Yoga Levels: Meat Eaters are More Spiritual than Vegetarians
Let me preface what I am about to say with this: I am a vegetarian.
And let me continue by saying this: that doesn't make me better or more spiritual than meat eaters.
How can that be? As we all know (or ought to by now--it has been published repeatedly by physicists), everything is energy. Our world is made of atoms, electrons, and neutrons, and nothing else. These are merely different vibrations of pure energy. So how can it be better to eat one type of vibrating energy than to eat another type of vibrating energy? Our world is a constant re-cycling of energies into different forms. Grass grows. A cow eats it. A man named Edwin eats the cow. Edwin lives a full life, dies, and is buried in his local cemetery. His body deteriorates, and becomes part of the soil. Out of the soil grows grass. So what is the grass? Is it really a vegetable? Or is it Edwin in another form? If a cow eats it, is he eating Edwin in the form of grass, or is he eating grass? Is the cow then a vegetarian or not? The line between vegetable and animal begins to get blurry. For the grass to come to exist, it was first a cow, then a man, then soil, and eventually grass. On the energetic level, nothing is separate or isolated in its existence. We are all intertwined in this cosmic energetic soup.
To believe otherwise is materialistic. On a more materialistic level, it might seem more evolved not to eat meat. It is better for the environment. It is better for your health. It is better for the animals who must give up their lives to feed you.
But even that is debatable. As my Cherokee husband often tells me (he is also a vegetarian), many Native American tribes had deeply spiritual experiences as they hunted and ate what they killed. They not only honored their experience as hunters, but they honored the being they were hunting. It was a merging of spirit, they believed, to take an animal's body to feed the tribe. The animal's spirit merged with their own in a deep union of hunter and hunted. To them, the spirit never died, only the animal's flesh. To them, the animal was liberated from the limited life afforded on this plane, and set free into the limitless spirit world. Isn't this spiritual?
To me, it is more spiritual than raw vegans who have bumper stickers condemning most of the western world not only for eating meat, but for cooking food: "Cooked food is poison." In this little bumper sticker is another message: "I'm better than you." Is that spiritual?
Of course, Native Americans who hunted in a traditional way in a wilder world were of a different time, and those animals were not factory farmed. They lived a free life in pristine natural environments.
But what about the lion? Is the lion "bad" for eating meat? What about your cat or dog? They seem to follow their intuitions guiltlessly. As do the spiritual teachers Eckhart Tolle and the Dalai Lama, neither of whom are vegetarians.
And it is that freedom from guilt that is a most important piece in spirituality. Obviously, it is the strongest shackle in religion. And guilt is what differentiates the two.
Is a vegetarian "better" for eating vegetables? How do we know that vegetables aren't just as sentient -- if not more -- than deer or sheep? Did you know that when a tree is sick, it is able to send a message to trees in nearby forests, who then are able to protect themselves from that very sickness? (http://www.gi.alaska.edu/ScienceForum/ASF7/762.html). In this way of communicating, they are more intelligent than humans. Can we be certain that the plant world doesn't feel as strongly as any other being?
It is the "better-ness" and the "guilt" that strike the cord of not-the-way-to-go-ness to me. Neither of those qualities evoke spirituality. In fact, the opposite is true. "Better-ness" and "guilt" are deeply materialistic, sticky, and pain-provoking.
For many people who have wanted to become vegetarians for a long time, but were unable to give up their guilty pleasure of meat eating, it was their guilt binding them to their behavior. If you can let go of the guilt, you might have a better time making an objective decision about what to eat. But as long as vegetarians enforce that guilt with their better-ness, there is a remarkably un-spiritual superficiality preventing change.
Follow Olivia Rosewood on Twitter: www.twitter.com/OliviaRosewood
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
What are you actually trying to say? Animals feel great pain and suffering as they are slaughtered for food. The Oxford English Dictionary defines compassion as "sympathetic pity and concern for the sufferings or misfortunes of others." Are you confused on these points? The issue is rather straightforward: either the suffering of animals is important to our ethical decisions or it is not.
See Olivia Rosewood's Profile
"I have known many meat eaters to be far more non-violent than vegetarians." Mahatma Ghandi
If only the lawmakers of this land can read this post and make cannibalism legal. It's all just vibrations, right?
Thank God that no spiritual gurus in the history of mankind ever made any kind of statements on the topic of eating ethics. We have been waiting for you for a long time.
See Olivia Rosewood's Profile
My blog had nothing to do with eating and nothing to do with ethics. Sorry that you missed the point.
See Olivia Rosewood's Profile
"Always aim at complete harmony of thought and word and deed. Always aim at purifying your thoughts and everything will be well." Mahatma Ghandi
Thank you for this wonderful post! You are a true light of compassion, regardless of what the naysayers here say. Namaste and blessed be!
See Olivia Rosewood's Profile
Namaste, onagadori, and thank you.
Go see Food, Inc.
Oh, and how about an nice interview with the PETA guy?
Interview - Bruce Friedrich - The Animal Activist's Handbook
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M84JVzSXKJI
I would agree that being a vegetarian or vegan is of course not everything. One can do it with a completely wrong attitude, and be a guilt-tripping, preaching, judging vegetarian, making every omnivore's dinner hell. However, though the premise of your title may certainly be correct in some cases (or even across the board) that doesn't say anything about the value of vegetarianism in itself, and certainly should not excuse the practice of eating meat. It just means that, given that one believes vegetarianism is a good thing (like you must do, as you are one), vegetarians should work more and try to evolve into "good" vegetarians (being "more spiritual" - whatever that means - still).
Most of us, being flawed human beings, try to do good things but do it with partly wrong attitudes, thoughts, motivations. If we attach value to consistency, then we should try to evolve towards being consistently "good", not consistently "bad".
I've heard the stories of spiritual hunting and eating meat with compassion etc a thousand times. And yes, I guess there's different ways to kill, different ways to eat meat. But I always wonder: if we cannot spiritually kill another human being, what is the difference between humans and animals for us to be able to speak about spiritually killing a non-human animal?
See Olivia Rosewood's Profile
It is true that I cannot eat animals because I love them too much. However, that is not to say that I am better than anyone else for having these feelings. They are merely mine, and I follow my intuition wholeheartedly.
On the subject of equating the taking an animal's body in a humane way, to taking the life of a human, I can only point to this: should I ever be on a ventilator and presumably brain dead, my husband has the power of attorney to pull the plug. In our culture, he and I are seen as one, in a holy union, and in many ways not separate beings. So in this aforementioned situation, he has the right--and my request--to take my life in a humane way by pulling the plug. We are seen as one.
So when thinking of unions and oneness, I can think only of what I know of the Native Americans, who had such a strong connection with not only each other, but also animals, the land, the sky, the waters, and the plants. Just like my husband and I are in a sacred union and view ourselves as one being, and can legally be seen as one being, the Cherokee were in a sacred union with all of nature.
See Olivia Rosewood's Profile
In the Cherokee tradition, when the life of an animal was taken, they felt as though they had taken one of their own, and there was as much reverence and respect. From a book called Teaching Spirits by John Brown, he writes, "the spirits of the natural world are especially watchful for irreverent, insulting, or wasteful behavior toward living things. They insist that these beings be treated with the deference owed to the sources of human life." (page 97). This very much reminds me of your words, randomkindness.
Perhaps the compassionate taking of animals' life for food can only come if one is so connected to nature, and the animal, that they see themselves in union, as elements within one, unified being. As perhaps, your blood might feel guiltless about taking the oxygen from your lungs. They are elements within one being.
But as far as the purpose of this blog, it is not to encourage meat eating, it is only hoping for the release of many vegetarians' anger and disdain of meat eaters. They are sentient beings, and deserving of understanding. And it's not healthy for vegetarians to carry so much hate and judgement (not necessarily you, but there are many).
To alienate and judge meat eaters is so far from the beautiful compassion that has led vegetarians toward their diet preference.
See Olivia Rosewood's Profile
The author of the book from which I drew my quote is actually Joseph Epes Brown, not John Brown (ironicially, John Brown was an abolitionist who hated slavery so much he was willing to go to violent extremes to end it). Excuse me--
Olivia, I agree wholeheartedly that there's often a lot of judging and blaming and guilttripping in vegetarians/vegans/animal rights people's speech and thought.
As for the comparison with your husband "killing" you humanely: surely you can see the difference in the situation: he would do it to release you from suffering, while if we kill animals, no matter how humanely, we do it for other, more trivial reasons.
anyway, perhaps the cherokee or other cultures do have a good way to kill animals, and perhaps they HAD to kill animals because there was not enough other food available. but neither conditions apply to people in affluent countries. moreover, many of the people referring to indians killing animals humanely, suggest it as an ideal while they do not move in that direction themselves (which would be buying meat that is not just organic but comes from a very small scale farm or from an individual who knows and cares for his animals personally).
I find the phrase "should not excuse the practice of eating meat" to be very judgmental. Why do vegans or vegetarians care what others are eating (unless one is an animal right's activist-which is a separate issue)? Meat eaters do not negate the lifestyle choices of non-meat eaters. If you don't want anyone to attack your habits and practices, one should be more respectful of others. The last time I checked, it is not illegal to eat meat. Evolving into a "good" vegetarian, as you stated, should involve the spiritual practice of acceptance.
Though I am not one to be labeled "spiritual," I have read many texts on this fascinating subject, ancient and modern. Your comments on not being able to spiritually kill another human reminded me of The Bhagavad-Gita. In his teachings, Lord Krishna explains to a young warrior that there should not be guilt or karmic fear in battle; as human form is perishable, the soul is not. Krishna teaches, "The self embodied in the body of every being is indestructible; you have no cause to grieve for all of these creatures." Now, one may not agree with these sentiments, nor am I advocating violence, but this important and highly influential Hindu scripture cannot be dismissed and I think it provides a perspective to your last question.
Sorry if I sound judgmental (i do not believe that we can be entirely non-judgmental as long as we are not enlightened, so that might explain it :-).
many vegetarians' and vegans' motivation are avoiding meat or animal products for serious reasons, and i count myself among them. you may say that people should not try to spead their belief towards other people, but the fact that you say that about vegetarianism means only that you don't believe in the value of that topic, because i think you WOULD agree that people try to spread ideas of non violence towards people, non racism, etc, no?
in my experience, no matter how gently one tries to write as a vegan, omnivores will always find some cause to accuse the vegan of being judgmental and opposing his ideas on others. but there is a huge gap between forcing something on other people on the one hand, and just talking about it, trying to spread a message one believes in.
that being said, like i stated, many veg*ns really ARE too aggressive and judgmental. i try not to be, though I may fail.
as for the bhagavad gita: i'm sure Krishna (or was it Arjuna?) means that in cases where we CANNOT BUT kill, we don't have to worry. He is obviously not condoning killing for no reason.
best to you
It's a shame we can't eat spirits.
Yea, but we can drink them though.
Please don't drink my spirit.
Personally, it does not matter to me what people prefer to eat. I live in a household of meat-eaters, and so, I also eat meat. But, if I lived alone, I would probably eat only what I liked the best, cheese, veggies, fruit, cereal, milk, ice cream, bread, peanut butter. To me, eating is not a spiritual event, but rather a pleasant part of my day, where I relax a bit and fuel up, and then go about my daily routine. I am not insulted by the choices of vegetarians, meat-eaters, and vegans. What I do not like are insulting bumper stickers that claim, "Meat is Murder" and the like, that makes people feel horrible for eating a piece of chicken. Another thing that I do not like is seeing photos in my local newspaper during the deer hunting season of a hunter smiling broadly while he hoists up his trophy, the severed head of the deer he shot. Sometimes, the photo is of a smiling kid, who went hunting with his parent, holding up his prized kill. That makes me sick.
So, in my opinion, people should eat what they enjoy, try to stay healthy, and not insult others for
their different food preferences. Newspapers should stop glorifying hunters that kill for the pleasure of sport and trophy acquisition.
See Olivia Rosewood's Profile
I understand your dilemma--both in your home and in your society. We tend to be pulled in the direction of the majority, at both micro and macro levels.
I don't see vegetarianism as having anything to do with spirituality. We humans aren't anywhere close to being "spiritual", carnivores and vegetarians alike.
But refusing to subsidize the horrors of the meat industry is certainly ethically correct. Not wasting our planet's limited resources to feed animals that we then slaughter is certainly ethically correct.
Forget spiritual, let's just take a few steps in that general direction.
People should start by reducing the meat they eat. Vegetarian diets are delicious!
See Olivia Rosewood's Profile
I agree, Clairvaux, vegetarian diets are delicious!
"it is freedom from guilt that is the most important piece of spirituality"
If this is the case then sociopaths must be the most spiritual people on Earth! We seem to reserve a special scorn for people who not only do wrong by harming others but do so without experiencing guilt. Naturally, excess guilt can be debiitating but guilt should not be so easily dismissed.
By the way - what does "spiritual" even mean? I don't think it really means anything but generally serves as a cover for confused thinking...I suppose we have to know what is meant by this term before it can be considered worth pursuing or who is more or less spirtual than anyone else.
What she said was "a most important piece in spirituality" not "the most". And I've never heard of guilt stopping someone from committing a crime or eating their 8th cheeseburger. Lots of criminals have guilt. Lots of drug addicts and obese people have guilt. Child molesters and wife abusers have guilt. Lots of it. But it does it stop them from behaving the way they do?
It gives them low self esteem, making it difficult to change anything about their behavior. What helps? Understanding right from wrong in your society. Having consequences. Having high enough self esteem to know that change is possible.
spiritual: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirituality
I have often thought that vegetarianism is taking the taboo against cannibalism to the extreme: animals eat and move like us, so they should not be eaten.
But, who is to say that broccoli does not have feelings? Does not a watermelon bleed?
Most, if not all, of the animals we eat would not have existed at all were it not for humans breeding and raising them. The important thing is that they are allowed to live and die in a humane way.
As usual, thank you for your keen insight Olivia.
See Olivia Rosewood's Profile
Did you know that cannibalism was still in regular practice on the Fijian islands as little as 150 years ago? The tribes were at war with one another constantly, and it was a very violent place. It doesn't get much more violent than eating each other. According to experts, they reached their "saturation point". No one could tolerate that degree to which the violence had reached. They had a complete turnaround, and they are now the most peaceful, friendly people you can imagine.
Thank you, Olivia. Your post really resonated with me. It touches on one of my greatest struggles: how to be this person I've chosen to be, and discuss my ideals, without being in any way judgmental of others. I'm on the other side of the spectrum from the raw vegan with the bumper sticker "wisdom." I'm more likely to smile quietly when my father-in-law teases me for filling a plate with side dishes and skipping the meatloaf than I am to confront him with my reasons for being vegetarian in the context of his diet-related health problems and ignorant impacts on the environment he loves. Whether or not I say it, though, the thoughts are there. Like you, I practice yoga, and yoga has taught me that the internal finds a way to to manifest itself on the external, even if it's only through gestures and expressions.
I want to be able to communicate my choices from an authentically non-judgmental place, but I haven't quite figured out how to untangle the spiritual from the material, so I've resigned to keeping largely quiet.
See Olivia Rosewood's Profile
Thank you so much for your comment. I have also struggled with similar issues. You will see how to untangle the spiritual from the material, and even then, there is great power in living your life as you choose, whether you choose to be quiet or loud.
But don't you think change has to happen in this world? And doesn't that require some loudness?
I support everyone to eat whatever they desire. Personally, I choose to eat what Nature intended us to eat, as described in "The Original Diet."
From my candid discussions with commercial farm operators, a personal estimate is that tens of millions of ground-living animals are brutally killed each year as a result of being mangled and smashed by cultivators, tillers, and harvester machines used to mass produce many vegetables and unsustainable annual monocrops such as wheat, corn and soy. I see nothing gentle in that.
As the author pointed out, there is mounting evidence that plants are sentient, and are capable of feeling pain and defending themselves. I see nothing gentle in ripping them out of the ground.
By definition, vegetarians eat animal foods such as eggs and dairy. I don't eat either one, nor feedlot animal foods.
I believe it is cruel to keep cows artificially pregnant on a continuous basis, and to keep them hooked up to machines that rob them of their milk for years at a time, all of which takes place in the mainstream dairy industry. I see nothing gentle in that.
I believe it is cruel to trick chickens into laying more eggs, to separate hens from roosters so none of the eggs are fertile, to remove eggs from the mother to an incubator, all of which is done somewhat universally in the egg industry. I see nothing gentle in that.
Roy Mankovitz, Director
http://www.MontecitoWellness.com
Great article. Well written and on point.
See Olivia Rosewood's Profile
Thank you. I appreciate your comments very much.
"You are what you eat" my dear, we knew that back in the sixties Google it great album, and movie project too if I'm not mistaken...
See Olivia Rosewood's Profile
Thanks. I will take a look.
You aren't really what you eat. Your body may be related to what you eat, but you are much deeper than just your body. When you die, what's left? Your spirit/soul/whatever you want to call it. And it has much less to do with what you consume physically (food) as what you consume spiritually (emotions, thoughts). It might be more true to say that you are what you think and feel.
But it is true that you eat at your vibration. For example, when you're depressed you might be drawn to heavier, more fattening foods that match your vibration energetically. When you're feeling happy and carefree, your more likely to be drawn to light foods like salads and fruits.
But doesn't food affect what you think and feel?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
