Enlightenment and The One Great Family of Life

[Center]

god, I used to be a fuckin weirdo.

I agree that everything comes from one source.

one love-

[verklingen]

Originally Posted by JainVeganBuddha

im not ignoring your points, im just responding in a generalized and abbreviated fashion. the point by point is a bit lengthy and tedious to me. thats just not the way i flow and perhaps im more 'clear and zen'--not in contrast to you but in general. i take in what you say and respond to your general flow. trust me i read and reread your posts while posting.

oh, so being "clear and zen" amounts to verbal masturbation. . . gotcha. this is really no different from your meat your meat thread. points are presented and disregarded in favor of regurgitating your original point. try to open the discussion beyond that and you might get a picture, then that's that. your zen seems like an excuse for laziness. not only in action, but in belief.

Originally Posted by JainVeganBuddha

why cling to the ways of this world with its suffering. why not aspire to better worlds free of such.

surely we can aspire to create a more ideal world, but what has our diet got to do with that? animal or vegetable, we must kill to eat. so the problem isn't as much what we eat, but how we eat it. do we appreciate our food? do we respect it? if we don't, we should. if we can love it more, we should. but if we love our food enough not to kill it, WE die. and that's not loving anything, that's disrupting and disrespecting the system in which we play a part.

[JainVeganBuddha]

Originally Posted by verklingen

oh, so being "clear and zen" amounts to verbal masturbation. . . gotcha. this is really no different from your meat your meat thread. points are presented and disregarded in favor of regurgitating your original point. try to open the discussion beyond that and you might get a picture, then that's that. your zen seems like an excuse for laziness. not only in action, but in belief.



surely we can aspire to create a more ideal world, but what has our diet got to do with that? animal or vegetable, we must kill to eat. so the problem isn't as much what we eat, but how we eat it. do we appreciate our food? do we respect it? if we don't, we should. if we can love it more, we should. but if we love our food enough not to kill it, WE die. and that's not loving anything, that's disrupting and disrespecting the system in which we play a part.

the difference between you and I is very simple...there is no need for complex logic for me to express myself. your proliferation is required for you to rationalize something abominable.

the difference between you and I is that you are willing to violate, harm, and kill other living beings for some minor fancy--not out of necessity--for some certain taste/texture for a few minutes of eating. mind you there is a big difference in eating fruits or plant foods and animals. as living beings, they all express themselves according to their own nature. you choose not to listen to their voices, but to the (delusional) chain of thoughts in your head.

you just want to argue. youre not trying to learn or improve yourself. so let your own karma be your teacher. what you do to those animals and other living beings will come right back to you in full blown reaction. so there is no point in arguing with each other--other than you needing to express your aggro karmic energy. just chill. there are many faces of the great spirit we will meet as teachers. one is the one who talks and explains nicely. the other is the one who gives your violent karma back to you.

youve pretty much eclipsed the whole thread with this painstaking pedantic style of cripple-dog point by point dullard argument on this one issue. you still cant hide the vampirish, hideous, beast-like quality of your character as you grin, blood-spattered, slicing throats of bound animals, tearing out their inner organs, licking and chewing the stinking guts, and growling at anyone who comes near with a crazed barbarity of bloodlust. im just watching you with disdain from up in a tree, gathering apples and bannanas for my meal

[verklingen]

Originally Posted by JainVeganBuddha

the difference between you and I is very simple...there is no need for complex logic for me to express myself. your proliferation is required for you to rationalize something abominable.

let's analyze the logic each of us have put forth in this thread, and determine which is more complex. i'll define "more complex" as "the one which makes the most assumptions."

you:

• the sun provides life-giving energy which "has all pure and 'divine' or wholesome qualities" to the earth.
• this life-giving energy is most abundant in plants because they receive it directly.
• the animals which eat the plants maintain this energy in their body, but an animal which eats such an animal receives a polluted, diminishing return of the energy. this behavior is improper.
• eating animals condemns one to the same suffering the animals he has eaten experienced.
• carnivores build negative energies.
• "nonviolence is a spiritual/moral principle--not a belief."
• "meat-eating degrades the consciousness"
• "at the pinnacle of this development is the best that is found in this world: nonviolence toward all life forms; receiving subtle knowledge of the universe through meditation, purification, etc; non-possessiveness; silence and equanimity"

you make assumptions on the quality of energy coming from the sun and assume there is only one proper way of absorbing this energy. you assume that absorbing this energy in any other way is negative -- serving to degrade one's consciousness and reserving negative energy for later experience -- whether or not the being absorbing in this fashion believes in or understands it. lastly you assume there to be a pinnacle of development which is achieved the exact same way for all beings.

me:

• "plants are no different from animals in that they both are grown only to die and both serve their use to those who will partake of them"
• "eating is part of survival in this realm. . . there is no harm, only a progression and unfoldment of energy."
• "EVERYTHING is an idea."
• "there's no such thing as a right and wrong belief. all beliefs have their justifications, and all of them are reasonable and rational for those who hold them. there is no such thing as an objective rationale for belief because all beliefs are subjective to the person who welcomes their influence into his experience."
• "all conceivable experiences are innately devoid of meaning until a consciousness engages them."

i assume that both plants and animals die for consumption, and that there is nothing inherently wrong about it because it is an inescapable element in the process of our present awareness. i also assume that everything is an idea, and any idea will carry only as much weight as the carrier allows. finally, i assume that all experience is unique to the experiencer and only he is able to determine its quality, which i in turn assume determines what effects it may have on him and his circumstance.

i'm telling everyone that they decide what their actions/experiences mean to them, and you're dictating to everyone what their actions/experiences mean to them. THAT, to me, is abominable.

Originally Posted by JainVeganBuddha

the difference between you and I is that you are willing to violate, harm, and kill other living beings for some minor fancy--not out of necessity--for some certain taste/texture for a few minutes of eating. mind you there is a big difference in eating fruits or plant foods and animals. as living beings, they all express themselves according to their own nature. you choose not to listen to their voices, but to the (delusional) chain of thoughts in your head.

the only difference between you and i is that, even though you profess a belief in the equality of all beings, you make a distinction between the death of a plant and the death of an animal. taken to the extreme, your belief would have you eat nothing. but that wouldn't bode well for your survival so you've drawn a line between the two in regard to dietary behavior and placed yourself on what you deem as the "proper" side: without understanding that the only difference between behavior on one side or the other lies in your own personal definition of those behaviors which you've arbitrarily segregated into "proper" (eating only plants) and "improper" (eating any animals at all). who's making a chain of thoughts, now?

Originally Posted by JainVeganBuddha

you just want to argue. youre not trying to learn or improve yourself. so let your own karma be your teacher. what you do to those animals and other living beings will come right back to you in full blown reaction. so there is no point in arguing with each other--other than you needing to express your aggro karmic energy. just chill. there are many faces of the great spirit we will meet as teachers. one is the one who talks and explains nicely. the other is the one who gives your violent karma back to you.

youve pretty much eclipsed the whole thread with this painstaking pedantic style of cripple-dog point by point dullard argument on this one issue.

i certainly do not want to argue, i only seek clarity. i'm not out to "beat" you. i know that in the realm of belief there is no winner or loser. all we can hope to do is clarify our position as best we can in order to help others understand where we are coming from. sometimes others, such as myself in this thread, ask for clarifications to facilitate their own understanding. you did fine in your first reply, and i offered my take on what you had to say. . . which incidentally begged further clarification. the discussion then became about you preaching the virtue of your beliefs from a pulpit while debasing belief in any other way.

that's what you turned this thread into. i tried and succeeded to some degree in learning and improving myself by understanding your belief and its implications in contrast with mine, but you took my curiosity as an invitation to glorify your belief at the expense of contrary beliefs and therefor limited the possibility for mutual learning (because you speak of your beliefs only in light of your beliefs, much alike to discussion the existence of jesus using only the bible). and you speak of my ego!

Originally Posted by JainVeganBuddha

you still cant hide the vampirish, hideous, beast-like quality of your character as you grin, blood-spattered, slicing throats of bound animals, tearing out their inner organs, licking and chewing the stinking guts, and growling at anyone who comes near with a crazed barbarity of bloodlust. im just watching you with disdain from up in a tree, gathering apples and bannanas for my meal

yeah. . . have fun with that. all of it.

[JcP]

Jain, are you buddhist? Because you aren't sounding like one.

Originally Posted by verklingen

the only difference between you and i is that, even though you profess a belief in the equality of all beings, you make a distinction between the death of a plant and the death of an animal. taken to the extreme, your belief would have you eat nothing.

In complete seriousness Verk, I've thought about this myself. And, to be honest, it's not an easy answer for me. I obviously have continued to eat and survive, but there is a large part of me that has an issue with the ouroboros of life. I'm sure there's an answer, but nothing jives with me yet. So at the very least, I'll keep on eating till I find it.

I'm fully open to the concept that vegetarianism is a mistaken view of consumption...IE, life is life and all life needs to consume itself to survive.

But my soul says eating meat is different than eating vegetables. In the abstract, you are right. All life is equal. But there's something about that that just doesn't seem right, and I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that underneath it all, you agree more than you're suggesting. Then again, what the fuck do I know. I don't even know if I should eat anything or not anymore

[Waves]

the whole plants vs animals thing comes down to one thing- our belief that pain and suffering and blood and gore is bad. lions dont see blood or gore or pain when they are eating an animal- they see a fuckin meal.

really it doesnt matter what you eat. its just genetically programmed bullshit mixed with belief bullshit that results in what you think is right for you. everyone has preferences, find yours and let others have theirs i say. its when people start pushing their own boundaries and start telling others what is right and wrong for them that i like to step in and kindly remind everyone that there is no right or wrong and you are entitled to whatever you wish. you can go eat rocks if thats what your heart desires. at least your basing your decisions on what you genuinely want and not what your beliefs tell you you should have, or what your parents tell you you should have, or what the buddhists tell you you should have. live your own damn life. follow your own desires and not what people tell you to desire.

[spicoli]

i like what dennis leary said: 'eating meat is an instinct, not eating meat is a choice.'
both are essentially choices, but he's funny and this thread got ugly.

[JcP]

Originally Posted by Waves

the whole plants vs animals thing comes down to one thing- our belief that pain and suffering and blood and gore is bad. lions dont see blood or gore or pain when they are eating an animal- they see a fuckin meal.

really it doesnt matter what you eat. its just genetically programmed bullshit mixed with belief bullshit that results in what you think is right for you. everyone has preferences, find yours and let others have theirs i say. its when people start pushing their own boundaries and start telling others what is right and wrong for them that i like to step in and kindly remind everyone that there is no right or wrong and you are entitled to whatever you wish. you can go eat rocks if thats what your heart desires. at least your basing your decisions on what you genuinely want and not what your beliefs tell you you should have, or what your parents tell you you should have, or what the buddhists tell you you should have. live your own damn life. follow your own desires and not what people tell you to desire.

but we're not lions, we are humans with consciousnesses which have the ability to choose what we think is right and wrong. And being born with that consciousness is not a choice, just like the lion doesn't have a choice in how he sees the gazelle. Just because a mother spider eats her babies doesn't mean I would think it's totally normal for my next door neighbor to eat her 2 year old kid. And I would suggest that's the purpose of our species.

out of curiousity, do you continue this belief when it comes to murder, rape, or destruction? IE, if I think it's right to kill you, should others have the right to tell me I'm wrong and that my desires are not right?

I'm just seeing how far you allow this (in a way) anarchist thread in you to go .

[verklingen]

Originally Posted by JcP

I'm fully open to the concept that vegetarianism is a mistaken view of consumption

i'm open to you being open to that concept, but i'm not myself open to the concept that views can be considered mistaken by anyone other than the person holding them. it's fine to consider your own views mistaken, that's how we learn and grow and develop. but i would never venture to consider another's views as mistaken.

waves put it well. we're just here to figure out what works for us. in one way or another, all our struggles result from something or someone taking it upon themselves to tell others what works. i think we've had enough of that.

[Man in Black]

Way to break it down, Verk.

"all conceivable experiences are innately devoid of meaning until a consciousness engages them."

Brilliant. This is the essence of a priori (pure) reasoning. Your beliefs and ideas which are gained through experience, while they may or may not be empirical they are not tautologies. That is, they are not true under any/every possible valuation. A priori knowledge is that which is self-evident and does not need to be based from experience.

No matter how much you believe in what you may happen to believe in, it is based off of inductive logic, i.e. it is not universal. Your beliefs may be valid for you but they are not universally true.

To quote Immanuel Kant:
"But, though all our knowledge begins with experience, it by no means
follows that all arises out of experience. For, on the contrary, it
is quite possible that our empirical knowledge is a compound of that
which we receive through impressions, and that which the faculty of
cognition supplies from itself (sensuous impressions giving merely
the occasion), an addition which we cannot distinguish from the original
element given by sense, till long practice has made us attentive to,
and skilful in separating it. It is, therefore, a question which
requires close investigation, and not to be answered at first sight,
whether there exists a knowledge altogether independent of experience,
and even of all sensuous impressions? Knowledge of this kind is called
a priori, in contradistinction to empirical knowledge, which has its
sources a posteriori, that is, in experience."

JVB, get down off your high horse. Your Jainist/Buddhist beliefs are no more valid than my Christian ones.

Oh and JCP, as far as being confused about eating anything ever again..have you heard of sun eating? I was watching either Wife Swap or Trading Spouses (my guilty pleasures) and one of the wives was a lady from Arizona who rose very early in the morning and basked in the sunlight as a source of nutrition and food. But she also ate a very strict diet of nuts and berries and the like. It seemed a little silly to me but if it works for her, more power to her.

[JcP]

Originally Posted by verklingen

i'm open to you being open to that concept, but i'm not myself open to the concept that views can be considered mistaken by anyone other than the person holding them.

then why are you debating jainveganbuddha? his/her beliefs are not mistaken, right?

as with waves, I'm not sure where either of you are drawing the line on this.

[Man in Black]

So that's a no on the sun eating?

[JcP]

that was a reply to verk's post.

As to yours, sun eating sounds interesting. It still requires the eating of nuts and berries tho, which kind of defeats the purpose. So it's just drawing the line somewhere else.

sounds cool tho! maybe it will be possible with some sort of technological advances in the future...human solar power or something lol

[Man in Black]

I saw a program the other day about the advances made in solar energy. It was very interesting. Apparently it's becoming more and more efficient.

[JcP]

solar, wind, tidal, and geothermal are the only truly "green" energies, imo. All this ethanol bullshit is crap. Who the fuck asked for ethanol? Biofuels were always the "stopgap," not the solution.

A+ on solar energy!