Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 77

Thread: cruelty towards animals

  1. #11
    Beloved Woman paradise-on-earth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Elfengarten, Germany
    Posts
    69,836
    rose Always a pleasure to be inspired by you to think!

    Quote Originally Posted by paradise-on-earth View Post
    Imo, the 1. topic is about deciding what the animals prefer.
    And you CAN NOT DO THAT. You simply donīt know.
    So, it must not be your pie! You can only decipher and decide what YOU prefer.
    Let me say that better:
    You can only decipher and decide what YOU prefer- in regards to the animal, also.

    I am certain, that noone who is ITV would enjoy an animals pain that they notice, or would really like to keep animals in ways that the animals dislike. But again- thatīs a VERY fine line, given the fact that Abe say that almost all animals (including our beloved pets) would prefer their freedom over the seeming comfort that we offer them, while we -"lovingly"- lock them up in the same time.

    Itīs feeling good to me as well to watch the animals in wilderness to get some clues about what they instinctually would prefer. Having said this itīs true also, that a lot of animals start to behave in new ways, when inspired/trained by humans. So those who keep animals can observe, that many of them start to use our human inventions to their own amusement and comfort, over a true genuine "natural life".

    While wild animals probably wouldīnt do the same, I have seen pigs scratch themselves ecstatically squeeking on the electric fences for minutes by their very own choice- which you could easily call a torture if you would do it to them. I knew a horse who loved to go reversely through a labyrinth, when left on its own. While my riding teacher had told me that horses HATE to go reverse, and never do it in nature- and within humans command only when they canīt avoid it.

    -I have seen cows repeatedly (while the vet told us that they would naturally never jump, he got taught that their skeleton would not enable them to do for that without pain) jump over very high fences just to get into the strawberry-garden for a special treat, and calfs who climbed again and again and again a 2 meter high metal-fence, to break into the corn-field nearby. I have seen a dog drive on a scateboard -just for fun- without itīs owner advicing it at all, and cats, who are best friends with mice or chicks, or who pile up one over the other in packs of 4 and more, in extremely close containers by their own choice.

    But again- the fact that we donīt REALLY know what the animal would prefer if left alone, is absolutely no excuse to do anything that YOU deem to be cruel.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by paradise-on-earth View Post
    I am certain, that noone who is ITV would enjoy an animals pain that they notice, or would really like to keep animals in ways that the animals dislike. But again- thatīs a VERY fine line, given the fact that Abe say that almost all animals (including our beloved pets) would prefer their freedom over the seeming comfort that we offer them, while we -"lovingly"- lock them up in the same time.
    I am glad that Abraham say this because that is also my experience, I have lost 2 cats to the wilderness and I am so proud of them, even if I know for certain that one was then bit by a snake and died, and the other, given her rather fearful personality, probably didn't survive either, even if she had a period of transition when she was doing back and forth and that may have helped her. Also the first had such a period, but he was in a foreign country so that might have confused him. We just let some food for them where we knew they could find it, until they didn't need it any more. They were both used to the forest as they often went along my husband, who liked to have long walks in the forest, and so they must have taken an informed choice.

    There may be a fine line but as a "sine qua non" I think one can safely say that most animals like being in nature and they like being free to move their body. Certainly some of them move more than others but constriction isn't exactly easy to them anyway. Then they may love the lace if that means it gets them out of the house, but you get what I mean.
    Regarding cows, I don't know if it is so annoying to them to lactate for years as it would to me, at the end of my breat-feeding year I was jumping on walls so much it annoyed me. And done mechanically, imagine. I may get more informed on the matter as butter especially is a big deal for me to leave behind.

    The behaviors you beautifully describe are behaviors of happy animals, I think, and highlight even more how conscious curious and vital they really are and how much in pain they must be if they become so zonked out, under some circumstances. Once I saw a group of cows literally run down the massive of the Grindelwald in Switzerland, the slope was absurdly steep, and they run and chased each other like kids playing "acchiappino". Their fur was shiny and of a vivid color and with no blemishes of sorts. Not only did they move with impressive agility, but their faces were so alive and present you wouldn't believe they were simple cows.

  3. #13
    Beloved Woman paradise-on-earth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Elfengarten, Germany
    Posts
    69,836
    oh, I agree how INCREDIBLY lively, curious, playful, deeply loving, amazingly skilled and intelligent- and full of mischief animals can be- and how dull they seem when OOTV. "simple cows"... wow, what is simple in a pejorative way about ANY animal...!

    And also, they seem to be able to not only tolerate all kinds of conditions in which we cannot wrap around our mind that anybody would choose them, but to ENJOY them. And then- donīt we humans do the same, when you think about new children getting born into war-areas (and all other sorts of tragerous environments).

    I donīt have a written quote about that, but Abe said that the animals would NOT get born into the environments in questions, if they would not accept them as what they want to come in. They come KNOWINGLY and willingly.

    As your cats didnīt run off because they had been mixed up, but being CALLED by their source, (Abe say that what we call instinct" is nothing other than source guiding them), so the animals that get raised in the huge breeding farms- no matter if itīs chicken, pigs, cattle, or animals who are supposed to produce fur, KNOW what they are coming in.

    -And they prefer that over not getting born.

    So, they are no victims. If they donīt want to take it anymore, they "go away"- meaning, they croak. Animals do that quite easily, and without clinging to dear life. They have no resistance to death- except when a beloved human is in their vicinity and clings to them, vibrationally. In that cases, Abe have said that the animals are often willing to suffer longer than they would do, naturally.

    Abe pointed out that without human, breeding and feeding animals in this massive ways, there would be BY FAR less opportunities for animals to come into physical life.
    -There is something bigger going on than just greedy human, being out of control.

    I LOVED my nursing years, by the way... I agree, at the end of a year, it naturally stopped being calling. But that is the same with cows. They just lactate so and so long in a productive way, and then they need to get another calf before their body eagerly produces new milk. You canīt override nature in a "productive" way, really.




    Guest:
    ...I struggle with allowing family and friends who eat animals (due to the
    suffering of the animals) and especially when co-habiting with someone
    who desire to have dead animals in the refrigerator and cook them in my
    house. Can you help me with this?

    Abraham: Not really.

    Guest: It's a tough one.

    Abraham:
    Well, you have yourself up for a lot of grief because you keep beating that
    drum. You used every word that you could use to make that a bad thing.
    So, here is what we would say to you. You cannot have it both ways.
    You cannot vehemently disapprove of that and have dead carcasses
    in your refrigerator at the same time. In other words, something must
    give--and we would work on getting in the flow with the nature of things.

    In other words, it is possible that some ruler could become so powerful
    and get such a big bomb that he could convince all other humans never
    to eat animals. But you are not ever going to convince the other animals
    not to eat other animals. The big one is always going to eat the little one.
    In other words, the big fish is always going to eat the little fish.

    And when you get into the rhythm of that, when you understand that the
    animals coming forth come forth knowing that, then you do not make it
    such a big deal.

    And we promise you that, as clear-minded as these beasts are (as all of you,
    coming in), if it was not a game they wanted to play, they would not come
    forth again and again to play it with you, you see. You can let that one go.

    You do not have to eat meat--but do not push against something that is
    so prevalent in your society that you have to cringe at it.

    Abe



    Question:
    Do domestic animals create their own reality? By thinking? So when they get ill,
    or slaughtered, they've caused that themselves?

    Abe:
    You teach them competition, which they do not naturally feel. You teach them
    behavioral problems, which they do not naturally feel. In other words, you teach
    them resistance- -in the same way you teach it to your children.

    Well, you have to realize that many of the animals coming in came forth
    knowing that they were going to be somebody's food.



    (Asheville, NC, 10/27/01)

  4. #14
    The parts of the quotes you highlighted do make me think.
    There's also another consideration that came to my mind, in association to 'the simple cow' idea, and it is that we make a differentiation between simple aka stupid animals and smarter ones, and so for example it's a taboo to eat dolphins and dogs. I think the idea is that the simpler they are the less they will be in pain. And somehow choosing to eat a plant-based diet follows the same idea, that a carrot will mind being eaten much less than a chicken because it's less evolved. But, life is life, and plants can be so wise. I don't like the distinction between class A and class B creatures. Thinking that plants are more ok to eat than animals is making a big assumption.
    Now, it's also true that until it's eaten the carrot is planted in soil and having a rather natural existence, contrarily to a farmed animal.

  5. #15
    AnBrutico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    16
    This is such a beautiful question and one I have considered several times. I love and resonate with so much of what has already been said.

    I remember reading a book (not sure if I'm allowed to mention a non-abe resource) but there was a part about agricultural animals and how they have been domesticated and bred specifically for their usefullness as food. The gist was that if we were somehow able to cease the eating of animal products, all these agricultural animals would just stop being bred. There would be no need for chickens or cows or pigs. They wouldn't be born or get a life at all. They exist specifically because of their usefulness as food. Something about that idea felt good to me. That it is exactly because of their symbiotic usefulness to us as food that they even exist in the first place and get a chance to live at all.

    What ended up feeling best to me is to the best of my ability acquire my food from humane and sustainable sources (pastured beef and pork from a local farm. Free range chickens and eggs. Honey from an apiary near me focused on sustainable bee keeping for example) And I also appreciate the heck out of the animals I eat and enjoy them as thoroughly as possible.

    Everyone's path will look and feel different. You can't get it wrong.

  6. #16
    Super Kitty Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Tempe, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    9,623
    Quote Originally Posted by AnBrutico View Post
    I remember reading a book (not sure if I'm allowed to mention a non-abe resource) but there was a part about agricultural animals and how they have been domesticated and bred specifically for their usefullness as food. The gist was that if we were somehow able to cease the eating of animal products, all these agricultural animals would just stop being bred.
    Abraham has said the same thing as well. We all come into this experience knowing what we're getting into. Plants and animals come into this experience fully understanding that being food for something else is their primary purpose.

    Quote Originally Posted by AnBrutico View Post
    Everyone's path will look and feel different. You can't get it wrong.
    THIS!

    I will add this one additional point: Rather than making this about particular conditions, how does the idea that animals are powerless and victims FEEL? Regardless of whether it seems TRUE, you can tell by the way you feel whether it's a perspective that your IB shares. It's also a perspective that taking action doesn't really solve. The real work is VIBRATIONAL/EMOTIONAL.

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by AnBrutico View Post
    The gist was that if we were somehow able to cease the eating of animal products, all these agricultural animals would just stop being bred. There would be no need for chickens or cows or pigs. They wouldn't be born or get a life at all. They exist specifically because of their usefulness as food.
    This is exactly the argument of my husband, and I kind of agree but I also have questions.
    First, that they happen to be food for humans doesn't necessarily infer that they couldn't be born as something else when we stop farming them, there are wild cats there could be wild cows for what I know. The average life of a farmed cow is of 18 months, 4years if it's a dairy cow, while the natural life would be of around 10 year. So taking into account the difficulties of going wild maybe fewer of them would survive but would live a longer life. I don't know what would happen to them in the winter, but also Abraham said that animals would rather choose wilderness than our protected environments, so I think they would be happy with that.
    Also, they may need to be born in such huge amount as harmonizers of the planet exactly in the measure that we as humans are out of balance, if not, instead of slaughtering them, we would slaughter each other and end up extinct within a week. As we raise our vibration and need less help in keeping in balance the whole farming thing may become redundant and feel not so good anymore.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    I will add this one additional point: Rather than making this about particular conditions, how does the idea that animals are powerless and victims FEEL? Regardless of whether it seems TRUE, you can tell by the way you feel whether it's a perspective that your IB shares. It's also a perspective that taking action doesn't really solve. The real work is VIBRATIONAL/EMOTIONAL.
    If you were living in nazist Germany, the thought that the Jews were unjustly tortured and killed wouldn't have felt good either, but that's what a step 1 is for, and it doesn't necessarily feel good to have it, as long as it's step 1. In the big picture I know that nothing wrong was happening there either, but I wouldn't have wanted to be part of the nazist system. Now I am using a quite triggering analogy, I am sorry for that. I am not implying it's the same thing, I am only implying that some dynamics are similar.
    I don't necessarily feel bad for animal farming in the big picture either, as it is what it is and it has its function as an experience for everybody, but I am not sure I want to be part of it. And it's easy to pivot the bad feeling thought of animal sufferance in the good feeling thought of choosing to be compassionate, choosing to be friendly and respectful of animals.

    I realize more and more thanks to the discussion that given my natural feelings on the matter I am incredibly lucky to have a body that has so little attraction for fish and meat, it's always been so, ever since I was a child. I had never realized how easy this makes it. So I can just stay with that for now, appreciate that I am a natural vegetarian, without pushing it to eliminate dairy eggs and honey too.
    Last edited by rose essence; 1 Week Ago at 04:37 AM.

  8. #18
    Something that makes me very happy is to have the chance to verify here that I have no triggers in whichever direction about the subject. Well I actually still have little clue or definite position so that is that.

    Back to the differentiation that POE was making some posts ago, between what I prefer and what they prefer, I actually don't really know if those cows are that unhappy? maybe, as coercion is all they know, it's just 'how things are' for them. They may not know that they prefer better treatments because they have never in their short lives been treated otherwise. And if that step 1 appeared in their consciousness, then after dying, which happens kind of fast, at the age of 18 months, they would probably be reborn as something else than a farmed animal. So maybe what I prefer needs not necessarily be informed by what they prefer, as they don't really know how much better life can be, but I do. But it's easy then to become condescending, isn't that their pie and their expansion? and yet, I wouldn't like being the one taking advantage of the other fellow who doesn't know better than being beaten up and abused because that's all he's experienced.

    And there's also the pending question about that assumption that plants are less conscious than animals, as I have no mean to verify that. Anyone who's been in a forest or watched a mountain would question that assumption. I used to think that cutting grass was equal to cutting hair, until I found out that hair, like nails, is actually already dead, so of course it's not the same thing at all. So there may not be a way out of life eating itself, because being "one" it can't not be that way.

    It is still reasonable to say, I think, that fishes and carrots live a more natural life than a cow or a chicken. One could go in the direction suggested by AnBrutico and go for humane and sustainable sources, but that's kind of an complication for me, I just like to buy things in the most practical and least time consuming way. Also, those humane ans sustainable sources may not really be as humane as they claim. When I lived out of town I used to buy milk, like all my neighbors, from a very sweet old man who had a few cows he called by name, he would make the rounds once a week and leave in front of the door those old style glass bottles, and get back the empty ones. Then one day we were talking with him, it comes out he never let the cows out of the stable? Whut? I have another story about eggs bought in the village, but I'll spare it to you. Maybe in US you have better ways to actually determine what is what, here it is quite a gray zone, and honestly at the end of the day it's just more practical not to eat eggs at all or the fewest possible.
    Of course that's also just a function of where the focus is at, so if the focus is on poor cows also the local sweetheart will prove to be an ass who doesn't let his cows breath fresh air once in their entire life. But if it is so, in the same manner also my vegan action journey would prove to be useless, like already WB was saying from the start. LOL I'M RUNNING IN CIRCLES!
    Last edited by rose essence; 1 Week Ago at 07:25 AM.

  9. #19
    Super Kitty Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Tempe, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    9,623
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    First, that they happen to be food for humans doesn't necessarily infer that they couldn't be born as something else when we stop farming them, there are wild cats there could be wild cows for what I know. The average life of a farmed cow is of 18 months, 4years if it's a dairy cow, while the natural life would be of around 10 year. So taking into account the difficulties of going wild maybe fewer of them would survive but would live a longer life.
    Here's part of our human perspective that you're trying to superimpose upon them that distorts things. Abraham has reminded us on many occasions that animals know that there is no death. They don't have any reservations about leaving this physical experience and returning to non-physical, because they know they can just turn around and be born into a new body. From that perspective, it's not necessarily the case that 10 years is better than 4 years is better than 18 months. Rather, if coming and going isn't a big deal, then the particular length of time of a particular life isn't really all that relevant.
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    I don't know what would happen to them in the winter, but also Abraham said that animals would rather choose wilderness than our protected environments, so I think they would be happy with that.
    Think about what you just wrote. Animals would prefer freedom to our efforts to "protect" them, even if that freedom leads to them croaking (because they know there is no death). This is just another (well-intentioned) way of trying to control their experience.
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    Also, they may need to be born in such huge amount as harmonizers of the planet exactly in the measure that we as humans are out of balance, if not, instead of slaughtering them, we would slaughter each other and end up extinct within a week. As we raise our vibration and need less help in keeping in balance the whole farming thing may become redundant and feel not so good anymore.
    Every single one of these animals is going to die, just like every single human alive or will ever be born. Might as well make peace with that inevitability.

    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    If you were living in nazist Germany, the thought that the Jews were unjustly tortured and killed wouldn't have felt good either, but that's what a step 1 is for, and it doesn't necessarily feel good to have it, as long as it's step 1. In the big picture I know that nothing wrong was happening there either, but I wouldn't have wanted to be part of the nazist system.
    Except that whether you take action or not, if you're still focused on the vulnerability of someone, you ARE part of the system that perpetuates that whether you take action or not. That's going to be the case regardless of which particular example you look at. You're just describing a very big example.

    Abraham tells the story of how when Jerry was younger, he would often run into situations where he encountered some seemingly stronger person beating up someone seemingly weaker one and he would be faced with the quandary of either trying to intervene, and risking his own safety, or leaving the weaker person to get beaten up, neither of option felt good, and regardless of which action he took, it never really resolved things. Part of that is because the people involved had their own vibrational stuff going on, and even if Jerry did not encounter them again, LOA just kept lining him up to rendezvous with different people playing the same part. Abraham explained that Jerry had to realize that HIS vibration needed to change in order for his experience to change. That didn't mean that somehow people lost the freedom to explore that particular vibrational dynamic. Rather, Jerry had to tune into the sort of experience that he wanted to have.

    Now that's not to say that there's anything wrong with being where you are. You're absolutely right -- Step 1 is perfectly fine and it's understandable that you or any of us see things how we see them. Heck, there are issues and situations where I can very much relate to what you're getting at, even if they're not the same specifics that you're talking about. The difference is that even though I feel similarly on those subjects, I realize that how I'm feeling is actually about my perspective, rather than the conditions themselves and that it's something that I work on.
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    Now I am using a quite triggering analogy, I am sorry for that.
    I'm not. People usually bring up babies or Nazis when they want to object to how LOA works on some sort of moral basis.
    I am not implying it's the same thing, I am only implying that some dynamics are similar.[/quote]
    [QUOTE=rose essence;998170]
    It IS the same thing. Vibration is vibration. If tune into the vibration of what seems like victimization in this physical experience, you'll find evidence of it. If you tune into the vibration of well-being, you'll find that evidence too. That's how this physical experience works. Abraham talks about the "well stocked kitchen" and how there's an abundance of ingredients and how we get to choose what ingredients to put in our pie. It's not necessary push against any of them or to try to get them removed from the kitchen, nor is it possible.
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    I don't necessarily feel bad for animal farming in the big picture either, as it is what it is and it has its function as an experience for everybody, but I am not sure I want to be part of it.
    Again, as long as you're focusing on this subject in the way where you're seeing something being imposed on some unwilling party, you ARE a part of it regardless of the action you take. That's a vibrational quandary that action can't solve.
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    And it's easy to pivot the bad feeling thought of animal sufferance in the good feeling thought of choosing to be compassionate, choosing to be friendly and respectful of animals.
    And what's more respectful than recognizing that they're empowered creators of their own experiences just like you are? There's a big difference between being inspired to the action you're describing from a place of alignment and taking action because you believe that they're incapable of taking care of themselves. Of course it makes sense that it's going to be easy to feel good if you'll focus on the conditions you approve of, but that just underscores the predicament that relying on conditions puts you in. It's also easy to pivot the good feeling thought to feeling bad when you notice the absence of those pleasing conditions. That's the point of this thread, is it not? If you're going to find a way to feel better CONSISTENTLY on this topic, you're going to have to find some relief on this topic that doesn't depend on the conditions.
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    I realize more and more thanks to the discussion that given my natural feelings on the matter I am incredibly lucky to have a body that has so little attraction for fish and meat, it's always been so, ever since I was a child. I had never realized how easy this makes it. So I can just stay with that for now, appreciate that I am a natural vegetarian, without pushing it to eliminate dairy eggs and honey too.
    You've certainly got your own path of least resistance and the beautiful part is that it's what is right for you at this point.
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    I am pondering further on the differentiation that POE was making some posts ago, between what I prefer and what they prefer. I actually don't really know if those cows are that unhappy?
    Exactly. You actually don't. You've always been superimposing your preferences for theirs.
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    maybe, as coercion is all they know, it's just 'how things are' for them. They may not know that they prefer better treatments because they have never in their short lives been treated otherwise.
    Indeed. Imagine someone who's born into a very different society and culture than our modern one. There are humans born in the Amazon that have had absolutely no contact with modern culture, let alone modern technology. Are they unhappy because they don't have access to the iPhone X? NO! Are they aware that there's anything missing even though they don't have running water and flushing toilets? NO! Is it ever going to be accurate to try to impose our preferences and values on their conditions and experiences? NO! Does what they're experiencing, valuing, etc. invalidate where we are, what we prefer and what we want? NO!

    That same sort of difference in perspective is even bigger when we talk about the difference between human and animal.
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    And if that step 1 appeared in their consciousness, then after dying, which happens kind of fast, at the age of 18 months,they would probably be reborn as something else than a farmed animal. So maybe what I prefer needs not necessarily be informed by what they prefer, as they don't really know how much better life can be, but I do.
    Well, part of it is that you really DON'T know how much better life can be for them. You know what YOUR preferences are for you, and you know what your preferences are for your experiences with animals are, but you won't ever know what's in their Vortexes.

    Here's the other thing: How much better life can be for them comes about from THEIR exposure to contrast. It's the exposure to contrast that gives birth to desire, and then it's simply a matter of getting up to speed with that improvement... and they can get up to speed with that quickly by croaking and re-emering into non-physical and then getting a new body. The issue is that you're actually trying to limit their exposure to contrast that gives birth to the improvement. If they (or we) wanted a perfectly feathered nest, they'd have stayed in non-physical.
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    But it's easy then to become condescending, isn't that their pie and their expansion?
    Except that it IS their pie and their expansion. That's not condescension, that's an unavoidable truth.
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    and yet, I wouldn't like being the one taking advantage of the other fellow who doesn't know better than being beaten up and abused because that's all he's experienced.
    In a certain sense, that's exactly what you're doing. You're saying, "You're weak and incapable. What you're experiencing is inappropriate. I know what's right for you and you do not. You're not capable of " Now is that what you're intending? Of course not.
    [QUOTE=rose essence;998172]
    I know for a fact of life that sufferance is not necessarily a bad thing, I just may choose not to be the one to deliver that opportunity for a step 1, as/if I can avoid it. I know, I have said the very same thing already, it's just a little more defined for me now.
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    And there's also the (quite a deal-breaker for me) pending question about that assumption that plants are less conscious than animals, as I have no mean to verify that. Last year I used to go to this forest in the French Alps that was not only preternaturally beautiful, but had also a really amazing energy. And I know for contemplating mountains and collecting stones wherever I go, that considering the mineral world less conscious may be a wild misunderstanding. I used to think that cutting grass was equal to cutting hair, until I found out that hair, like nails, is actually already dead, so of course it's not the same thing at all.
    There's no such thing as "dead." Everything is made of consciousness.
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    It is still reasonable to say, I think, that fishes and carrots live a more natural life than a cow or a chicken.
    Reasonable by whose standards? The fish, carrot, cow and chicken get to choose to come into those circumstances and the contrast of their lives cause them to form their own preferences. Just like your life causes you to come to your preferences.
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    One could go in the direction suggested by AnBrutico and go for humane and sustainable sources, but that's kind of complicated for me, I just like to buy things in the street markets, as Lyon has really wonderful ones, or the nearest supermarket. Also, those humane ans sustainable sources may not really be as humane as they claim. When I lived in the countryside I used to buy milk, like all my neighbors, from a very sweet old man who had a few cows he called by name, he would make the rounds once a week and leave in front of the door those old style glass bottles, and get back the empty ones. Then one day we were talking with him, it comes out he never let the cows out of the stable? Whut? I have another story about eggs bought in the village, but I'll spare it to you. Maybe in US you have better ways to actually determine what is what, here it is quite a gray zone, and honestly I am a little too busy for that, at the end of the day it's just more practical not to eat eggs at all or the fewest possible.
    Doesn't that just magnify the impossibility of trying to control conditions that are uncontrollable?
    Quote Originally Posted by rose essence View Post
    Of course that's also just a function of where the focus is at, so if the focus is on poor cows also the local sweetheart will prove to be an ass who doesn't let his cows breath fresh air once in their entire life. And in the same manner also my vegan action journey would prove to be useless. LOL I'M RUNNING IN CIRCLES! that's exactly what happens when you do what I'm doing, looking for answers in the same plane as the questions....
    Exactly my point. This is a VIBRATIONAL corner you've backed yourself into. Action isn't going to get you out of it.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    22
    Hello Rose Essence

    I am a long time lurker, but I had to log in because this question of one's body deriving pleasure from the suffering of others also has me puzzled.

    This is as neatly as I can phrase it from an Abraham perspective:
    Abraham says that Source enjoys everything. If you do like Source and enjoy absolutely everything, also you will encounter only enjoyable things and experiences.

    If anyone meets something they don't find enjoyable, it means their alignment is 'off' and they now have the choice to live that way or to realign with enjoying everything, (which is what source does and Abraham suggest aligning with source)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •