eating meat

[Guest guest]

In olden days,

two combatants faced each other , even as enemies.

The best fighter ( not the best ideas, but the valor) won.

Even in winning, where one's enemy was killed, one saw the suffering incurred in

war.

There was a lot of respect for death, for one's enemy and for his/her family.

Today's missiles lob hundreds of miles away, very precisely, causing accurate

destruction. But, this occurs away from one's actual field of vision, and

deprives one of this experience mentioned above. There is no personal

involvement in this death, no remorse even in " winning", no compassion for the

dead or their families.

 

The cow mentioned in your example, who would come to you to get her ears

scratched, a lovable, freely roaming animal, would be a difficult image to be

wiped off of one's psyche. Regardless of whether her meat is tastier and

healthier or not, it is easier to

" consume" that which was sacrificed by some one else, inspite of all the

correct assumptions of " negative karma " associated with eating such meat. We

do hear the

" pangs prior to death" from animals. We do not have such " ears" to listen to

the tomato . It is perhaps easier to accept that the fruit was dropped by the

plant, and therfore is ours. But, so was the calf, left by the cow, to roam

freely. But then again, shouldn't one "protect " all young and innocent lives

? But, in nature everything is food . Everything is consumed by someone else as

food , as long as there is no wanton destruction, as that wrought upon by man in

his search for more profits, by over fishing and over killing.

 

This philosophical discussion will never reach its end point, because the

philosophies are so different , and appeal to one's basic innermost opinions,

which are subject to change from one side to the other. Is it absolute Ahimsa,

and eat minimum, and pray to the food ? Or is it the Yin and Yang and consume

all food as " food" , and pray to the food before consuming ? Is food the only

level at which the philosophy stops ? Should it not be extended to all human

contact ? There should be absolutely no " cheating" of anyone by any body !!!!

These are issues beyond just intellectual debate about " food".

 

Ultimately, one eats that which appeals to one's visual, olfactory ( smell) and

taste stimuli. Does that pertain to the food, which is presented, or does it

begin and end in the "mind" is a two thousand year old Buddhist question, that

is also beyond the scope of this discussion. But, all of this discussion is

ultimately supposed to challenge our thinking, atleast to those of us , who read

these columns regularly.

[Guest guest]

-

Brilliant !!.

 

chai nitai

 

 

-- In ayurveda, durgesh mankikar

<d_mankikar> wrote:

> In olden days,

> two combatants faced each other , even as enemies.

> The best fighter ( not the best ideas, but the valor) won.

> Even in winning, where one's enemy was killed, one saw the

suffering incurred in war.

> There was a lot of respect for death, for one's enemy and for

his/her family.

> Today's missiles lob hundreds of miles away, very precisely,

causing accurate destruction. But, this occurs away from one's actual

field of vision, and deprives one of this experience mentioned above.

There is no personal involvement in this death, no remorse even in "

winning", no compassion for the dead or their families.

>

> The cow mentioned in your example, who would come to you to get her

ears scratched, a lovable, freely roaming animal, would be a

difficult image to be wiped off of one's psyche. Regardless of

whether her meat is tastier and healthier or not, it is easier to

> " consume" that which was sacrificed by some one else, inspite of

all the correct assumptions of " negative karma " associated with

eating such meat. We do hear the

> " pangs prior to death" from animals. We do not have such " ears"

to listen to the tomato . It is perhaps easier to accept that the

fruit was dropped by the plant, and therfore is ours. But, so was the

calf, left by the cow, to roam freely. But then again, shouldn't

one "protect " all young and innocent lives ? But, in nature

everything is food . Everything is consumed by someone else as food ,

as long as there is no wanton destruction, as that wrought upon by

man in his search for more profits, by over fishing and over killing.

>

> This philosophical discussion will never reach its end point,

because the philosophies are so different , and appeal to one's basic

innermost opinions, which are subject to change from one side to the

other. Is it absolute Ahimsa, and eat minimum, and pray to the food ?

Or is it the Yin and Yang and consume all food as " food" , and pray

to the food before consuming ? Is food the only level at which the

philosophy stops ? Should it not be extended to all human contact ?

There should be absolutely no " cheating" of anyone by any body !!!!

These are issues beyond just intellectual debate about " food".

>

> Ultimately, one eats that which appeals to one's visual, olfactory

( smell) and taste stimuli. Does that pertain to the food, which is

presented, or does it begin and end in the "mind" is a two thousand

year old Buddhist question, that is also beyond the scope of this

discussion. But, all of this discussion is ultimately supposed to

challenge our thinking, atleast to those of us , who read these

columns regularly.

[Guest guest]

One point in Todds argument I agree with is that if one eats meat

then one should only eat meat from animals raised on a natural diet

with all other natural parameters - such as the animals must be

allowed to have their normal sexual cycles and of course should never

be given hormones and antibiotics. Poorly nurtured and rised animals

have all of the same disases we have when following a highly

stressful unnatural lifestyle with unnatural diet.

 

These considerations should also be followed by those drinking milk

and taking milk products from farm raised animals - only take milk

and its products from healthy naturally raised animals.

 

I talked to one veternarian vaidya at the Ashram of

HH Amritaanadamayima in Kerala. He told me how important it is to

only take milk from healthy animals. This fellow cares for the cows

that provide the milk for Amacchi and the sannyasis. Ayurveda has an

ancient speciality of vetenarian practice.