Veganism/vegetarianism and "ethical" lifestyle choices

[murphythecat]

its very hard to explain in such resume style so its normal you cannot understand as it would take much more time to explain.
mind and the body are separated. they are related, but separated in that mind is not generated by the body. mind (consciousness) is not generated by the brain. of course, consciousness is influenced by the brain input and the 5 senses (eye, smell, touch, ect), but when you still the mind in concentration meditation, it becomes clear that you experience the calming of the mind, the mind calms itself and you begin to experiment a reality that has nothing to do with the body.

when you meditate, its clear that your mind is not the body and that the mind can be calmed. theres no way you can walk if your mind doesnt say first: walk. mind over matter. the body is controlled by the mind.

if we decorticate what happens in life, it becomes evident that the mind can react to the body or can be trained to react differently to body input. for example, when the body feel sense contact he doesnt like: cold. it creates a feeling. your mind interpret the feeling and decide I like it, or I dont like it, and then, the mind react and tells to the body move the body to escape that feeling. its always the same process. sense contact-feeling- reaction in the mind to that feeling (positive or negative or neutral)- mind tells the body to move, or not. the body feels and the mind normally react almost automatically but with practice, you can learn to not react automatically and see that chain of cause and effect and stop being so concern with the body. you can train your mind just as much as you can train your body.

the body has a life of its own that the mind cannot control and vice versa. your body is bound to the law of nature: its bound to suffering, decay, death, old age.
your mind however is not bound to the same laws. you can create mind suffering with negative thoughts, or happy state of mind with thinking about love, compassion. ect.

your mind cannot tells your body to stop bleeding. or your body cannot decide for your mind to relax and stop thinking. they are in separated realities so to speak and can be totally independant.
I'm french so its hard to explain perfectly in english!

Sorry, maybe its my lack of comprehension skills, but I have a hard time following your logic without experiencing cognitive dissonance. How is something connected and seperate? If the mind is connected to the body but distinct and seperated, does that mean that your mind exists without the body? Will the person that everyone seems to associate with your human experience continue to exist when you die? If there is no self behind a name or a personality, does that mean you will not mourn when your loved ones die? If no individual is real, then why care about any individual's suffering? their suffering is just an illusion.

 

[turkalurk]

Id say that relative truth based on our experience of reality thru the 5 senses is not objective reality, its relative. its conditioned and more importantly, it will end.
I think there a objective reality in that everyone can find it and that we all have access to that objective reality.
objective reality, at least in bouddhism, is nibbana.
also, theres stage of insight. the first insight of nobody there (nibbana) doesnt enlightened oneself, but it shows him that theres a reality without the me. thats why they say: there is the path, but nobody to enter it.

the ego is everything we think we are. but as soon as we try to remove layers of the self, everything that you take as me, you realize that all that is left is the knower. then you look at what the knower is. where is the knower when asleep. or, what and who was the knower when I was 5, 10, 15 years old. that was all me? at 5, I thought I knew everything, at 15, less so, and at 25, I know I know nothing really. so all that knower was me? impossible. the self is a mental formation. there no you, no self. nothing to protect as nothing is your own.

to experience this moment fully, mindfulness and stilness of mind is mandatory. we need to go below the surface of thoughts, sense-contact, feelings and reach our inner being.

If I start removing enough layers, I will cease to be recognizable. If you take away my brain, and remove my face, then I am no longer recognizable as me. With out my frame of reference to this particular form of life, I have no reason to associate my identity with this personality. The word "I" will still refer to this particular body, whether I remember my ego are not, because the I refers to my form as well as my functions. The word "I" will still function as a reference to this particular organic system. I am not consciousness, I have it. If I lost my body, my consciousness would be come something its not now. I will have evolved into a different form of consciousness, and without memories of this life, then the " me" that I become is irrelevant. You are not just an observer, you are a property of the observed. Without form, there is no function. If I peel away the layers of my body, I no longer exist in this form that I associate as "me."

 

[turkalurk]

its very hard to explain in such resume style so its normal you cannot understand as it would take much more time to explain.
mind and the body are separated. they are related, but separated in that mind is not generated by the body. mind (consciousness) is not generated by the brain. of course, consciousness is influenced by the brain input and the 5 senses (eye, smell, touch, ect), but when you still the mind in concentration meditation, it becomes clear that you experience the calming of the mind, the mind calms itself and you begin to experiment a reality that has nothing to do with the body.

when you meditate, its clear that your mind is not the body and that the mind can be calmed. theres no way you can walk if your mind doesnt say first: walk. mind over matter. the body is controlled by the mind.

if we decorticate what happens in life, it becomes evident that the mind can react to the body or can be trained to react differently to body input. for example, when the body feel sense contact he doesnt like: cold. it creates a feeling. your mind interpret the feeling and decide I like it, or I dont like it, and then, the mind react and tells to the body move the body to escape that feeling. its always the same process. sense contact-feeling- reaction in the mind to that feeling (positive or negative or neutral)- mind tells the body to move, or not. the body feels and the mind normally react almost automatically but with practice, you can learn to not react automatically and see that chain of cause and effect and stop being so concern with the body. you can train your mind just as much as you can train your body.

the body has a life of its own that the mind cannot control and vice versa. your body is bound to the law of nature: its bound to suffering, decay, death, old age.
your mind however is not bound to the same laws. you can create mind suffering with negative thoughts, or happy state of mind with thinking about love, compassion. ect.

your mind cannot tells your body to stop bleeding. or your body cannot decide for your mind to relax and stop thinking. they are in separated realities so to speak and can be totally independant.
I'm french so its hard to explain perfectly in english!

If you really believed this, why not blow your brains out and be at one with the world? If your brain is unecessary to achieve consciousness, then why aren't dead people considered conscious? Why isn't a rock conscious? If everything is consciousness, then the meaning of the word consciousness has no substance. It could no longer be distinguished from unconsciousness or anything else for that matter. Without an association to the form of life in which it emerges from, consciousness becomes an abstraction that you can project on anything. It becomes an anthropomorphism of reality.

 

[Ninae]

i think nirvana is a feature of brain funtioning that results when the self is supressed.

It's more like you join with the whole so your self is dissolved, from my experience. You're not really willing to give up the self without getting something better in return (because you need it to survive). I think some who take a lot of psychedelics, etc. are seeking out that experience.

But it's a bit hopeless to tell people to give up the self so they will get a reward. It would be more effective to teach them to seek the reward first. Although this is hard to achieve, but so is ego-dissolution.

 

[turkalurk]

Smelling pistakes can be annoying when there are many of them. Everyone typos once in a while and that's what spell check is for. Worse are grammar mistakes because they can alter the whole meaning of a phrase or sentence. But online, mentioning them tends to get wild accusations of 'grammar nazi' or worse. I am unsure why people think it is OK not to be able to properly use their language (ESL folk aside ) but it seems to bring virulent reactions. I'd put it down to bad teaching where students got chastised for incorrect spelling etc. but to be honest, schools just aren't that particular anymore and I doubt more than maybe 10% of teachers would pass an 8th grade (form 3) spelling test in my day.

You engaged in a conversation that started from a spelling correction by implying the importance of grammar. I, simply, found it ironic that you are so terrible with your grammar. I was asking if you were aware of your poor grammar. Apparently, you are not. I will correct the first few paragraphs for you:

Clearly[,]reading is not your forté[,] either. :D

I did not claim it matter[ed], I pointed out no errors (except your 'punctuation' one later on, mostly for the irony)[missing a period] I corrected no mistakes, and it is more irony[ironic] you claim I distracted from the debate as [,]at least[,] I included on topic conversation in my post - unlike this one of yours. And[,] I diminished nobody's credibility.

And[,] I'm guessing you don't know enough grammar to follow through on your implied offer to correct my English... :D

Pretty much a fail all around... :D

The worst place I found for smelly people was Paris -[this should be a period or semicolon] I figure it must be why they got into so perfumes so heavily. And[,]Paris is not renowned for a vegetarian diet as a city -[this should be a colon] lotsa meat, lots of meat-based sauces[,] etc. But[,] it wasn't meat I smelt it was unwashed bodies, mostly with an attempt to cover it with rather sickly smells some might call fragrances.

By the way, when you corrected my spelling error, you did distract from the observation I made about your grammar by drawing attention to irrelevant attempts to diminish my credibility.

LOL - happy for you to post your corrections... :D of my 'puncuation'... :D (given you don't seem able to spell the word I am sincerely interested. :D)

 

[turkalurk]

I don't know about you guys, but typing on a phone is like texting a friend. I will not pretend that my posts will ever be free of errors.

 

[turkalurk]

It's more like you join with the whole so your self is dissolved, from my experience. You're not really willing to give up the self without getting something better in return (because you need it to survive). I think some who take a lot of psychedelics, etc. are seeking out that experience.

But it's a bit hopeless to tell people to give up the self so they will get a reward. It would be more effective to teach them to seek the reward first. Although this is hard to achieve, but so is ego-dissolution.

If you read the study, damage to your right parietal lobe influences an experience of transcendence. There is a god helmet that can use electromagnetic radiation to inhibit activity in the right parietal lobe, which is said to result in a spiritual(transcendent) experience.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/inside-the-mind/human-brain/brain-religion2.htm

 

[turkalurk]

yes, and imo, when people are so defensive and offensive, its when they are in the wrong or feel they may be wrong

By that logic, are you wrong? You did claim to be worried about my lack of comprehension skills.

 

[Erikmen]

You engaged in a conversation that started from a spelling correction by implying the importance of grammar. I, simply, found it ironic that you are so terrible with your grammar. I was asking if you were aware of your poor grammar. Apparently, you are not. I will correct the first few paragraphs for you.

By the way, when you corrected my spelling error, you did distract from the observation I made about your grammar by drawing attention to irrelevant attempts to diminish my credibility.

It's always like this.

 

[murphythecat]

If you really believed this, why not blow your brains out and be at one with the world? If your brain is unecessary to achieve consciousness, then why aren't dead people considered conscious? Why isn't a rock conscious? If everything is consciousness, then the meaning of the word consciousness has no substance. It could no longer be distinguished from unconsciousness or anything else for that matter. Without an association to the form of life in which it emerges from, consciousness becomes an abstraction that you can project on anything. It becomes an anthropomorphism of reality.

hi
we need this body to find what we are looking for. some look for sense contact and the body gives them that.
if you meditate and discover a state of being that is much more appreciable then living in the sense contact, you would give up the importance of the sense contact and meditate all day long to attain that state of mind which is only available with concentration and that you prefer.

Its not the place to discuss this. dhammawheel is a great forum and any talk by ayya khema, ajahn brahm, ajahn chah would help you much more to understand then anything I could ever say!

If I start removing enough layers, I will cease to be recognizable. If you take away my brain, and remove my face, then I am no longer recognizable as me. With out my frame of reference to this particular form of life, I have no reason to associate my identity with this personality. The word "I" will still refer to this particular body, whether I remember my ego are not, because the I refers to my form as well as my functions. The word "I" will still function as a reference to this particular organic system. I am not consciousness, I have it. If I lost my body, my consciousness would be come something its not now. I will have evolved into a different form of consciousness, and without memories of this life, then the " me" that I become is irrelevant. You are not just an observer, you are a property of the observed. Without form, there is no function. If I peel away the layers of my body, I no longer exist in this form that I associate as "me."

the you is temporary, its impermanent. you will lose this body, this body will die.
you are not this body, nothing on the body ask for ownership. your mind and its delusion imagine that your toes are yours, and your nose, and your breath. ect. in reality, theres toes, theres breath, theres a nose. nothing is yours, its only a phenomena. even consciousness is impermanent. everything you experience is bound to the same law of raise-peak and decay. the body gives us a sense of solidity and thats why we take it for granted but your body will die, no matter what you do.

you dont own consciousness, consciousness is. your mind can be influenced by consciousness or can be train to not react and desire everything the body has to offer.

of course, its once you begin to meditate and experience a more pleasant state of being then anything the sense can provide, that you become to realize that the way we live: mostly by constantly try to have sense gratification is not fulfilling and concentration and mindfulness is much more.

By that logic, are you wrong? You did claim to be worried about my lack of comprehension skills.

id have to say that you seem much more comprehensive then two weeks ago!

 

[turkalurk]

hi
we need this body to find what we are looking for. some look for sense contact and the body gives them that.
if you meditate and discover a state of being that is much more appreciable then living in the sense contact, you would give up the importance of the sense contact and meditate all day long to attain that state of mind which is only available with concentration and that you prefer.

Its not the place to discuss this. dhammawheel is a great forum and any talk by ayya khema, ajahn brahm, ajahn chah would help you much more to understand then anything I could ever say!


the you is temporary, its impermanent. you will lose this body, this body will die.
you are not this body, nothing on the body ask for ownership. your mind and its delusion imagine that your toes are yours, and your nose, and your breath. ect. in reality, theres toes, theres breath, theres a nose. nothing is yours, its only a phenomena. even consciousness is impermanent. everything you experience is bound to the same law of raise-peak and decay. the body gives us a sense of solidity and thats why we take it for granted but your body will die, no matter what you do.

you dont own consciousness, consciousness is. your mind can be influenced by consciousness or can be train to not react and desire everything the body has to offer.

of course, its once you begin to meditate and experience a more pleasant state of being then anything the sense can provide, that you become to realize that the way we live: mostly by constantly try to have sense gratification is not fulfilling and concentration and mindfulness is much more.

id have to say that you seem much more comprehensive then two weeks ago!

yes, but what about the article that showed evidence that the transcendent experiences are based in brain functionality. How is this not just another method of "pleasing the senses." You feel a oneness, but you are no more one with than anyone else; you just feel as though you are, by redirecting the flow of processing information in ways that inhibit the "self sensation." This results in a pleasing and gratifying experience which can lead to attachment just like any other pleasurable experience. Why do you think there is such a corelation between addicts and new age spirituality that promotes these healthier ways of achieving a rewarding experiences with the added benefit of desirable consequences? Its a simple reward vs. consequences equation that favors its sustainability as a healthy way to indulge in a pleasurable experience without the costs of other easy ways that involved much more risk of harm.

However, its not immune to harmful implications when taken to extremes or over-indulged in. Just like anything else, moderation is key. I mean, this path you speak of is called "the middle way" for a reason.

 

[murphythecat]

hi
I doubt the veracity of science and consciousness. all the experience of ego death or even people who are clinically dead and says that they were still conscious of everything and looked at doctors trying to resuscitate them. all the same things are describe: the light, the fact that they were looking at their body from a third perspective. I do not think that consciousness is only a brain function.
about the attachment to pleasant feeling in meditation. Id have to say that its much better for someone to get attached to the pleasure of renunciation and concentration then be attached to sense gratification. when you are fully concentrated, you cannot hate, crave, desire, ressents. meditation is puryfing. of course, meditation and concentration is also conditioned upon this body, but its much more safe to abide in a pleasure born of concentration rather then sensual pleasures. sense pleasure is like being in debt, because as soon as you fulfill a sense desire, theres another one coming right back at you. pleasure born of concentration is very fulfilling and allow one to gain insight into the mind.

when you mediate, your ego shrink very much. normally, in waking life, we believe that there is the observer (the ego, the self) and the observed (the think we observe). when you mediate, you concentrate on the observed so much that the observer is definitely not there anymore. all you experience is the observed, you are so into the observed and the present moment that it becomes evident that your consciousness is very malleable.
fascinating stuff imo

yes, but what about the article that showed evidence that the transcendent experiences are based in brain functionality. How is this not just another method of "pleasing the senses." You feel a oneness, but you are no more one with than anyone else; you just feel as though you are, by redirecting the flow of processing information in ways that inhibit the "self sensation." This results in a pleasing and gratifying experience which can lead to attachment just like an other pleasurablr experience. Why do you think there is such a corelation between addicts and new age spirituality that promotes these healthier ways of achieving a rewarding experiences with the added benefit of desirable consequences. Its a simple reward vs. consequences equation that favors its sustainability as a healthy way to indulge in a pleasurable experience without the costs of other easy ways that involved much more risk of harm.

However, its not immune to harmful implications when taken to extremes or over-indulged in. Just like anything else, moderation is key. I mean, this path you speak of is called "the middle way" for reason.

http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?t=21221
heres a thread about mind vs brain. could be very interesting for you

 

[Ninae]

Nostradamus predicted advances in the science of telepathy will make it possible for people to talk with their pets and farm animals.

He wrote "This will lead to an upsurge in vegetarianism since the hog will become a brother to man.”

 

[socko]

Nostradamus predicted advances in the science of telepathy will make it possible for people to talk with their pets and farm animals.

He wrote "This will lead to an upsurge in vegetarianism since the hog will become a brother to man.”

By coincidence, having telepathic communications with my next-door neighbor's dog Sam is one of the things that influenced my decision to become vegetarian.

 

[Ninae]

Whar do you mean by telepathic communications?

 

[socko]

Whar do you mean by telepathic communications?

I assume the same thing you meant - transfer of information by no known physical means or sensory channels.
Edit: oh dear, what did you think i meant?

 

[Ninae]

I just meant what you talked about. I'm not that good at reading thoughts but I read feelings and energy very well. My cat is very expressive so I can see most of what he feels.

 

[socko]

I just meant what you talked about. I'm not that good at reading thoughts but I read feelings and energy very well. My cat is very expressive so I can see most of what he feels.

Receiving/sending a complete thought 'bindle.' I'm making up that word because I don't know any words to describe the process. A bindle is like a bundle of thoughts and images and emotions all rolled up into a packet that is experienced by the receiver instantly like a flash of déjà vu. It is non-verbal because animals don't have language. Unlike a typical déjà vu, the bindle has content. It is similar to having had a conversation with someone. It expresses the idea of the sender.

 

[Ninae]

I've experienced this a lot, but not while talking with animals. Though it can be as much as a page of 5 paragraphs in one second. But what did he say?

 

[socko]

That is how I experience it for animals whether or not they are physically present. It is, of course, non-verbal since animals don't have language, but it can be surprisingly sophisticated.
This isn't the place to talk about it in detail. Send me a pm or something and i'll tell you more details