Spirituality and vegetarianism

[randomGuy]

39 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

 

I think what you mean is that your main  issue is the distress-signal that you can perceive and recognize; that resembles your and my distress-signal.

 

Plants feel distress too when you hurt them - we just can't empathize with that because their distress signals are not perceptible to us, unless we use analyzer devices as sensors. 

 

BTW, I am vegetarian, too. 

"No, plants do not have brains or a nervous system, and therefore cannot feel pain. While they have complex biological defense mechanisms to survive, these reactions are not the same as the conscious, emotional suffering that animals and humans experience." 

https://www.britannica.com/story/do-plants-feel-pain

 

[BacktoCricaddict]

5 minutes ago, randomGuy said:

"No, plants do not have brains or a nervous system, and therefore cannot feel pain. While they have complex biological defense mechanisms to survive, these reactions are not the same as the conscious, emotional suffering that animals and humans experience." 

https://www.britannica.com/story/do-plants-feel-pain

 

 

Yes, plants do not have a nervous system that resembles animals' nervous systems - I posted on this thread too (maybe you missed it because I am so wordy!). But that does not dismiss the idea that plants feel and communicate distress-signals. They may not feel distress in exactly the same way as we do, but they do perceive distress and communicate distress from one part of their body to another. One of the ways they do this is by using a chemical called glutamate. And guess what, glutamate is one of the most important pain transmitters in our nerve cells. So, the more fundamental you get, the more commonalities you find in the distress-signaling between different organisms. 

 

Again, pain as we know it, is one way to express distress.  We can see an animal in distress and know that it is in distress because it expresses pain like we do. But plants don't express it in a way that we can see - but find a way to measure glutamate and you see it. Just like in our nerve cells during pain signaling. 

[singhvivek141]

4 hours ago, mishra said:

Perfect. Surving is your Dharma as well. Now Gita says, u cant ever know you are taking the right call. So take the best call using you own “vivek”. I don’t know english term for “vivek”

Hi, I'm here :) 
Vivek..usually means "wisdom" or "sense of judgement".

[singhvivek141]

4 hours ago, mishra said:

To me, Hindu philosophy is based on few basic statement.

1. God created everything and that his light is in everyone.

2. Do your Karma on basis of Dharma. You may be right or wrong in taking that call but always do karma on Dharma principles.

 

So if you kill a animal for joy or eating, Obviously you are trying to extinguish that same light which you call god. So being vegetarian is justified. 

 

But point 2 gives you a way out of vegetarianism. If your Dharma tells you to say participate in a war, If you dont have food to live , I think only in such circumstances you can take a call that I need to eat meat to survive.

Hindu philosophy often weights the situation as well and accordingly judges the deed.
1. For example, as mentioned, killing other animal is wrong. For example, killing a cow is as bad as "Brahm-hatya", but if the same cow is already injured and in a non-recoverable pain, giving it an instant death is actually better.
2. Similarly, God has created everyone, but has also given choice of selection (specially to humans). Hence, someone like Bhakt Prahlad who was born in a family of demon like Hiranyakshipu was a devotee, while, someone like Ravana who was born in a family of saints like Rishi Vajshrava ended up doing acts worse than a demon.
3. In BhagwatGeeta...Lord Krishna actually says that he's seated in hearts of all living entities. So even if Arjun kills someone, he can't kill the "essence" of himself. Similarly if we break a mango from a tree for our nourishment, the same seed can be sown again to give rise to another Mango tree. 

Now we all know that our books speak everything metaphorically and leave a lot on the wisdom of the individual. But, how I see is that "vegetarianism" is the prime form of food, provided you're in a situation where it's readily available.
If the situation isn't favourable, then you can go deep down exploring different stages of "non veg"...but the moment you're back to the normal life, vegetarianism is expected.

Though, what was veg and what not is distorted...I'm sure Rice, Dal and other carb heavy products weren't the "regular veg" diet. We choose these diets for our survival.

[randomGuy]

7 hours ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

 

Yes, plants do not have a nervous system that resembles animals' nervous systems - I posted on this thread too (maybe you missed it because I am so wordy!). But that does not dismiss the idea that plants feel and communicate distress-signals. They may not feel distress in exactly the same way as we do, but they do perceive distress and communicate distress from one part of their body to another. One of the ways they do this is by using a chemical called glutamate. And guess what, glutamate is one of the most important pain transmitters in our nerve cells. So, the more fundamental you get, the more commonalities you find in the distress-signaling between different organisms. 

 

Again, pain as we know it, is one way to express distress.  We can see an animal in distress and know that it is in distress because it expresses pain like we do. But plants don't express it in a way that we can see - but find a way to measure glutamate and you see it. Just like in our nerve cells during pain signaling. 

1.Pain plus also mental suffering - fear anxiety pressure etc.. Seeing another animal getting slaughtered, is also mental suffering for an animal. If we think deeper, it is associated with the sense of 'I'.

 

Humans and animals have the sense of 'l'. Plants don't have the sense of 'I' as per Google.

 

2.Without the suffering, everything is just chemicals.

If a dead frog is about to be dropped in boiling water, it's legs move against where the water is, like it doesn't want to be dropped. It is just chemicals, the dead frogs doesn't suffer.

 

 

[ravishingravi]

I think one has to be careful to not get into the Abrahamc's DOs and DONTs mode. Hindu civilization has been built on best practices and inferences. If you are practicing meditator, there is literally no doubt that you will feel a clear difference when you eat meat. You will also feel aclear difference once you give up onion and garlic. 

 

But I don't think there should be generic prescription on these. As a natural progression, one gets there. As you move from being eho sensitive to life sensitive, it is difficult to see a chicken getting slaughtered without responding to it. 

[Gollum]

22 hours ago, randomGuy said:

"In the United States, vegans and vegetarians have an estimated average life expectancy of roughly 83 to 86 years, compared to the national average of around 76 to 79 years. This survival advantage is largely driven by a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease, obesity, and certain cancers"

 

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4191896/

 

 

"There is no single, fixed vegan life expectancy for the USA. However, modeling studies suggest that transitioning to an optimized plant-based diet in adulthood can add 6 to 9 years of life expectancy compared to the typical American diet."

 

https://ajcn.nutrition.org/article/S0002-9165(24)00454-4/fulltext

 

 

@Gollum @singhvivek141 @Lone Wolf

 

 

I am a vegetarian now, just that I consume eggs and fish oil pills. 

[randomGuy]

15 minutes ago, Gollum said:

I am a vegetarian now, just that I consume eggs and fish oil pills. 

Extra Kudos to south folks who go vegetarian!! We have abundant 6 type of dals, then lobhia, chhole, matar, paneer, rajma, beans etc. in non-south region of india which is not as well made in the south.

Edited June 5 by randomGuy

[Lone Wolf]

19 hours ago, mishra said:

To me, Hindu philosophy is based on few basic statement.

1. God created everything and that his light is in everyone.

2. Do your Karma on basis of Dharma. You may be right or wrong in taking that call but always do karma on Dharma principles.

 

So if you kill a animal for joy or eating, Obviously you are trying to extinguish that same light which you call god. So being vegetarian is justified. 

 

But point 2 gives you a way out of vegetarianism. If your Dharma tells you to say participate in a war, If you dont have food to live , I think only in such circumstances you can take a call that I need to eat meat to survive.

Vedas have accounts animal sacrifices and Shakti traditions.  Shakti traditions and Bali practices are still popular among old school Hindu ritual followers.  Pahadis, Nepalis and even Odia Bengalis follow them

 

Since Puranas were written post Mahabharata lot of the concepts of Vedas were contradicted.

 

 

The concept of Ahmisa and non violence doesn't exist in original Hinduism and we all know where it came from and the downfall of the great land of Bharatas began with that moment.

[Lone Wolf]

9 hours ago, randomGuy said:

1.Pain plus also mental suffering - fear anxiety pressure etc.. Seeing another animal getting slaughtered, is also mental suffering for an animal. If we think deeper, it is associated with the sense of 'I'.

 

Humans and animals have the sense of 'l'. Plants don't have the sense of 'I' as per Google.

 

2.Without the suffering, everything is just chemicals.

If a dead frog is about to be dropped in boiling water, it's legs move against where the water is, like it doesn't want to be dropped. It is just chemicals, the dead frogs doesn't suffer.

 

 

Logic doesn't supports this, easiest example Rice plant forms seeds so that it can make more rice plants, but we kill the plant and consume the seed. So growing rice is similar to raising chicken for food.

 

 

[randomGuy]

47 minutes ago, Lone Wolf said:

Logic doesn't supports this, easiest example Rice plant forms seeds so that it can make more rice plants, but we kill the plant and consume the seed. So growing rice is similar to raising chicken for food.

 

 

India has worst air pollution / carcinogenics in food, air,water.

 

What kind of logic suggests further putting pressure n taking away 6-9 years or 10% years extra from your life by eating non-veg? -

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mishra]

17 hours ago, singhvivek141 said:

Hi, I'm here :) 
Vivek..usually means "wisdom" or "sense of judgement".

It means more than wisdom. Thats my opinion.  For example if you are left in a room with another person for too long, you may decide I will rather die of hunger or become canibalistic to survive. What does wisdom says 

Edited June 5 by mishra

[mishra]

16 hours ago, singhvivek141 said:

Though, what was veg and what not is distorted...I'm sure Rice, Dal and other carb heavy products weren't the "regular veg" diet. We choose these diets for our survival.

Yes, Our sense that we collectively judged that a seed is not alive, a fruit just part of plant and not the plant itself, Or a one acre field which gives a output of 20 quintal wheat, will need 1 quintal wheat seed to regrow wheat remaining 19 quintal  can be eaten as else  all seeds may die if we put all 20 quintal in that field. Society have created a staple diet for itself using those little fundamental Godly light principles which I mentioned in earlier post.

 

Society has very cleverly made rules. Like Kshatriya who goes in battlefield may not get vegetarian food and to survive , it can eat meat when away from home. They needs to learn to hunt so that they can survive, Hence you see stories where kings go on hunting. 

 

 If someone claims Abrahmanic religion says be kind to animal. How can he justify that religion can say this. Because there is no godly light in any thing. God created and left the planet. So you can kill anyone(human or non human) and you do not necessarily need to care for nature. Thats why you find relatively more paradoxes in Abrahmanic religion.

Edited June 5 by mishra

[Lone Wolf]

45 minutes ago, randomGuy said:

India has worst air pollution / carcinogenics in food, air,water.

 

What kind of logic suggests further putting pressure n taking away 6-9 years or 10% years extra from your life by eating non-veg? -

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, but it makes hella lot of sense in India which is rampant when it comes to food adulteration to look at other sources when it comes to having proper nutritious food.

 

Why is eating non-veg still seen as “sinful” by many in India when we’re a protein-deficient, malnourished country?

 

India has some of the worst nutrition stats globally:

 

35.5% of kids under 5 are stunted

 

57% of women aged 15–49 are anemic @Gollum

 

Millions of Indians have extremely low protein intake, especially in rural area

80 crore people still depend on ration  mostly just rice and wheat

 

 

In this context, you’d think we’d be encouraging affordable protein  like eggs, meat. But no, In schools, boiled eggs in mid-day meals are opposed not because of cost or health, but because “it hurts sentiments.”

 

How did we end up here, where nutrition takes a backseat to outdated beliefs?

[Nikhil_cric]

4 hours ago, Lone Wolf said:

No, but it makes hella lot of sense in India which is rampant when it comes to food adulteration to look at other sources when it comes to having proper nutritious food.

 

Why is eating non-veg still seen as “sinful” by many in India when we’re a protein-deficient, malnourished country?

 

India has some of the worst nutrition stats globally:

 

35.5% of kids under 5 are stunted

 

57% of women aged 15–49 are anemic @Gollum

 

Millions of Indians have extremely low protein intake, especially in rural area

80 crore people still depend on ration  mostly just rice and wheat

 

 

In this context, you’d think we’d be encouraging affordable protein  like eggs, meat. But no, In schools, boiled eggs in mid-day meals are opposed not because of cost or health, but because “it hurts sentiments.”

 

How did we end up here, where nutrition takes a backseat to outdated beliefs?

For the rich in India, who want to follow a spiritual path associated with strict vegetarianism and , they can do it without the need to block boiled eggs in mid day meal schemes in the name of hurting sentiments. 

It's for millions of poor kids who cannot get their requisite protein intake.

 

Opposing such policies is stupid and evil. 

 

Edited June 5 by Nikhil_cric

[Lone Wolf]

Just now, Nikhil_cric said:

For the rich in India, who want to follow a spiritual path associated with strict vegetarianism and , they can do it without the need to block boiled eggs in the name of hurting sentiments. 

It's for millions of poor kids who cannot get their requisite protein intake.

 

Opposing such policies is stupid and evil. 

 

There should be special place in hell for those dumbf*ks who deprive poor kids of proper nutrition in the name of religion which never was about depriving proper nutritious food to begin with.  Swami Vivekananda got that and no wonder he was last great Hindu spiritual leader this nation saw.

 

Whenever I look at these numbers of malnutrition it is heartbreaking and I am damn sure our ancestors would be ashamed of the country we have turned out to be.  No wonder it is often argued that God's left this country a loooong while back & it's totally not surprising we got enslaved for thousands of years.

Still being stuck at avg sub altern 75 IQ , a land which was once cradle of civilization.

[BacktoCricaddict]

This thread is addressing two very distinct issues - spirituality and nutrition. They are unconnected concepts. 

 

If I may add my perspective as a vegetarian biochemist (and others have said the same thing in different ways):

 

For longevity. the source of the food (animal or plant) does not matter as much as the total caloric intake. Direct diet-intervention experiments with caloric restriction have shown that calorie restriction increases longevity. It just happens that vegetarian/vegan diets make it easier to achieve caloric restriction.  

 

The studies referenced in this thread are observational, not interventional. A big flaw (not the only flaw) in such studies is that they are not normalized for caloric intake. In other words, the people consuming a non-veg diet would naturally be consuming more calories. So it's not about the animal, it is about the calories. if you fed one group of people with a veg diet and another a non-veg diet, but kept their caloric intake and macronutrient content the same, it would give the same results. 

 

Bottom line:

 

It is about balance, not dogma. The average individual should:

• Keep your caloric intake to <1700 kcal/day. The American 2500 kcal/day is way too high.
• Eat a mostly plant-based diet so you can get a lot of fibre. That does not mean "no meat." 
• Include enough protein - while there are plant sources, animal-sourced proteins are better. That does not mean "no plants."
• Don't restrict based on origin. Plant/animal is not important. Focus on composition.
  • E.g., from a saturated fat perspective - coconut oil is just as bad as (or worse than) beef tallow. Just because one is vegetarian does not make it better. 
• Exercise.

 And don't mix your nutrition-based choices with your religious beliefs, or vice-versa.

Edited June 5 by BacktoCricaddict

[BacktoCricaddict]

25 minutes ago, Lone Wolf said:

There should be special place in hell for those dumbf*ks who deprive poor kids of proper nutrition in the name of religion which never was about depriving proper nutritious food to begin with.  

 

 

It's evangelism/proselytizing of a different kind. 

[BacktoCricaddict]

20 hours ago, ravishingravi said:

I think one has to be careful to not get into the Abrahamc's DOs and DONTs mode. Hindu civilization has been built on best practices and inferences. If you are practicing meditator, there is literally no doubt that you will feel a clear difference when you eat meat. You will also feel aclear difference once you give up onion and garlic. 

 

But I don't think there should be generic prescription on these. As a natural progression, one gets there. As you move from being eho sensitive to life sensitive, it is difficult to see a chicken getting slaughtered without responding to it. 

 

I was always sensitive to animal senses. It's easy to see yourself in them because their reactions resemble human reactions. 

 

Not to be facetious, but my biochemical data-led meditations made me sensitive to plant-distress too. It is during these PhD project meditations did I realize that very little separates our biochemistry from that of plants. People split hairs and say that plants don't have nociceptors or a nervous system, so they don't feel pain like we do. True, but the phrase "like we do" is a distraction. They do feel distress, and react to it. At the very root of it, it's all chemical, electrical and acoustic signals that help survival. And many of those are the same in plants and humans.

 

Once you come to that realization, it is liberating. You stop judging people for their food choices. You only want them to eat nutritionally sound food. The organism from which it was derived is meaningless. 

 

As for onion and garlic, I contend that, as you grow older, you are more likely to become sensitive to FODMAPs. That's what you are sensing. 

 

 

Edited June 5 by BacktoCricaddict

[Vancouver]

This is what Sikhism say on meat eating -

 

(Guru Nanak, Pg 1289-1290 Guru Granth Sahib, Raga Malar)

 

Born out of flesh, in flesh does man live.
With life comes love of flesh, bones, skin, limbs
All are flesh.
As from flesh the living body issues, the breast that is flesh,
It grasps in mouth.
Of flesh is the mouth, of flesh the tongue,
Through flesh is breath drawn.
As is man grown up, matrimony he enters,
And brings home flesh.
Of flesh is born flesh,
With flesh are all relationships established.
By the touch of the holy Perceptor is the Divine Ordinance realized,
Whereby comes fulfilment.
Not by man's own effort comes liberation:
Saith Nanak: Such talk only to perdition leads. (1)

Sloka Guru Nanak
Over eating meat dispute blind fools,
Of enlightenment and contemplation ignorant.
Which is flesh, which vegetation?
Which to sin leads?
After the tradition of the gods, was the rhinoceros slaughtered,
And of its flesh burnt sacrifice offered.
Those that at night-time gobble up flesh,
Pose to discard flesh and stop their noses.
A great show of piety they make before others --
Of enlightenment and contemplation ignorant.
Saith Nanak: What avail arguing with the purblind.
Neither would they say anything sensible,
Nor follow whatever is told to them.
Truly blind is one whose actions are blind --
The mind's eye he lacks
From mother's and father's blood are they born,
Yet flesh and flesh they abjure.
As at night come woman and man together,
Foul is their conduct.
Of flesh are we begotten, from flesh born;
Of flesh are we vessels.
Brahmin! ignorant of enlightenment and contemplation,
Thou art yet reputed to be wise.
Revered sir! the flesh that is brought from outside dost thou discard,
But those in thy home, of flesh made, thou thinkst good.
From flesh are all living objects made.
In flesh is life lodged.
Those by the false perceptor instructed;
Consume what is forbidden and discard what is lawful to each;
Know, that of flesh are we begotten, from flesh born;
Of flesh are we vessels.
Brahmin! ignorant of enlightenment and contemplation,
Thou art reputed to be wise.
In Puranas and in Muslim books is consuming flesh commended;
In all Four Ages is flesh in general use.
In sacrifices and in fine wedding ceremonials
Is use of flesh in vogue.
Women and men, of flesh are born,
As also are kings and great potentates.
Shouldst thou feel to hell are they wending their way,
Receive thou not their charity.
What absurdity that the donor to hell may go,
While the recepient to enter heaven is believed.
Brahmin! ignorant thyself, others thou dost instruct --
Strange that thou art declared wise!
Brahmin! thou knowest not where from is flesh born:
From water grows grain, sugarcane and cotton;
From water is the world reckoned born.
Water claims to be pure, yet from water comes much that arouses evil.
Saith Nanak after contemplation:
Shouldst thou discard all such delectable objects,
Mayst thou claim to have exercised true renunciation. (2)

Commentary

In the first stanza Guru Nanak establishes the fact that we are a creation of flesh, being composed of flesh and being born out of the flesh of our parents.

At the beginning of the second stanza Guru Nanak decries the duality of vegetarians who expound against eating meat. Guru Nanak says that these people have their priorities mixed up, they fight about the virtues of not eating meat, yet they do not instead spend their time contemplating God. He says that everything is a living thing, whether one is killing an animal or a plant, he says that can the vegetarian please tell him where the sin lies? If he is killing living things whether they are plants or animals. Then Guru Nanak follows this right away talking about how animal sacrifice (rhino) was such an integral part of Hindu worship, one is willing to sacrifice animals for religion, yet say do not eat flesh for religion, another contradiction exposed by the Guru. Guru Nanak then talks about the duality of these people who commit countless sins and then make a public show of their "great piety" by saying that they don't eat meat because it is a sin, another contradiction. Guru Nanak then talks about how the Brahmin vegetarian is a creation of flesh, yet he holds the flesh from outside as being sinful to eat, Guru Nanak is saying that aren't you Brahmin vegetarian a creation of flesh as well as your family also something to be abhorred if you are following your own criteria that flesh is sinful? Guru Nanak talks about these false preceptors who are wrongfully telling people to consume what should not be, and telling people to not eat what should be eaten. Guru Nanak then establishes the fact that eating meat was a historical fact of both the Muslim and Hindu faiths and it has been a part of daily life for many ages, yet why is the Brahmin vegetarian denying his own history? Then Guru Nanak talks about the absurdity that the kings who eat meat should all go to hell, yet the Brahmin vegetarian who lives off their donations and charity shall go to heaven. Finally Guru Nanak concludes by saying that all vegetables and meat are the same because their basic ingredient is water and that the Brahmin vegetarian if he really wants to practice his religious renunciation instead of not eating meat he should give up water altogether.

Edited June 5 by Vancouver