Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

a question?

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

> > a question for you: if *you* were the one who had to keep animals

>trapped

> > from birth in overcrowded, unnatural confinements, in desperate

>conditions,

> > doomed to be slaughtered, and if *you* were the one who had to somehow

>kill

> > the living, thinking, feeling animal, to provide yourself with a

>mouthful of

> > flesh, would you still choose to eat meat?

 

 

>I'll answer that.

>

>If I made my living raising & slaughtering animals,

>I'd most likely eat them too...

>

 

 

to whom it may concern,

sorry, i didn't make the question clear. i didn't mean "if you made your

living raising and slaughtering animals, would you eat meat" ... what i

meant to ask was "if you had to slaughter an animal yourself before you ate

it, would you still eat meat?"

 

matt L

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt Lillie wrote:

> to whom it may concern,

> sorry, i didn't make the question clear. i didn't mean "if you made your

> living raising and slaughtering animals, would you eat meat" ... what i

> meant to ask was "if you had to slaughter an animal yourself before you ate

> it, would you still eat meat?"

>

> matt L

 

Hello Matt L,

 

I do find that the fruits and vegetables that i grow in my garden to

have more taste than the ones i buy in the super market. Maybe its

because i fell in love with my garden. Same goes for meat or any

substance that i come to eat or drink. The closer the human contact in

love and compassion between the substance i will take, in all its chain

from birth to death, the better the food will taste to my mouth.

 

I have a flower plant at home that has been loosing a few leaves a day,

and an aunt that is dying from cancer. And sometimes it makes me feel

real strange, that the plant dying makes me as sad as my aunt dying. I

do love deeply and equally all forms of life. And this equal part i do

sometimes find strange. Each time i breath i slaughter something and

something is created, I just find this process my greatest lesson in

living.

 

Antoine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a message dated 11/28/99 7:30:04 AM Pacific Standard Time,

carrea writes:

 

<< Each time i breath i slaughter something and

something is created, I just find this process my greatest lesson in

living. >>

 

Dearest Antoine:

 

As always you express eloquently the innermost feelings of my heart without

the impediment of complexity. Many thanks.

 

Love,

Blessings,

 

Zenbob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a message dated 11/28/1999 8:40:53 PM Eastern Standard Time,

kvy9 writes:

 

<< Unless the "I" dies, the preta loka show just

continues :) For lovers this must be a hard nut to crack...

 

Jan >>

 

"I" dies more than once :-) This is very cute

for me Jan, Annette was made A-nut as a child..

 

But the child within me has both died and plays on,

the emotional, the mental, the Soul, each time

dies again. Perhaps not all in one life, perhaps

all in one life, but it is impossible to do this

as one death, no one who has truly awoken would,

and i won't debate this, because it is undebatable, it

is experienced, like the Fire of the Sun, or the fire

on your finger it is felt, like studying blue and pink

electromagnetic waves, I may study but I will not

experience fully until I see the colors.

 

But it is like the Sun, all life comes from the Sun...

 

.... from an anonymous German author on the "Golden

Way" every plant, each perennial flower, each lion

who steps, and bull who charges, each organic and verdant

blade of grass, each organic and inorganic thing comes

from the Sun. There is no flame that dances, no light

that shines, no avalanche to slide, nor volcanoe to erupt,

no lightening to flash, nor storm to thunder, which does

not originate in the Sun. No snake which crawls and

no Eagle which flies [Esoteric meanings intended],

no mountain which rises, nor ocean deep, which does

not originate in the Sun."

 

So, I am the Sun, we are all the Sun and do i not love

the Sun as myself? What am i without the Sun?

 

Your insight at times though, still makes me breathless

with wonder :-)

 

L*L*L

Anut van der Zon :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> Dearest Antoine:

>

> As always you express eloquently the innermost feelings of my heart without

> the impediment of complexity. Many thanks.

>

> Love,

> Blessings,

>

> Zenbob

 

Dearest Zenbob,

 

Complexity pushed to the extreme of day to day life is like softness to

my ears. To take an image, like this fire place touching gently with its

heat and sounds a comfortable sofa in a mild room lighten with candle

light painting dancing shadows on the wall where a window opens, but yet

perfectly filters, a cold windy night with a clear sky full of stars.

The smoke from the chimney leaving and elliptical trace around the sun

as the planet is cyclically rushing away from it, like the little

"poucet" going in the woods and leaving little piece of bread behind so

he may come back to his home.

 

Complexity of details is very soft to my ear, many thanks.

 

Antoine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/28/99 at 2:07 PM Matt Lillie wrote:

[...]

>to whom it may concern,

>sorry, i didn't make the question clear. i didn't mean "if

you made your

>living raising and slaughtering animals, would you eat meat"

.... what i

>meant to ask was "if you had to slaughter an animal yourself

before you ate

>it, would you still eat meat?"

>

>matt L

 

 

This is a good question indeed. Once I was in Cape Verde, a

third world country and there where several high, cylindrical

stone walls. Behind the walls were little pigs, about the size

of a cocker spaniel when mature. Asking why these pigs were

totally invisible from outside, the answer came: "If we look

at the pigs, we can't eat them". This doesn't come as a

surprise: pigs are as intelligent as dogs with the added

benefit, they will shit outside the house without being taught

to do so. One Cape Verdian apparently had found that out: when

he was running, the pig would run after him like a dog but

with its short legs, that was very comical to see. I stopped

walking to watch closely; a woman behind me did the same and

we both laughed at the unusual sight; at the same time I could

sense her confusion and pain in seeing that what is supposed

to be a meal actually is an affectionate pet.

 

It has been known in China for long that dog meat has

excellent taste but in the West, dog meat isn't eaten although

there are so many stray dogs that some are killed and used for

pet food. In times of hunger, one will not eat one's pet but

prefer mice and rats instead and share them with the pet...

Yet I've heard (first world) children say they couldn't see an

animal in a cow, only a walking steak and to them killing a

cow wouldn't be a problem; they are from the generation that

is thinking meat, milk, eggs, honey, beeswax etc. are just

products from the factory; the generation that thinks it is

"free, because money buys everything" and Ahimsa is but a

sentimental attachment...

 

Jan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Jan,

 

"Mental food" would be language and language is felt as long as there is

an other, even if the other cell is identical. The gentle folly of the

fool may be antother way of allowing the body(ies) to vanish like fog,

yet not changing anything in the way dog roses, peanuts and cucumbers

live or breath.

 

Antoine

> Wouldn't the greatest lesson come when the body finally loses

> its battle from birth on, with unicellular life, the most

> resilient life form in the universe, clear thinking and

> control start to fail, and one is left (once again) at the

> mercy of one's identifications and the "mental food" one has

> digested during life, manifesting for Tibetan Buddhists as

> "Bardo"? Or the preta-loka for the Hindus... Who would be

> playing the hungry ghosts? Dog roses, peanuts and cucumbers?:)

>

> Jan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Mental food" is consisting of a mix of sense-impressions and

thoughts regarding them (not necessarily in language); the

ones that are "played most often" are predominant. The mix

clings to the "I" thought (which isn't in language) like a

child to its mother, like a dog to its master, like chewing

gum to a shoe. Unless the "I" dies, the preta loka show just

continues :) For lovers this must be a hard nut to crack...

 

Jan

 

On 11/28/99 at 6:43 PM Antoine wrote:

>Antoine <carrea

>

>Hello Jan,

>

>"Mental food" would be language and language is felt as long

as there is

>an other, even if the other cell is identical. The gentle

folly of the

>fool may be antother way of allowing the body(ies) to vanish

like fog,

>yet not changing anything in the way dog roses, peanuts and

cucumbers

>live or breath.

>

>Antoine

>

>> Wouldn't the greatest lesson come when the body finally

loses

>> its battle from birth on, with unicellular life, the most

>> resilient life form in the universe, clear thinking and

>> control start to fail, and one is left (once again) at the

>> mercy of one's identifications and the "mental food" one

has

>> digested during life, manifesting for Tibetan Buddhists as

>> "Bardo"? Or the preta-loka for the Hindus... Who would be

>> playing the hungry ghosts? Dog roses, peanuts and

cucumbers?:)

>>

>> Jan

>

>--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor

----------------------------

>

> GRAB THE GATOR! FREE SOFTWARE DOES ALL THE TYPING FOR

YOU!

>Tired of filling out forms and remembering passwords? Gator

fills in

>forms and passwords with just one click! Comes with $50 in

free coupons!

> <a href=" http://clickme./ad/gator4 ">Click

Here</a>

>

>-----------------------------

----------

>All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places,

sights, perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and

exist in and subside back into the Space of Awareness. Like

waves rising are not different than the ocean, all things

arising from Awareness are of the nature of Awareness.

Awareness does not come and go but is always Present. It is

Home. Home is where the Heart Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be

the Finality of Eternal Being. A true devotee relishes in the

Truth of Self-Knowledge, spontaneously arising from within

into It Self. Welcome all to a.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jan Barendrecht wrote:

> Unless the "I" dies, the preta loka show just

> continues :) For lovers this must be a hard nut to crack...

 

Just as hard for dry, icy cold 'non-lovers', I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello again Jan,

 

May I ask why a nut should be harder to crack for some and not others?

One must desire what is within the nut to want to crack it, yet we are

all already in it. The nut rolls on...

 

Antoine

 

Jan Barendrecht wrote:

> "Mental food" is consisting of a mix of sense-impressions and

> thoughts regarding them (not necessarily in language); the

> ones that are "played most often" are predominant. The mix

> clings to the "I" thought (which isn't in language) like a

> child to its mother, like a dog to its master, like chewing

> gum to a shoe. Unless the "I" dies, the preta loka show just

> continues :) For lovers this must be a hard nut to crack...

>

> Jan

>

> On 11/28/99 at 6:43 PM Antoine wrote:

>

> >Antoine <carrea

> >

> >Hello Jan,

> >

> >"Mental food" would be language and language is felt as long

> as there is

> >an other, even if the other cell is identical. The gentle

> folly of the

> >fool may be antother way of allowing the body(ies) to vanish

> like fog,

> >yet not changing anything in the way dog roses, peanuts and

> cucumbers

> >live or breath.

> >

> >Antoine

> >

> >> Wouldn't the greatest lesson come when the body finally

> loses

> >> its battle from birth on, with unicellular life, the most

> >> resilient life form in the universe, clear thinking and

> >> control start to fail, and one is left (once again) at the

> >> mercy of one's identifications and the "mental food" one

> has

> >> digested during life, manifesting for Tibetan Buddhists as

> >> "Bardo"? Or the preta-loka for the Hindus... Who would be

> >> playing the hungry ghosts? Dog roses, peanuts and

> cucumbers?:)

> >>

> >> Jan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/28/99 at 8:58 PM Antoine wrote:

>Antoine <carrea

>

>Hello again Jan,

>

>May I ask why a nut should be harder to crack for some and

not others?

>One must desire what is within the nut to want to crack it,

yet we are

>all already in it. The nut rolls on...

>

>Antoine

 

For Ramakrishna this nut was impossible to crack; nothing is

so intoxicating as love. Bhakti and Sufism are paths of love;

both paths have followers, refusing to merge in love or as the

Sufis say, to be annihilated in the Beloved. Both paths have

followers, having merged/dissolved in love, having become love

itself, like the Sufi Ibn El Arabi and the Bhakta Ramanuja.

However, even in classical yoga this dilemma is known:

 

Purohit Swami comments on (I, 17) : [...] "The yogi is

attached to his personal God, prides himself in being his

devotee, his son, dedicates his life to him, sings his glory,

enjoys his sense of duality, refuses to merge himself into his

God, refuses to become God. God initiates him into this last

stage, when the yogi says: 'I am spirit, the personal Self is

the impersonal Self', leaves all for God, lives there for

ever" [...].

 

This choice or a desire cannot arise in a path of

unconditional surrender: the path ends when nothing is left to

to surrender; the paradoxical effort to be without effort

comes to a halt when the "I" has died and the sense of

individuality has left.

 

Jan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jan Barendrecht wrote:

> >Hello again Jan,

> >

> >May I ask why a nut should be harder to crack for some and

> not others?

> For Ramakrishna this nut was impossible to crack; nothing is

> so intoxicating as love. Bhakti and Sufism are paths of love;

> both paths have followers, refusing to merge in love or as the

> Sufis say, to be annihilated in the Beloved. Both paths have

> followers, having merged/dissolved in love, having become love

> itself, like the Sufi Ibn El Arabi and the Bhakta Ramanuja.

> However, even in classical yoga this dilemma is known:

>

> Purohit Swami comments on (I, 17) : [...] "The yogi is

> attached to his personal God, prides himself in being his

> devotee, his son, dedicates his life to him, sings his glory,

> enjoys his sense of duality, refuses to merge himself into his

> God, refuses to become God. God initiates him into this last

> stage, when the yogi says: 'I am spirit, the personal Self is

> the impersonal Self', leaves all for God, lives there for

> ever" [...].

>

> This choice or a desire cannot arise in a path of

> unconditional surrender: the path ends when nothing is left to

> to surrender; the paradoxical effort to be without effort

> comes to a halt when the "I" has died and the sense of

> individuality has left.

 

Thank you for your answer Jan,

 

If I "understand" correctly, as much as words may apply here, it is a

bit like a dreamer in a dream where the images in his dream define him

as dreamer. The images of the dream will always remain followers of the

dreamer to which they give substance as Dreamer. The Dreamer comes to

die when the dream comes to stop looking for a dreamer.

 

So my question may change to why should there be more than one dream,

dreaming? In the sense of why should it be harder for some than others?

Or is there even a dream?

 

A picture of a nut among many:

http://pages.infinit.net/carrea/physics/stars.jpg

 

Antoine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/30/99 at 11:47 AM Antoine wrote:

[...]

>Thank you for your answer Jan,

 

You're welcome..

>If I "understand" correctly, as much as words may apply here, it is a

>bit like a dreamer in a dream where the images in his dream define him

>as dreamer. The images of the dream will always remain followers of the

>dreamer to which they give substance as Dreamer. The Dreamer comes to

>die when the dream comes to stop looking for a dreamer.

>

> So my question may change to why should there be more than one dream,

>dreaming? In the sense of why should it be harder for some than others?

>Or is there even a dream?

>

>A picture of a nut among many:

>http://pages.infinit.net/carrea/physics/stars.jpg

>

>Antoine

 

There is neither a dream nor a dreamer.

There is no one to wake up from a dream that doesn't exist.

But that is something "I" cannot conceive.

 

Jan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...