Vegetarianism Vs. Eating Meat:
The Karmic and Moral Consequences of Our Dietary Choices
© 2003
>> Might we infer that to eat an animal and expect to take on its Karma and emotional state (at the moment of death) is similarly unfounded? I understand that Hare Krishnas avoid meat for this very reason: to avoid the Karma & (final) emotional state of the deceased animal. <<
Karma is not something that can, in any manner, be passed along through the consumption of flesh. It is not a *physical* substance. However, the final emotional state of terror that commercially slaughtered animals experience does effect their flesh and as a consequence does effect the person who eats that flesh.
>> I understand that Buddhists avoid meat because the flesh of animals is of a "lower vibrational frequency" than that of plants. And that if one aspires to refining their own mental processes, avoidance of these "lower frequencies" is recommended. <<
There is validity to the concept that different foods have different "vibrational frequencies". In conjunction with this, different foods require different actions on the part of the human body to digest. For example, meat requires a different set of enzymes and acids to digest than do vegetables. Many folks do find great value in a vegetarian diet in relation to their spiritual quest. However, vegetarianism does not in and of itself mean that one is therefore more spiritual than a meat eater. I have personally know many vegetarians who possess a very "low vibrational frequency" and also many meat eaters who possess very "high vibrational frequencies".
>> Besides, surely the Karmic profile/emotional state of any incarnated being (animal, plant, whatever) is not "stored" in the physical body anyway, and therefore not transferred during the *eating* of that body? <<
Emotional states are stored in flesh. For example, when an animal experience terror, great amounts of adrenaline are excreted into the blood stream. On top of the chemical composition, emotions are also stored in the energetic composition of flesh.
>> Similarly, with respect to Buddhist philosophy, surely the ingestion of material of a particular vibrational frequency by the *physical* body would have little or no bearing upon the refinement of the *mental* body? <<
Once again, it's an issue of the Earth Element (primarily) and its function of holding the three bodies together.
>> Finally, regarding the other popular argument - that's it's cruel to contribute to the slaughter of animals by being a meat-eater - while compassionate, surely misses the point that it's *just* as cruel to kill plants? Would a plant not suffer as much as an animal during harvest/slaughter? <<
A vegetable is the plant's attempt to make seeds. It is not the life of the plant itself. When you harvest a zucchini, for example, the plant will feel the wound of where you've severed the zucchini and will immediately begin the process of healing, but it does not experience terror. Many other vegetables are harvested at the very end of the plant's life cycle, such a rice, for example, when there is no loss to the plant at all. Commercial mono-culture however, is offensive to the plant's consciousness, especially when it is treated with chemicals.
>> Which might leave one wondering: "What *can* I eat with impunity?". I would suggest: "Anything you like!". Anyroad, I'm off to get a Big Mac or two......... ;-) ;-) <<
It depends upon what you mean by impunity. Surely those two Big Macs come with a high price to your health and to the planet in general. Ignoring consequences is not impunity.
Since we must eat in order to sustain our bodies, it's more a matter of which consequences do *you* feel comfortable bearing.
My best to you,
:) Rawn Clark
23 Aug 2003
>> (one eating the others for always, the purpose of this creation being completely obscure). <<
:) It's really not that obscure. It's an aspect of the *cycle* of life which is one of infinite change, guided by infinite continuity. If all living things were *not* part of a food chain (it's not just us animals who consume each other) we would not be expressing and experiencing the *cycle* of life in the way that we are -- we would not be earthlings all. But we *are* earthlings, all of us, regardless of species. Here and now, this is how the *cycle* of life is manifest, as it should and must be. Eating each other is part of what keeps life going, ending and in balance. This is Consciousness constantly changing its *forms*.
>> From the point of choice, I feel better being not eating meet (especially when knowing how we treat animals ...). But what you are saying is also true, it has no effect in itself on my vibes. This choice bears no compensation in itself; it does not improve my fate or improve my Karma. <<
What does bear compensation and does improve your karma is the fact that you *have* made a *conscious* choice! :)
>> And also, there is apparently no karmic price for eating meet while there is seemingly for other behavior. This is because Eating meat is not against this world's law. <<
Where the karmic price or debt enters into the equation is in how we collectively and personally treat our food. If we *unthinkingly* eat a hamburger made from the ground up flesh of a bull that's lived its short life standing in its own manure with 300 others, while being pumped full of antibiotics and growth hormones, and never shown any affection whatsoever by the human race, then we connect ourselves very personally with the karmic wrong done to that poor, innocent creature, even though it was not done by our own hands.
In our modern world, we are accustomed to assuming this burden and don't even notice its accumulation, don't even recognize its existence for the most part. It's sort of like karmic white-noise to most of us -- something in the back ground that's been there so long and so constantly that we're almost incapable of hearing it. But imagine for a moment, the volt of negative astra-mental energy that has accumulated over millennia of human disrespect for other animals. Multiply that bull's terror an unimaginable number of times . . .
There is nothing that a single individual can do to completely absolve the human collective from this karmic debt. However, we can each chip away at it by addressing our personal connection and responsibility, just as we must with all of our actions. As you said, by thinking about what your food has experienced on its journey to your mouth and honoring, acknowledging and thanking it for *its* struggle, you compensate for your personal responsibility in that larger debt. If done properly, this will also counter-balance the negative energetic residue that fills the food itself.
>> What if we apply the analogy law to our life ? what is the real purpose of our being here (apparently we are now at the very top of the alimentation laden). <<
;-) Silly human! ;-) ;-) ;-) I'd say that in the eyes of a virus, fungus, bacteria or mosquito, we humans are way, way down there on the food chain!
>> Surely the cow diet has little effect on its final fate -same for human, <<
I don't know if I'd really go that far. I think that our attitude in relation to what we eat *does* impact our "final fate". The cow, chewing her cud, doesn't have to worry about such things and therefore doesn't accrue karmic debt in regard to what she eats, in the way a human does. She is not abusing the grass she eats, she is merely eating it and probably thinking "Yummy!". :)
My best to you,
:) Rawn Clark
23 Aug 2003
>> I understand that the emotional state of the animals, and also the way they are treated while farmed carry along into the meat. Does the blessing and honouring of food before eating help transmute this? <<
Yes. When you make that interior contact with the food and honor its struggle and then thank if for having gone through all that just to end up sustaining your body, you open up that kernel of negative energy -- you soften its shell, so to speak, and begin its release and transformation. And when you follow this by a blessing of the food (however you might conceive of such a thing), you are creating a positive force which counter-balances the negative one. This positive energy enters into the food at the level at which that negative residue exists, penetrates its softened shell and, if it is strong enough, neutralizes it.
My best to you,
:) Rawn Clark
23 Aug 2003
>> But as you are a gardener yourself, what is the proper way to harvest your food from the hermetic standpoint? I can see that you can do everything you can to give the plants and animals under your care a nice life, but when it's time for reaping', what is the appropriate attitude? I mean, how can you bear to face that damaged zucchini plant 'the morning after'? Do the surviving carrots in your plot quiver in fear when you enter your garden? Are there rituals you should use, offerings etc.? I have worked with some of this myself, but I would really like to hear your point of view on this one. <<
Starting with the day I first took shovel to soil in my little garden space, I've been singing one song in particular every time I'm in the garden. It goes like this:
Lady weave your circle bright
Spin your web of golden light
Earth and Air, Fire and Water
Bind me to you.
This describes my relationship with all of the plants that grow in my garden. I provide them with the things they need for vibrant life and they, in turn, provide me with the things I need for vibrant life. I am always thankful to them and they are, likewise, thankful to me. We have a symbiotic relationship that nurtures us both.
When I harvest a zucchini, I praise the plant and express my joy at the beautiful zucchini it has grown for my consumption. As I cut the fruit from the vine, I thank the plant and wish it well. In return, the zucchini plant is glad to feed me its fruit and happily grows the most beautiful fruit it can to please me. It doesn't mind my cutting the fruit and sends its healing juices immediately to the cut end, healing the wound very, very rapidly. And then it focuses all its energy upon producing the next zucchini for me to pick.
I treat all of the plants in my garden in this same way. In return, they are all happy to feed me. They are all happy to be living in my garden. :)
My best to you,
:) Rawn Clark
24 Aug 2003
> "However, the final emotional state of terror that commercially slaughtered animals experience does effect their flesh and as a consequence does effect the person who eats that flesh." <
>> In what way? Is it the physical body that's affected, or all three? <<
The meat flesh is affected in two ways. #1) The animal releases large amounts of adrenaline and probably several other fear-related chemicals into the blood stream which in turn saturates the flesh. #2) The emotional energy of fear and resentment is astrally bound to the flesh. Both of these factors negatively impact the physical and astral bodies of the person who consumes the flesh, which (since our three bodies are united) in turn affects the mental body.
>> I'm thinking that the only way to get off the wheel is to redeem all of one's existing Karma, and - in the process - actually do *nothing*, so to avoid further attracting negative Karma. This feels like a circular reference to me, so I'm sure I'm missing something!! ;-) <<
Here's an excerpt from http://www.ABardonCompanion.com/Redemption.html that will help explain:
"I said previously that in order to be free from the wheel of Samsara, the adept must redeem karma the instant that it is created. At the moment of the adept's physical death, all personal karma must have been redeemed or reincarnation will ensue. Thus for the adept, the redemption of karma is a continuous discipline. As each negative effect is caused, its root lesson is immediately sought out and integrated; and as each positive effect is caused, its positivity is passed outward and multiplied throughout the lives of others.
"It is important to note that it is the elimination of ALL accumulated personal karma -- negative AND positive -- that frees the individual from Samsara. Negative karma accumulates until we learn its lesson and change our behavior, but positive karma accumulates when we hold onto it and do not pass it freely on. Thus the adept gives freely and without reservation, acting as a conduit for positivity, not as a source. This is a subtle and important distinction between being a conduit and a source. When you are a source of positivity, you accumulate positive karma, but when you are merely a conduit, you do not accumulate -- you re-deem."
>> The only solution I can find is this: the attraction of negative (and, indeed, positive) Karma is more about one's *intent* rather than one's actions. Is there any validity in this? <<
It's really a combination of the two. Right action, combined with right intention, generates positive karma. When eating a Big Mac, for example, having a right intention will diminish, and possibly eliminate, the negative impact but it will not transform the act into one that generates positive karma.
>> Which is what I meant by "Eat anything *you* like". For if one feels that the killing of an animal is "wrong" (by one's own conscience), then one may attract negative Karma by killing/eating an animal. However, if one's conscience is not bothered by such an act, then perhaps killing/eating *won't* attract negative Karma. <<
No, this is not accurate. This is like saying that if someone murders another person but doesn't possess the scruples to know it's a wrong thing to do, then they suffer no karmic consequences. Like I said earlier, ignoring consequences is not impunity.
My best to you,
:) Rawn Clark
24 Aug 2003
>> This is leading to other questions, but all of them are finally coming to the ones forever asked by mankind such as "what is the manning of creation as it is and why is it so ?" Despite a straight answer is unlikely to bring a definitive of these ultimate questions. <<
I think the answer is so hard to Understand by the sequentialized consciousness because it is really so simple and such simplicity is an unacceptable thing to the sequentialized mind. :)
The simple answer to "why?" is "because that's the way it is here and now".
The sequentialized mind perceives only an infinitely finite slice of time and space, and therefore has no direct comprehension of all that the Infinitely Infinite contains. From the eternal perspective of non-sequentialized Mind however, it is apparent that EVERY one of the infinite possibilities are manifest at one point or another in the infinite course of sequentialized time-space. From our sequentialized perspective, there have been and will be times and places where the cycle of life does not manifest the way it manifests here and now. From an eternal perspective, where ALL things happen simultaneously, the cycle of life is manifest in an infinite number of ways all at once, within an eternal Now.
It's really only from an eternal perspective that the simple answer of "because that's the way it is", can be truly *Understood* without the mind rebelling. From an eternal perspective it's perfectly clear that the way things are over there/then is the way the *must* be, and that over there/then it's the way *it* must be, and so on. That is how The Whole is eternally complete, even though seemingly incomplete from a temporal perspective.
>> This is becoming more philosophy than Bardon Praxis, ;-) <<
:) But philosophy is an important *part of* a Bardon praxis! It's inevitable that as the initiate advances, they will come face to face with these issues, not just as 'questions' that need answers, but as matters of Understanding. Pondering these questions and seeking out your answers through experience, are important steps toward Understanding.
My best to you,
:) Rawn Clark
25 Aug 2003
>> But now my question is- what about the animals that we must (?) eat? What is the proper way to relate to them? It seems somewhat more problematic. Obviously that avoiding big Macs and other ecosystem destroying meat sources is wise, if possible. But what is the best way to actually obtain meat from an animal from the Hermetic standpoint? Is it possible to have animals 'happy to be living in my forest' at the time of sacrifice? I suppose it seems easier (but not necessarily better) if you purchase organic, range fed meat, and say thanks in some way. Most people can do this, but that leaves the 'dirty work' for the butcher. What about those who 'grow their own' or practice hunting and gathering? How would they best handle things? <<
I'd say that the native cultures of our own [North American] continent offer us an excellent example of how to create a "right" relationship to our sources of sustenance, be they animal, plant or mineral. The primary ingredients are respect, thankfulness and conscientiousness.
In our modern setting where we buy our meats from a supermarket, this must be done after the fact since we have no direct contact with the animals we eat. It's the process I described in an earlier post. One establishes an inner contact with the spirit of the animal one is about to eat the flesh of, acknowledge their life and thank them for the sacrifice they made to feed you.
My best to you,
:) Rawn Clark
25 Aug 2003