people inclined

>toward nondual perception, tend also toward vegetarianism? Or does the

>understanding arise that it does not matter what one eats?

 

I would say there will be as many different answers as there are

rs. My perspective on diet is that there should be a proper

balance to maintain reasonable physical health, and that's all. An

inordinate focus on diet, longevity and physical health signifies (to me) a

strong attachment and feeling of ownership of the physical body (which, of

course, will die). So much attentional energy expended to prolong the life

of the body for perhaps 10 years. Is it truly worth it? Are there not

much more important areas to focus our awareness?

 

With Love,

 

Tim

 

-----

Visit The Core of the WWW at:

http://www.eskimo.com/~fewtch/ND/index.html

Music, Poetry, Writings on Nondual Spiritual Topics.

 

Tim's Windows and DOS Shareware/Freeware is at:

http://www.eskimo.com/~fewtch/shareware.html

[Guest guest]

Tim Gerchmez wrote:

> I hope nobody was insulted by my "Direct Approach

> Method" (Pat. Pending) on regarding diet. It just seemed to

> me that the conversation had wandered into "no-man's land" and was looking

> more like Dietician than anything else. The issue had become

> very unbalanced, focusing mainly on the physical body. I could have stayed

> out of the conversation completely, but I'll admit, it was driving me nuts :-)

 

 

I took your Method in the right spirit. While it is clear that people

involved in the diet conversation have a stable nondual view and

personally did not need your reminder, the conversation needs to be

punctuated with the reality of why we are here. And that's all you were

doing, in your own way.