[quote=JenW;13234]Agreed - I think it is incredibly important to recognise that what we can and are able to do and what is right to do are two entirely seperate things.
Evolution has given us the power of indpendent thought and analysis, it is our responsibilty to use this power with humility rather than with arrogance.[/quote]
Definitely agree with you. We are evolved. We have the CHOICE of eating meat or not and be perfectly healthy. I know I’ve been feeling amazing since I’ve cut meat (and fish) out completely.
I agree entirely with JenW & Pandara.
I would also like to add that some consider an occasional ?treat? of a favoured meat dish ok ? I feel this can not be so since it?s a bit like saying
I?m a little pregnant? LOL 
either you are a Vegetarian or not.
Having made a conscious decision to be a Vegetarian I have not knowingly consumed any meat in the last 10yrs. I agree with xela, you feel different vibrations when you switch, you really never want to lose these vibrations.
And the health benefits at the physical level (Annamaya Kosha) are also very tangible and enormous.
[quote=Fin;13242]
I agree with xela, you feel different vibrations when you switch, you really never want to lose these vibrations.
And the health benefits at the physical level (Annamaya Kosha) are also very tangible and enormous.[/quote]
So true! Those great vibes that come from living in accordance with your values are something you don’t want to lose (and the physical well being is nice as well).
I see it as a circle of life, but if you’re looking to go from a regular diet to a vegan one, consider this article on transitioning to a raw food diet:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1034874/transitioning_to_a_raw_food_diet.html
Just to add a quick note. If your intent is genuine and derives from a whole state of goodness. Then their are situations where you can take from another live force. For example, if a mosquito were to bite land on you. You may have to swat him so you don’t get infected with a potentially deadly virus. Just intend for him to be reincarnated into a better state.
[I]On the topic, I came across this article on some blog:[/I]
Are you a vegetarian by virtue or religion?
Today I see many kinds of vegetarians (I am one now). But the majority seems to be divided into two kinds of vegetarians, especially in India. Vegetarians by religion and vegetarians by virtue.
Vegetarians by religion are those who abstain from eating meat because their religion or caste proscribes them against it. They follow vegetarianism, in all probability, from their childhood and come to detest non-vegetarian diet; though I have seen some such vegetarians who are tempted to eat meat, but are afraid to do so out of various reasons, like getting caught, not wanting to sin, afraid of divine punishment, etc. Of course, some come to detest non-vegetarian way of life, they hate even to see others savoring meat. They simply can?t digest it that somebody could kill and eat any living creature. Their reason for that is mainly their upbringing which seems to teach them eating meat is beastly but some do hate violence towards animals. Many such vegetarians do not eat eggs as well, but I know some who eat eggs because, as one guy told me, ?eggs are vegetarian?. This guy called the egg ?vibhudi pandu?.
The second kind I have seen are vegetarians by virtue. These are the people who avoid meat because they do not want to incite violence towards other living beings (of course plants are excluded here). These are the people who actively analyze and discriminate what vegetarianism means. And one unique outcome of their independent thought is that they even avoid the use of leather, silk and other such products that are produced from slaughtering animals. In a way I think these people are true vegetarians, because they discriminate actively. They think with a purpose rather than just blindly adhering to religious edicts. Some vegetarians by religion eventually evolve into vegetarians by virtue, but not all of them.
Not that I have anything against non-vegetarians. I have been a non-vegetarian most of my life and only since a couple of years am I following a vegetarian life. Vegetarian by virtue, I must say. I believe there is nothing wrong in eating meat. Without a food chain, I do not think we humans could have even evolved. We eat plants without any guilty conscience because plants do not have a nervous system or any such systems with which they can express pain. We do not even know if plants feel pain. But I distinguish between being a non-vegetarian and a person who uses animal products for comfort, fashion and religion.
Meat for survival is something I can easily agree with. But slaughtering animals for the sake of our culture and fashion is something I can never digest. And yet today we have vegetarians who perform pujas in silk ?vastrams?. Do you guys know that it takes about 6000 cocoons to produce one silk saree? We also see today vegetarians and non-vegetarians using leather jackets, purses, handbags and shoes. Many schools fine students if they do not wear polished black leather shoes. And yet we have lessons about non-violence. Hindu religion greatly exalts non-violence, or so I?ve heard, and yet it prescribes animal sacrifice, has stories of mass battles, and asks for silken wear during rituals. Islam religion has the period of Ramzam after which cows are slaughtered on mass scale and shared amidst themselves. I do not know if this custom is prescribed by religious edicts or has evolved out of practice. But I think it is not eating for survival. It is a pure custom and today we have business houses selling chicken haleem, goat haleem and kalyaani haleem just to cash in on the festive season. Is that slaughter for religion or slaughter for survival? When Bonalu comes we have hundreds of goats and hens sacrificed just for the sake of ?appeasing? goddess Kali or Durga or Misamma or whatever-her-name-is. Did you guys know there is a board in the Jubilee Hills Durgamma Temple compound that says sacrificing animals is prohibited in the premises? And yet almost every Friday we have gangs of worshippers who nevertheless ?sacrifice? animals, cook and eat in those very premises of the temple. The management of the temple cannot be held responsible because they have that board hanging there, don?t they?
If we have to be true vegetarians, I guess we have to forego silk, leather, pastries (save for the eggless variety), etc. But it does not stop there. What about cosmetic products that have been tested on animals? What about soaps that contain fat? Is it animal fat? What about all products that have been experimented upon animals? Like medicines, etc? Should they be banned? Medicines have become a part of our survival game, but does that give us a license to test them on animals? These are some questions that I do not have answers for. Maybe some of you have better opinions on these.
But, in all, I would like to say it is better to be vegetarian by virtue or a discriminating non-vegetarian, rather than being a vegetarian by religion.
[I]Sounds interesting?[/I]
I’ve enjoyed the thead and some of the recipes contained within also. I am not a vegetarian, but I am trying to be more of a “fishetarian” and I am working to follow more of a sattvic and raw/living diet also. One step at a time 
Sean
[quote=Kiran;13055]
There is not enough room here to describe all the details and dynamics but knowing your predominant dhatu is just a starting point - we should be careful in taking any actions based only on your main type. Obviously, I am far from being a qualified consultant (perhaps someday).
The real trick is to keep them all in balance but to do so, you need to work with a trained ayurvedic physician or consultant…[/quote]
… or develop your yoga practice through yama-niyama, asana and pranayama, and all this becomes a first hand expereince. Than you don’t need a physician or consultant, as you will know what is best for you.
Indeed, experience, and intimate knowledge of pranamaya kosha requires a lot of work. Why people do not achieve it easily is because they did not master yama and niyama first. As annamaya kosha (physical body) is a sheet, or physical expression of pranamaya kosha (vital body), pranamaya kosha is a sheet or expression of manomaya kosha. (soul, or desire body) The latter is trained, cleaned and spiritualized by the practice of yama and niyama. If this is not done, than any direct work done on pranamaya kosha is redundant, and jeopardized by the uncontrolled, unclean nature of the desire body. Those who do not realize their lower, instinctual nature, and do not tame it, how can they ever raise to the heights of spirit ?
One knows a tree from it’s fruits. Where there are perfections (siddhis) there are advanced disciples, possibly initiates. Don’t immediatly identify these with levitation or such. The ability to compose music like this, for example is also a perfection or siddhi.
Just from a medical-scientific point of view:
- using proteins of animal origin as food results higher cholesterol levels, between 170 and 200 mg/dl. I am talking about proteins here, not animal fatty acids. Experiments on rabbits who respond to diet as humans, show that proteins from various meats, dairy, or eggs, made their overall cholseterol level much higher compared when they were fed with proteins of plant origin. So even if you eat fat free dairy, or low fat meats, your cholesterol level will be still much higher than that of those who do not use them. Our body does not need any cholesterol because it is produced in the great intestine in more than sufficient quantity. Cholesterol is a main component of cell membranes. It’s daily production is around 800-1000 mg/day. 400-600 mg is used up daily replacing the used up cells. The rest is eliminated through the bile. There is no reason to introduce any more cholesterol into our system. Foods of plant origin contain no cholesterol at all, only foods of animal protein have it.
- animal proteins through their phosphor-calcium unbalance (much more phosphor) reduce the body’s calcium reserves (exytra phosphor is eliminated as calcium-phosphate) and thus facilitate ostheoporosis
- animal proteins require higher acidity level to be digested in our stomach so they facilitate apparition of ulcer
-animal proteins do generate a greater insulin release, thus the chance to develeop diabetes in time is considerably greater
-animal fats are saturated fats, what directly increase the levels of bad lipoproteins (low density lipoproteins or LDL) while reduce the good ones (high density lipoproteins, or HDL)
-meat might contain prions, agressive proteic complexes what survive temeratures of several hundreds of Celsius, and cause illnesses like The Creutzfeld-Jacobs diease (mad cow disease)
So even from a scientific, self-health oriented point of view, using not only meat but food of animal origin is questionable. Add the fact that it;s not even economic (to produce the same quantites of animal protein, it is needed ten times as much land, and water as needed for plant-protein), and at once, one arrives to the conclusion that there is great room left for improvement to this and future generations.
[B]Swami Sri Ananda Acharya [1881-1945][/B], [I]Spiritual Talks [/I](Hoshiarpur, India: Vishveshvaranand Vedic Research Institute, 1957):
Give your affection for at least five minutes every day to trees and animals, to birds and fishes. You will soon discover in them a portion of your own life, sharing the wine of Brahman’s love. Think of them as manifestations of divine wisdom and treat them as members of humanity with full right to live and enjoy. The ruthless rate at which our cannibalistic civilized savages are felling forest trees and exterminating birds and animals and fish is beyond all bounds, and the children of men who will be born twenty or thirty years hence will have to learn the life history of birds and trees and animals from photographs and pictures. Remember, birds and animals are the friends of trees and trees are the friends of man, and when birds an animals and trees are gone out of our planet man will be friendless and the future human race will then receive the same gift of extinction which its reckless ancestors have offered to birds and trees and animals. Without forests, without birds, without animals, what will be left for poets to celebrate in their verse?
The materialist evolutionary theory is not right. I realize that I might discredit myself as once I was an ardent defender of this theory, but I care little. First, it is a theory, one material evidence seems to back up.
The problem is that there are more things that just those chekable by our senses (be those enhanced senses like microscopes, or telescopes or radar rays). As I leant, animals are the descendants of former species, undeveloped enough for the spirit to dwell in them.
This way, those animals what are warm blooded (mammals) are our closest relatives. Science agrees that we are not descendants of todays’ apes, but we have a common ancestor, from where we evolved, and they devolved into the great apes we know today. That common ancestor was a warm blooded creature what made possible the descendance of a spiritual entity, a soul. What is important to realize that we, humans are spiritual beings on Earth. We are the only ones visible on this realm. By this I mean, that animal’s do have souls, and even they have an identity, an ego, but that ego does not manifest itself in this world, but only through the many animal bodies of the species we witness. If by any wonder an animal could talk, it could only adress itself in third person, as it’s consciousness is not limited to a partciular body as in our case, but to all bodies of that species. Animals are not able to say, I am. Only human beings can do that as they bear the spirit in them, on this realm.
Blood is the bearer of the sentient soul, in fact not the physical blood, but the heat element in it, what in terms of alchemy was called air. In alchemy, when the alchemist meant earth, he did not ment soil, but all minerals. When he said water, he meant all what’s fluid, when he meant air, he meant all that’s gaseous, and when he said fire he meant an even higher subtility state. Heat is the lowest form in what the spirit can manifest itself. The highest part of an animal is the heat principle of it’s blood. When the soul descended, the lowest nature of the soul body met the highest part of the animal body. Of course a scientist will smile when he hears about higher, more subtle froms of existance, forgetting that he is the one who willingly chose to accept only physical, sensorial evidence. This sceintist is similar to a person wh sees the ripples in water, the wawes, and thinks that they are based on the combined rules of hydraulics and physics. He forgets the stone that has been cast in water, and generated the wawes. Life is similar. It is unexplained up to this day, They describe to great extent how it works, but they are clueless, why there is it in the firts place. Thye dare not to go further than the tools they have. Yet, it is possible to go further, and this is done by developing the right tools. But because the tools used in mapping the material world, are material tools, the tools necessary to map the spritual (or higher) worlds are spiritual tools. And there is no such thing here but in our souls. That’s why spiritual science cannot be but “subjective”, or introspective, at least in the beginning. That’s why it is dicarrded by short sighted scientists, because they think, something subjective cannot have general value. Yet it may have, if one preserves the objectivity of materialist science when dealing with his own soul. The tools necessary to search and map the spiritual world are the spiritual eyes or chakras. These are developed, built by the disciple, or spiritual scientist. Only some of them are dormant, other needs to be created from the chaos of soul life. When the existing ones are activated, that grants various abilities but those will not be conscious ones. So the new ones are more important, and they need to be created, and how they are created ? By yama and niyama, what rule the astral (manomaya kosha) body. When the new petals (half of those who are said to be there) are created, cleared, activated, than the old ones will work too.
This is where science meets morality, and this is the base of any spiritual discipline and advancement. Interesting how from the animals we arrived to this, isn’t it ? Sometimes I just cannot stop. But this need sto be understod if we do not want to be totally sunk in matter.
To get back to the beginning, that is why there was a significance of fish, as a cold blooded animal, in early christianity, that’s why there is a rule in the Torah to not eat flesh containing blood, that’s why fasting days allowed fish, but not other meat. The lowest spiritual elements, in form of animal instincts are absorbed by using blood as food, and exactly it is that part what needs to be adressed by yama and niyama. That’s why sadhana and discipline go hand in hand.
I’m guessing this is one of those subjects where what is right for one person isn’t for another. What feels right to me at present:
I have recently realized that the same life is in both plant and animal. For me, the violence lies not so much in the eating of plant or animal, but how each is produced and distributed.
The destruction of the earth that is taking place so that both plant and animal can be mass produced is violent to me.
The use of antibiotics and pesticides is violent to me.
The means by which both are slaughtered (without love, reverence and greatfulness) is violent to me.
The distribution of plant and animal over long distance and everything that entails is violent to me.
The energy required for storage at grocery stores is violent to me.
The waste of so much food that spoils before it is purchased is violent to me.
My partner and I are looking to move from Arizona to somewhere where we can raise our own food using methods that are as non-violent as nature allows. I look forward to healing this disconnect.
[QUOTE=Hubert;5635]I agree. This is because brahmacharya - control of the senses - is easier without those “animal vibrations” or call them hormones if you like a “scientific” approach. This is not superstition … eating meat makes you prone to all sort of desires and pleasures, one with basic awarness must agree this.
Regardless of asana, a well composed and varied vegetarian diet is healthier. But the difference between a vegan and a person who moderatly consumes meat is minimal. Different varieties of meat can be parts of balancing diets, I even read of horse meat recipes for those with lung problems -myth or true ? I don’t know - also cod is an animal, right ? (cod liver oil)
[/QUOTE]
It was very beautifully expressed Hubert…It really came from your heart.
David – I agree. One of the reasons I garden. I certainly don’t have enough land to maintain myself and family off the food chain grid entirely but every once in a while I get to celebrate a meal produced without reinforcing someone else’s profits from assembly line food.
An aspect of the consequences of our food choices we havent’ explored yet – and that hasn’t been packaged in a government certification yet – does ahimsa bid us to eat food the prearation and harvest of which was accomplished by people who earn a living wage? I think about my dad’s stories as the one white dude working the pea harvest on his uncle’s farm, and think about the food service exceptions to most minimum wage laws, and I remember that human suffering can be bound in our food decisions, too.
A farmer who was landlord to my uncle once told me that, from the sale of a packaged loaf of bread, the farmer gets less money for the wheat in the bread than the plastics company gets for the little split ring that holds the plastic bag together.
There are so many ways the global food chain that supplies humans has gone wrong . . .
Nichole,
At the end of the day this whole issue of diet is really down to the individual. My own personal choice is to refrain from animal products in food .I have been vegan for about ten years and believe that my practice has been enhanced by my dietry choice. becoming vegetarian or vegan needs some thinking out . proper planning , and being able to ease onesself into it. if you eat meat then cut out red first before moving onto white and the rest fish etc. I would like to think that anybody who aspires to becomea teacher of yoga would think very carefully about their diet and become vegetarian at the very least. as far as students or lay people go then its a matter of personal choice. I can always tell who among my students eats meat as they always tend to be a bit stiffer and take longer to progress. I never lecture them about eating or drinking habits as yoga if practised regulary will normaly regulate such habits as they become more aware of their bodies and just what they are putting into themselfs.To anybody thinking of letting go of meat i suggest taking your time ,detox when possible ,practice plenty of asanas. check out petas website and have a look at the video meet your meat. good luck.
Namaste,
IAN.
[QUOTE=Alix;5633]I’m really a very down to earth kind of person and I look to our physical characteristics to supply some of my answers. In this case, the teeth. We have tearing teeth like predators to consume flesh, and we have grinding teeth to consume grains etc. IMO it would be against nature to deny the gifts we’ve been given. I choose to eat an omnivorious diet and will continue to do so. I’m not sure where I stand on the issue of “karmic debt”. I think that could get us into a whole other realm of responsibility for the world as it is.
I believe each person must choose what is right for themselves and to force YOUR way of living upon another is the ultimate wrong. [/QUOTE]
In my opinion, you are exactly right,
Apostle Paul said: " if you believe that what you eat is right, then it no sin
to eat it."
Note: I quoted from memory; it is not an exact quote.
another paraphrase that described ancient Christian movement away from kosher dietary restrictions – what goes in your mouth isn’t the sin; it’s what comes out that counts.
Well, Apostle Paul does not count because he was immune even to snake poison.
Surely, eating meat would not harm him, either.
And The Christ also said, when asked why His disciple do not fast, that it is inappropriate for the guests to fast when they have the groom amongst them … but they will fast once the groom is gone. (Free quoting)
So, if the Groom is with you, eat whatever you like, if He ain’t, perhaps you might need fasting. 
[QUOTE=Techne;15004]another paraphrase that described ancient Christian movement away from kosher dietary restrictions – what goes in your mouth isn’t the sin; it’s what comes out that counts.[/QUOTE]
The mantra Maranatha is in Aramaic, the language of Jesus Christ. It means
Lord Jesus come.
http://www.wccm.org/item.asp?recordid=faqs01&pagestyle=default
I think it was introduced by Father John Main, promoter of Christian meditation.