The Case for Eating Meat

[Matt8800]

Many enlightened teachers admit to eating meat and that seems to shock some. Here are a few points that may illustrate why meat eating may be a non-issue:

1. Many consider taking an animals life the same as causing it suffering but that is not always the case. If the death to an animal is painless and sudden, how did it suffer? Conscious experience is all that matters.

2. People project their dualistic and delusional identification with their own body to animals. The consciousness of any animal is sacred (although ultimately, there is only one consciousness). Meat of any animal, including human, is just matter.

3. People talk of major life changes as the result of what they learned in Near Death Experiences. I have yet to hear of a meat-eating person experience a NDE and come back to try to tell everyone to abandon their meat-eating ways.

If I eat a chicken that was grown humanely and killed instantly, where is the suffering? "Who" suffered? Where is the "evil"?

Edited January 27, 2019 by Matt8800

[DocHoliday]

Of course, the mere act of eating meat is perfectly fine. There’s nothing more or less wrong with it than it is right or correct. 

Where it gets interesting though is the killing part of it. If you were sufficiently conscious and had to kill an animal yourself... that shit is hard. Because you see yourself in every animal or even insect for that matter. 

It would still be possible, certainly, but the way you’d feel about such an act simply changes so drastically. 

Every animal, insect or plant that you kill could have just as well been you, or your body respectively in its place. Of course, at a certain level death itself becomes a non-issue but nonetheless, if you don’t yet necessarily have to leave your body, you wouldn’t want to do that. Therefore, in the same way, you wouldn’t want to end any other being’s existence prematurely if it simply wouldn’t be inherently necessary.

Edited January 27, 2019 by DocHoliday

[Shadowraix]

What was the motive behind posting this? 

[TheAvatarState]

@Matt8800 How would you feel if someone else were to kill you right now and make a bunch of money selling your parts to hospitals? 

You've been raised humanely, have you not? Your death would be painless, would it not? What's the problem here, if there is one?

Edited January 27, 2019 by TheAvatarState

[Rilles]

Lets chop him up guys! Im hungry??

[Eric Tarpall]

Suffering is inevitable. Animals suffer when I kill them. But I suffer if I don't kill them. Sure my pain is less intense but I would have to feel that pain my entire life.

[DocHoliday]

[TheAvatarState]

@Rilles so glad we could come together and have this wonderful dinner of Roast Matt ??

Let's converse over how responsible it was to buy grass-fed Matt. He was grown so humanely that he didn't even see it coming! 

[Matt8800]

24 minutes ago, TheAvatarState said:

@Matt8800 How would you feel if someone else were to kill you right now and make a bunch of money selling your parts to hospitals? 

You've been raised humanely, have you not? Your death would be painless, would it not? What's the problem here, if there is one?

Are you saying the chicken is feeling existential dread of the ending of their falsely identified bodies?

For a human, the only suffering in that scenario is the anticipation of the harm to the "self". If you could communicate the same concept to a chicken, you might have a point

[Matt8800]

34 minutes ago, DocHoliday said:

Of course, the mere act of eating meat is perfectly fine. There’s nothing more or less wrong with it than it is right or correct. 

Where it gets interesting though is the killing part of it. If you were sufficiently conscious and had to kill an animal yourself... that shit is hard. Because you see yourself in every animal or even insect for that matter. 

It would still be possible, certainly, but the way you’d feel about such an act simply changes so drastically. 

Every animal, insect or plant that you kill could have just as well been you, or your body respectively in its place. Of course, at a certain level death itself becomes a non-issue but nonetheless, if you don’t yet necessarily have to leave your body, you wouldn’t want to do that. Therefore, in the same way, you wouldn’t want to end any other being’s existence prematurely if it simply wouldn’t be inherently necessary.

Does the fox end the mouse's live prematurely or was the mouse destined to end at that time? 

[Matt8800]

36 minutes ago, Shadowraix said:

What was the motive behind posting this? 

There seems to be a concern in many spiritual circles around the idea of eating meat.

[TheAvatarState]

3 minutes ago, Matt8800 said:

Are you saying the chicken is feeling existential dread of the ending of their falsely identified bodies?

You didn't answer my question. Notice how you put up a straw man of "so you're saying this?" Also notice how you depersonalized my question by saying, "for a human,...." 

I'm asking how you'd feel about a policy where you could grow people and sell their parts once they hit a certain age. And if you were chosen next

[DocHoliday]

4 minutes ago, Matt8800 said:

Does the fox end the mouse's live prematurely or was the mouse destined to end at that time? 

It’s not really about “destiny.” It’s the foxe’s nature to kill mice. But for humans it’s a different kind of story. See, for the fox it is inherently necessary for his survival, for humans in many cases not as much. It’s about consciousness and choices based on it. 

[Matt8800]

24 minutes ago, TheAvatarState said:

@Rilles so glad we could come together and have this wonderful dinner of Roast Matt ??

Let's converse over how responsible it was to buy grass-fed Matt. He was grown so humanely that he didn't even see it coming! 

A couple points on that:

1. Different species have different levels of consciousness. If a chicken could see through the illusion of the ego to realize the True Self and become enlightened, you would have made a great point

2. If someone suddenly killed a body that is not actually "me", it wouldnt matter to me because I wouldnt know.

3. There seems to be an assumption that death, even without suffering, is "bad". Why is that?

You are projecting your own fear of impending death and identification with the body onto the chicken.

Here is a question for you - Did the chicken experience suffering before or after the moment it was killed?

[Matt8800]

7 minutes ago, TheAvatarState said:

You didn't answer my question. Notice how you put up a straw man of "so you're saying this?" Also notice how you depersonalized my question by saying, "for a human,...." 

I'm asking how you'd feel about a policy where you could grow people and sell their parts once they hit a certain age. And if you were chosen next

I will answer that in the hypothetical situation that humans and chickens have equal levels of intelligence and consciousness:

If I didnt know about it, I wouldnt have an opinion and there would be no suffering

I direct my value and compassion towards conscious experience, not the body.

[Shadowraix]

15 minutes ago, Matt8800 said:

There seems to be a concern in many spiritual circles around the idea of eating meat.

You didn't and won't solve those concerns. This problem doesn't get solved by debating it with other people. 

[TheAvatarState]

3 minutes ago, Matt8800 said:

Different species have different levels of consciousness. If a chicken could see through the illusion of the ego to realize the True Self and become enlightened, you would have made a great point

99.9% of people who die cannot see through the illusion of the ego to realize true self! And even if that was the case, how would this point mean anything? For all I know, all chickens could be enlightened, and honestly they're much closer to enlightenment than most people. 

That's my secret... I don't have a point!  HAHA! 

9 minutes ago, Matt8800 said:

If someone suddenly killed a body that is not actually "me", it wouldnt matter to me because I wouldnt know.

Unconsciousness. 

12 minutes ago, Matt8800 said:

There seems to be an assumption that death, even without suffering, is "bad". Why is that?

No, not at all. What you're not seeing is that even animals "raised humanely" still suffer quite a lot. It's an unnecessary life, and if the Buddhists had anything to say about it, life is Dukkha (suffering).

 

16 minutes ago, Matt8800 said:

You are projecting your own fear of impending death and identification with the body onto the chicken.

I do not fear impending death. I am identified with the chicken. That could hurt the ego, so watch out. 

Perhaps you're projecting your own fear of suffering and fear of being on the same level as a chicken. 

23 minutes ago, Matt8800 said:

Here is a question for you - Did the chicken experience suffering before or after the moment it was killed?

From the moment it was born.

[Commodent]

It's environmentally unsustainable. A plant based diet is also healthier in general.

[Matt8800]

1 hour ago, Shadowraix said:

You didn't and won't solve those concerns. This problem doesn't get solved by debating it with other people. 

Is there a problem?

[Bluebird]

Many different angles: Health, environmental, sustainability, ethics, futurism, etc.

Take your pick, of course ultimately the ethical argument can be deconstructed, as can all the points to some degree. The only perspective that really matters is your own. Particularly from the health perspective, so eat a lot of meat, then go vegan for a few months, then eat meat again, see if there is any difference (but be highly conscious of the body during the eating and digesting phase).

Eating meat may be a non-issue. Do you really want to find out in your own experience?