Monday, November 12, 2012

The Universal Consciousness

In the Eskimo/Inuit language of cold, wintry Alaska there are dozens of words for “snow” - Dozens of words with intricacies and connotations well-known and understood by them, but typically unnoticed and misunderstood by others. Similarly, in the Sanskrit language of ancient, spiritual India there are approximately a dozen different words for “consciousness” – a dozen clearly delineated words with subtle nuances which in English we can only loosely, clumsily call “consciousness.”

For every psychological term in English there are four in Greek and forty in Sanskrit.” -A. K. Coomaraswamy

So what exactly is consciousness? When western doctors say someone is conscious or unconscious they really just mean “awake” or “asleep.” The patient is called unconscious under anesthetics and conscious when awakened. However this particular meaning is clearly a misnomer because even when supposedly “unconscious” during sleep, coma, or under anesthetics we still dream and are “conscious” of that experience, so our consciousness hasn’t disappeared as implied, it has merely altered/shifted to another state.

In medicine, the presumption that consciousness is nothing more than a function of the brain is reflected in such statements as, ‘The patient regained consciousness’ – this routine, narrow depiction has assumed that consciousness is a mundane physical phenomenon, a self-evident priority for experience about which nothing more needs to be said.” -David R. Hawkins, M.D., Ph.D., “Power Vs. Force”(249)

Other common (mis)uses of the word consciousness are “awareness” as in “being conscious of something,” and “spirituality” as in “attaining higher consciousness,” but again these are not the denotations understood by modern scientists or ancient mystics. As best expressed by Theoretical Physicist/Experimental Psychologist Peter Russell, the true, simple meaning of consciousness is “the capacity for experience.” Consciousness is the ability to have an inner experience. It is our internal world of thoughts, emotions, sensations, perceptions, and choices, the “I,” the little me in our minds, the sense of self inside us that has never changed since childhood – that is consciousness.

The identification and experience of self could be limited to a description of one’s physical body.  Then, of course, we might well ask, how does one know that one has a physical body?  Through observation, we note that the presence of the physical body is registered by the senses.  The question then follows, what is it that’s aware of the senses?  How do we experience what the senses are reporting?  Something greater, something more encompassing than the physical body, has to exist in order to experience that which is lesser – and that something is the mind … The question then arises: How does one know what’s being experienced by the mind?  By observation and introspection, one can witness that thoughts have no capacity to experience themselves, but that something both beyond and more basic than thought experiences the sequence of thoughts, and that that something’s sense of identity is unaltered by the content of thoughts.”  -David R. Hawkins, M.D., Ph.D., “Power Vs. Force”(252)

That something is consciousness, the capacity for experience, the inner witness of our outer lives.  As written by philosopher Malcolm Hollick, “Events are experienced by an experiencer, thoughts are thought by a thinker, pain is felt by a feeler, imaginings are created by an imaginer, and choices are made by a chooser.”

What is it that observes and is aware of all of the subjective and objective phenomena of life?  It’s consciousness itself that resonates as both awareness and experiencing, and both are purely subjective.  Consciousness isn’t determined by content; thoughts flowing through consciousness are like fish swimming in the ocean.  The ocean’s existence is independent of the fish; the content of the sea doesn’t define the nature of the water itself.”  -David R. Hawkins, M.D., Ph.D., “Power Vs. Force”(252-3)

Given the definition, “the capacity for inner experience,” we can easily observe that consciousness is not a phenomenon limited only to human beings.  In fact, as we trace the trait of consciousness back through the animal kingdom, it becomes increasingly difficult to say there exists any animal which doesn’t have its own inner experience of the outer world.  In his excellent book “From Science to God,” Peter Russell examines this issue in detail starting with the example of a dog:

A dog may not be aware of all the things of which we are aware. It does not think or reason as humans do, and it probably does not have the same degree of self-awareness, but this does not mean that a dog does not have its own inner world of experience. When I am with a dog, I assume that it has its own mental picture of the world, full of sounds, colors, smells and sensations. It appears to recognize people and places, much as we might. A dog may at times show fear, and at other times excitement. Asleep, it can appear to dream, feet and toes twitching as if on the scent of some fantasy rabbit. And when a dog yelps or whines we assume it is feeling pain –indeed, if we didn’t believe that dogs felt pain, we wouldn’t bother giving them anesthetics before an operation.”  -Peter Russell, “From Science to God

My dog, Buddy, always recognizes me and shows excitement when I come through the door.  He also recognizes the veterinarian’s office and shows fear when we pull into the parking lot.  If I ignore Buddy and give more attention to his sister, Harley, then Buddy will exhibit signs of feeling slighted and jealous, he will sulk by himself in the corner of the room, his tail no longer wagging when I go to pet him.  If I raise my voice at him, he will cower, lower his head, and scamper off.  From facial recognition to dreams to complex emotions, dogs exhibit a multitude of expressions associated with consciousness.  To assume they exhibit all these external characteristics of consciousness without having their own internal experience is quite implausible.  And as Peter Russell points out, if we actually believed that dogs didn’t “feel” pain, we wouldn’t give them anesthetics before an operation.  

“If dogs possess consciousness then so do cats, horses, deer, dolphins, whales, and other mammals. They may not be self-conscious as we are, but they are not devoid of inner experience. The same is true of birds; some parrots, for example, seem as aware as dogs. And if birds are sentient beings, then so, I assume, are other vertebrates – alligators, snakes, frogs, salmon, and sharks. However different their experiences may be, they all share the faculty of consciousness.  The same argument applies to creatures further down the evolutionary tree. The nervous systems of insects are not nearly as complex as ours, and insects probably do not have as rich an experience of the world as we do, but I see no reason to doubt that they have some kind of inner experience.  Where do we draw the line?”  -Peter Russell, “From Science to God

Carefully considering where to draw the line between conscious and non-conscious entities, the closer one examines the issue, the more difficult it becomes to argue that any animal is insentient.  Regardless of whether they have a brain or nervous system, no matter how small or simple, all animals seem to have their own inner experience and exhibit common characteristics of consciousness.  

So what about the plant kingdom?  While most would agree that animals are conscious, most would probably agree that plants are not.  Is this where we can draw the line?  Apparently not - Thanks to the work of Cleve Backster, Dr. Ken Hashimoto and others, it is clear that even plants are remarkably conscious.  

In 1966, polygraph-expert Cleve Backster conducted a series of experiments which conclusively demonstrated that plants are capable of intelligent thought processes.  First he took a Dracaena plant (dragon tree) in his office and connected lie detection equipment to its leaves.  Next he watered the plant and found that its polygraph output was similar to the undulation of human happiness.  In order to test his developing theory and elicit a stronger reaction, Backster thought to threaten the plant by burning one of its leaves.  With this thought in mind, even before retrieving a match, he noticed a strong positive curve appear on the polygraph paper.  He then left the room to find some matches, and as soon as he arrived back, another high peak appeared on the paper.  As he lit a match, the plant’s fear reaction spiked and remained high as he proceeded to burn one of its leaves.  In further trials Backster found that if he showed less inclination to burn the plant, its reaction was weaker, and if he merely pretended to burn it, there was no reaction.  So not only was the plant appearing to show genuine happiness and fear, but it seemed to be discerning true intentions from false ones.

[In] 1966 Cleve Backster, a pioneer of lie-detection methods, decided to threaten a dragon plant in his office.  A few minutes before, and having on a whim connected the plant to the electrodes of one of his lie detectors, he had noticed that when he watered its roots, the plant gave what in a human being would be interpreted as an emotional reaction.  To arouse the strongest reaction he could, Backster first placed a leaf of the plant in hot coffee, with no apparent response.  He then decided on a worse threat:  to burn the leaf.  But as soon as he thought about the flame, there was an instant response from the plant – without Backster moving but just thinking about the threat, the plant had reacted!  When he left the room and returned with some matches, there was a second surge of anticipation from the plant.  And as he reluctantly burned the leaf, there was a subdued but still noticeable reaction from the dragon plant.  Over the next 40 years, Backster ran a large series of experiments, building up a huge archive of data showing that all organisms are in continual communication in a vast matrix of dynamic and nonlocal awareness.”  -Ervin Laszlo and Jude Currivan, “Cosmos” (91)

In further trials Backster tried burning the leaves of other nearby plants not connected to the polygraph, and the original dragon plant, still connected, registered the same wild response to its friend’s pain as when its own leaves were burned.  In another experiment Backster placed two plants in an empty room, blindfolded 6 students, and had them draw straws.  The receiver of the short straw was then secretly instructed to uproot and destroy one of the two plants.  Since they were all blindfolded, only the short straw student and the remaining plant knew the identity of the murderer.  Two hours later Backster connected the remaining plant to the polygraph machine and instructed each student to walk past it.  The murder-witness plant registered absolutely no reaction as the 5 innocent students walked by, but then went crazy almost off the charts as the murderer came close.  Somehow it correctly identified and emotionally reacted to the guilty student.

Backster’s experiments suggest that plants are not only conscious, intelligent, and emotional, but also telepathic!  Plants will indeed register a typical human “fear” reaction on the polygraph precisely when someone directs a malevolent thought towards them.  These experiments have been replicated many times with the same results.  Somehow plants are able to intuit and react to certain human thought patterns.

The ‘Backster effect’ had also been seen between plants and animals.  When brine shrimp in one location died suddenly, this fact seemed to instantly register with plants in another location, as recorded on a standard psychogalvanic response (PGR) instrument.  Backster had carried out this type of experiment over several hundred miles and among paramecium, mold cultures and blood samples, and in each instance, some mysterious communication occurred between living things and plants.  As in Star Wars, each death was registered as a disturbance in The Field.”  -Lynne McTaggart, “The Field: The Quest for the Secret Force of the Universe,” (145)

Other experiments have been performed testing the effect of prayer, positive and negative directed intention and emotion on plants.  Dr. Bernard Grad of McGill University had a team of psychic healers habitually direct positive or negative feelings onto a variety of plants.  The positively-infused plants survived and thrived, while negatively-infused plants withered and many of them died.  Reverend Franklin Loehr, a Northampton pastor, performed similar studies with his parishioners testing the power of prayer to affect plants and seeds.  In one experiment he planted 46 corn kernels evenly spaced in a round pan with 23 on each side.  He then gave daily “positive-growth” prayer to half the kernels and “anti-growth” prayer to the other half.  Eight days later, the positive side had 16 sturdy, budding, seedlings growing and the negative side had only 1 barely left alive.  In another test, one of his parishioners, Erwin Prust, subjected 6 Ivy plants to daily “anti-growth” prayer while watering them and within 5 weeks, 5 of them were dead.

In the incredible documentary, “The Secret Life of Plants” Fuji electronics managing director and chief of research Dr. Ken Hashimoto created special instruments which translate the electrical output of plants into modulated sounds effectively giving them a voice.  His wife has since been teaching the Japanese alphabet to her favorite plants.  In the documentary Mrs. Hashimoto recites Japanese letters/phonemes/words and the plants repeat them back to her!  Reminiscent of a small child trying to sound-out new words, the plants are unable to properly imitate the language at first, but then actually struggle and practice, slowly improving until they are able to perfectly imitate the human sounds via their electrical output.  She says she looks forward to the day when she can have a conversation with her plants.

So if plants can learn languages, show emotional output, react to emotional / intellectual stimulus, communicate with other plants, and read the minds / intentions of humans, it is quite rational to assume that the plant kingdom, just like the animal kingdom, is conscious.

This demonstrates extremely well that plant life, like all life and indeed everything in the Universe are an inseparable aspect of the same infinite Mind, Consciousness, and intelligence of The Source, The First Cause, of God.  Human beings, still totally steeped in the material world and personal ego assume that just because a plant does not appear to have a physical brain, or a mouth, or any other animal characteristics that they are ‘unintelligent’ or simply ‘inanimate.’  Nothing in fact can be further from the truth.  The human brain is not the real Mind any more than physical parts of a plant or a mineral are real Mind.” -Adrian Cooper, “Our Ultimate Reality (217)

So how far down the evolutionary line does consciousness exist?  The work of Dr. Masaru Emoto suggests that even water is in some sense conscious.  His research began by exposing H2O to nonphysical stimulus and photographing the resulting water crystals with a dark field microscope.

Japanese researcher, Masaru Emoto, of the I.H.M.-Institute in Tokyo, has revealed how water is fundamentally affected by words, thoughts and emotions - all of which are waveforms. He and his team exposed water to various music and different words and expressions, and then froze it to produce water crystals. When these were examined under a microscope the response of the water was amazing. Look at the way it reacted to the words and thoughts (vibrations) of 'Love and appreciation', and, 'You make me sick - I will kill you'. Imagine the effect on the body of our words and deeds when it is some 70 per cent water. This is how thoughts and words affect us energetically. I should stress that it is not the words that have the effect, but the intent behind them. If you said 'I will kill you' in a light-hearted fashion, as a bit of fun, it would not have the same effect as it would if you meant it, or said it with malevolence"  –David Icke, “The David Icke Guide to the Global Conspiracy” (47)

Thus even water has the ability to distinguish between real human emotions and fake platitudes.  When infused with positive intent the H2O molecules align themselves into beautiful, symmetric, sacred geometrical forms, and when infused with negative intent they align themselves into chaotic, non-symmetrical blobs.  Obviously the level and type of consciousness operating in water molecules is far different from human consciousness, but the fact that something in the molecules is identifying and reacting to human emotional/intellectual content suggests that even water is indeed in some sense conscious.

“We usually assume that some kind of brain or nervous system is necessary before consciousness can come into being. From the perspective of the materialist metaparadigm, this is a reasonable assumption. If consciousness arises from processes in the material world, then those processes need to occur somewhere, and the obvious candidate is the nervous system.  But then we come up against the inherent problem of the materialist metaparadigm. Whether we are considering a human brain with its tens of billions of cells, or a nematode worm with a hundred or so neurons, the problem is the same: How can any purely material process ever give rise to consciousness?  -Peter Russell, “From Science to God

Can we truly draw a definitive line between conscious and non-conscious entities in the universe?  At what level of simplicity do we assume matter to be insentient?  Even single-cell organisms react to external stimulus, reproduce, communicate, respirate, hunt and consume food – is this all an unconscious, insentient “program” of Newton’s mechanical universe or are even single cells imbued with a slight degree of consciousness, a miniscule internal experience of their own?  When sperm and egg unite, each human begins their life as a single-cell organism which then rapidly divides and multiplies into the conscious community of 50 trillion cells we generally know as human.  In classical science, consciousness is a mysterious emergent property of this process; in spiritual science, consciousness is the known primary property and the physical world is the emergent mystery. 

The capacity for inner experience could not evolve or emerge out of entirely insentient, non-experiencing matter. Experience can only come from that which already has experience. Therefore the faculty of consciousness must be present all the way down the evolutionary tree…There is nowhere we can draw a line between conscious and non-conscious entities; there is a trace of sentience, however slight, in viruses, molecules, atoms, and even elementary particles. Some argue this implies that rocks perceive the world around them, perhaps have thoughts and feelings, and enjoy an inner mental life similar to human beings. This is clearly an absurd suggestion, and not one that was ever intended. If a bacterium’s experience is a billionth of the richness and intensity of human being’s, the degree of experience in the minerals of a rock might be a billion times dimmer still. They would possess none of the qualities of human consciousness – just the faintest possible glimmer of sentience.  -Peter Russell, “From Science to God

The ancient Sufi teaching states that “God sleeps in the rock, dreams in the plant, stirs in the animal, and awakens in the man.”  What if we replaced the word “God” with “The One Infinite Consciousness?”  If God is defined as - an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent intelligence – then God must exist inside all things, yet outside of all space, time, and matter.  What has quantum physics (and honest introspection) shown exists inside all things, yet outside space, time, and matter?  Consciousness.

Without consciousness, there would be nothing to experience form.  It could also be said that form itself, as a product of perception with no independent existence, is thus transitory and limited, whereas consciousness is all-encompassing and unlimited.  How could that which is transitory (with a clear beginning and ending), create that which is formless (all encompassing and omnipotent)?  -David R. Hawkins, M.D., Ph.D., “Power Vs. Force”(250-1)

How can non-experiencing, unintelligent, insentient matter randomly coalesce into a form that magically creates conscious intelligent life?  What mechanical process could possibly bring consciousness, intelligence, and life into being?  How could any material process create something as immaterial as consciousness?  Why would the material universe even exist without a consciousness to perceive it?  Quantum physics and Eastern Mysticism are both quite clear that matter does not exist without a consciousness to perceive it.  Albert Einstein himself said, “A human being is a part of the whole, called by us ‘Universe’ – a part limited in time and space.  He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest – a kind of optical delusion of consciousness.

Whatever our beliefs – irrespective of how far we expand our perception and regardless of how profound the ability of science may be to understand processes of emergence – sooner or later we arrive at the requirement for an originating creative act.  We arrive ultimately at the concept of a cosmic mind.  Although science has so far chosen to ignore this inescapable logic, the deeper we delve into the fundamental mysteries of Nature – as did Einstein – we see order, harmony, and cosmic mind manifest in our universe.  What is revealed doesn’t require us to choose between intelligent design and evolution, but to recognize a co-creative design for evolution.  What we see, literally hidden in full view, is Einstein’s concept of a cosmic mind at work.”  -Ervin Laszlo and Jude Currivan, “Cosmos” (22)

Unless you actually think “God” is a bearded white man living in the clouds, perhaps replacing that word, as Einstein did, with something like “Cosmic Mind,” “Universal Being,” or “Infinite Consciousness” will help bridge the mental gap most Westerners seem to have between science and spirituality. 

After I shook the dust of organized religion from my sandals, I learned that the link between big ‘ol God and little ‘ol me was no more and no less than consciousness.  And each of us, at and as the very center of us, have this same feeling of I Am, for the not-so-obvious reason that each one of us is really God pretending to be each one of us.  There is only one I Am, there is only one God, one Brahma, one Tao, one beingness … we both see the same world, because we both are the same world.  But we have so cleverly and convincingly hidden ourselves from ourselves that we really believe that we are separate entities.”  -Roger Stephens, “A Dangerous Book” (56)

The coming scientific revolution heralds the end of dualism in every sense.  Far from destroying God, science for the first time is proving His existence – by demonstrating that a higher, collective consciousness is out there.”  -Lynne McTaggart, “The Field: The Quest for the Secret Force of the Universe,” (226)

As shown previously, the plenum of physical forms in the universe is fundamentally an energetic Oneness with consciousness playing the role of creator and experiencer.  This means the multitude of transitory material forms and bodies about us, don’t exist without us, and come from within us.

A growing body of research suggests that we’re more than cosmic latecomers simply passing through a universe that was completed long ago.  Experimental evidence is leading to a conclusion that we’re actually creating the universe as we go and adding to what already exists!  In other words, we appear to be the very energy that’s forming the cosmos, as well as the beings who experience what we’re creating.  That’s because we are consciousness, and consciousness appears to be the same ‘stuff’ from which the universe is made.”  -Gregg Braden, “The Divine Matrix” (39)

The universe holds its breath as we choose, instant by instant, which pathway to follow; for the universe, the very essence of life itself, is highly conscious.  Every act, thought, and choice adds to a permanent mosaic; our decisions ripple through the universe of consciousness to affect the lives of all.  Lest this idea be considered either merely mystical or fanciful, let’s remember that fundamental tenet of the new theoretical physics: Everything in the universe is connected with everything else.”  -David R. Hawkins, M.D., Ph.D., “Power Vs. Force” (148)



Support independent publishing: Buy this book on Lulu.


Order the Spiritual Science 284-page Paperback



 Support independent publishing: Buy this e-book on Lulu.


Download the Spiritual Science 284-page E-book

28 comments:

Bill Hadley said...

Pretty much removes the assertion by vegans that eating meat is murdur. Since plants are apparently conscious and feel pain, so vegans too are murdurers.

Eric Dubay said...

Don't be ridiculous Bill. Plants don't have brains or nervous systems to experience pain the way that humans and animals do. Plants don't have mouths that scream in agony, or eyes that cry in terror, or blood that gushes as you cut them. Plants don't have feet for mobility and freedom the way animals do. Plants don't have mother's that grieve for their children like animals do. When you harvest from plants correctly, they regenerate and more will come back in their place. When you eat fruit, the seeds move through your body and when you defecate it naturally spreads the seed so a new tree can grow and provide more food. Alternately, what happens when you kill an animal and eat it's corpse? Does a pig regenerate it's limbs if you cut them off and eat them? When you defecate a meal of pork does a pork tree grow and provide thousands of new pigs to eat? NO. When you eat animals you're ending the cycle of life! You are infringing on another beings freedom, torturing and murdering it, just so you can have a less healthy meal than you would've if you'd just gotten your nutrients from plant sources.

Now for Bill and you other heartless, brainless flesh-eaters out there, do me a favor and watch these two clips:

A Man Murdering Some Basil

A Man Murdering a Pig

Notice how the basil isn't screaming, crying out in pain, and trying to run away? All this article is saying is that plants just like rocks and everything in existence is imbued with consciousness. Just because plants have consciousness too, you say "this pretty much removes the assertion that eating meat is murder," which is ludicrous. Meat is clearly murder and eating plants clearly is NOT. The article talked about water consciousness as well, so do you think drinking water is murder too? And unless you're a lifetime breatharian, coming here and calling vegans murderers is beyond hypocritical.

Plants Don't Have Feelings You Idiot

Anonymous said...

I like how Bill spelled murder wrong so he's like 'dur dur, vegans are murdururs tooo, durp'

Eric Dubay said...

"As long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other. Indeed, he who sows the seed of murder and pain cannot reap joy and love." -Pythagoras

"The time will come when men will look upon the murder of animals as they now look on the murder of men." -Leonardo da Vinci

"To a man whose mind is free there is something even more intolerable in the sufferings of animals than in the sufferings of man. For with the latter it is at least admitted that suffering is evil and that the man who causes it is a criminal. But thousands of animals are uselessly butchered every day without a shadow of remorse. If any man were to refer to it, he would be thought ridiculous. And that is the unpardonable crime." -Romain Rolland, author, Nobel Prize 1915

"While we ourselves are the living graves of murdered beasts, how can we expect any ideal conditions on this earth?" -George Bernard Shaw

"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." -Mahatma Gandhi

"As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields." -Leo Tolstoy

david said...

An awesome article, but the comments are silly.

Eric, you have WAY missed your own point. Just because YOU are cognitive of the pig does NOT mean the basil is silent. We humans are in a chain that destroys animals and plants. Pretending one is higher than the other is fallacious, stupid aristotlean classification that is meaningless.

The secret life of plants, you show the book? Have you read it? Your comment is contradicting the evidence in that book ... so what now?

peace mate

Eric Dubay said...

Having the faculty of consciousness and having the capacity to experience physical pain and suffering are two different things. Do you eat humans David? You say "Pretending one is higher than the other is fallacious, stupid aristotlean classification that is meaningless." Well I'll be thrown in jail if I start eating my next door neighbors, but you say that's "fallacious and stupid" because all plants and animals are equal. If we as a society really believed that, why do we keep some animals as pets and others as food? If we as a society are really as you say then why isn't cannibalism regarded as equally as acceptable as vegetarianism?

david said...

Having the faculty of consciousness and having the capacity to experience physical pain and suffering are two different things.

Please prove that?

Cannibalism is frowned on in your culture. What makes yours right?

Unfortunately, while you have a lot of very good reasons for being vegetarian, they're all just social conventions.

A storm front shows all the signs of life, does it contain consciousness? Feelings? Anything? How would you know?

Treat the basil and the pig and the raincloud all the same, if you can?

peace

Eric Dubay said...

In that case I'm on my way to your house to eat you and your family for dinner David! If you have any problem with that, by your own reasoning, you're "fallacious and stupid."

david said...

Bit of a raw nerve there, maybe you should start with a raincloud first?

peace ;-)

Eric Dubay said...

Not a raw nerve, just proving my point ;-) Peace

Mark said...

I enjoyed the article. You also might want to mention that it appears that plants (or perhaps all consciousness...) wants to work with us (to ascend?). I'm reminded of the suggestions by Anastasia in Megre's books about how to prepare seeds prior to planting them. Then how she got up each morning and encouraged all the new shoots that had sprouted in her forest home. And I'll never forget her story of how the love of a cherry tree can impact our lives.
Now, I'm going to see if I can find that video you mention in your article of the Japanese lady teaching her plants to speak. That should be fascinating.

Eric Dubay said...

Thanks for the comment Mark. Those Anastasia books are amazing and I'd recommend them to everyone. Here's that Secret Life of Plants Documentary and you can see Mrs. Hashimoto at 41:00. Peace

Dinson said...

Eric brother! It's been awhile since posting but I always still read your articles. I have been vegan ever since returning home and feel amazing! I have been learning how to cook and have been inspiring friends to eat less animal products, even though at first they gave me shit for eating like that! Also, I have became very enlightened after reading your book and have been having deep and awesome conversations with people whom I never thought either of us would have had before.

Once again, thank you for your hard work man. I am going to continue with the spreading of information and positive vibes!

Oh yeah I also recently connected with the conspiracy rapper J Solli, and we are going to start creating music together! Big ups to you for posting his talent!

Keep it moving, eat your vegetables and go with the flow!

Peace!
D



Eric Dubay said...

Hey Dinson, thanks for the great comments as usual. Really glad to hear you liked Spiritual Science, you're living and promoting veganism, and that you're collaborating with J Solli! That's awesome, can't wait to hear what you guys are gonna come up with. Be sure to send me links! Peace

Anonymous said...

another way to look at it is too acknowledge that when you kill an animal, its life ends there; when you a fruit falls off a tree, the tree keeps giving! plants want to nourish us, i feel. amazing information! i used to justify eating meat anyway i could by buying grass fed, but after going vegetarian for four weeks, the difference i felt was unreal.

David said...

Hi, Eric.

Great article. I like the idea of veganism, but it seems that too many vegans almost get religious about it or at the very least very judgmental.

There's a lot of debate about whether it's the best diet for humans or not.

I follow mixed martial arts and I know some fighters have tried it and just couldn't compete on a high level with a vegan diet.

Some would say that humans, as a part of the animal kingdom, are simply a part of the natural food chain that has a natural predilection towards meat and also (ideally) functions to manage the population of the prey below us.

For example, hunting deer. If humans didn't hunt deer the population would become so big that they'd interfere with modern life. We couldn't drive down the street in some areas without crashing into one. And driving down the street without crashing is something we've decided we need as a society.

Therefore, we would have to either introduce predators, which would gladly kill us too. Or sterilize the deer. Or periodically cull the population. What's the solution?

In my opinion, if people want to eat meat I'd definitely say hunting a wild animal that's lived a free life is ethically preferable to farming animals in inhumane conditions. And it's better for the planet.

Seems like a step in the right direction.

David

Eric Dubay said...

Great article. I like the idea of veganism, but it seems that too many vegans almost get religious about it or at the very least very judgmental.

Thanks! Yes, I get very judgmental when it comes to standing up and speaking out for those who are being abused, tortured, and murdered. Just yesterday I stood up to a child abuser in public. What is your problem with people who are "very judgmental" about animal cruelty? You don't like being judged for your immoral habits?

I follow mixed martial arts and I know some fighters have tried it and just couldn't compete on a high level with a vegan diet.

What about Mac Danzig, the vegan who won UFC Ultimate Fighter 6? What about every Shaolin monk for hundreds of years? They are all strict vegetarians. What about me? I guarantee I can beat the shit out of you and I don't eat any animal products. So what's this, "um, I know some vegan fighters just couldn't compete" BS? Please watch the following:

Vegan/Vegetarianism, Shaolin Martial Monks, Bodybuilding, Hunting and Ethical Eating

Some would say that humans, as a part of the animal kingdom, are simply a part of the natural food chain that has a natural predilection towards meat

Humans do not have a natural predilection towards meat, we are natural herbivore/frugivores:

The Meat Myth

For example, hunting deer. If humans didn't hunt deer the population would become so big that they'd interfere with modern life. We couldn't drive down the street in some areas without crashing into one

I bet the deer feel exactly the same about the human population. The only difference is they aren't killing us for sport and claiming it's for our own good.

Seems like a step in the right direction.

Vegetarianism is a step in the right direction. Murdering wild animals instead of murdering domestic animals isn't a step in any direction. Peace

David said...

"Thanks! Yes, I get very judgmental when it comes to standing up and speaking out for those who are being abused, tortured, and murdered. Just yesterday I stood up to a child abuser in public. What is your problem with people who are "very judgmental" about animal cruelty? You don't like being judged for your immoral habits?"

Eating meat is"Immoral"? Now you're just getting religious. This is an opinion not a statement of fact.

Is it immoral for other animals to eat meat when they get hungry? Is it immoral for the Eskimos you mention in the first sentence of this article to fish for food? I'm sure there's not much farming going on in Alaska? Does it become "moral" to eat meat if you live in Siberia and lack veggies?

"What about Mac Danzig, the vegan who won UFC Ultimate Fighter 6?"

Yes, he does it for ethical reasons. I've seen his fights. Who knows, he might do better if he ate meat. Isn't that possible?

"What about me? I guarantee I can beat the shit out of you and I don't eat any animal products."

Actually, you can't guarantee that having no knowledge of me whatsoever. You see, it seems like all logic goes out the window when you get on this topic, Eric.

Have you ever tried Wing Chung vs Jiu-Jitsu, Greco Roman wrestling, or Muay Thai? It might not work out as well as you think, but I digress.

"Humans do not have a natural predilection towards meat, we are natural herbivore/frugivores:"

Historical eating patterns don't seem to support this. If it's true it seems like it would be reflected in human behavior. But okay.

"I bet the deer feel exactly the same about the human population. The only difference is they aren't killing us for sport and claiming it's for our own good."

And gazelles aren't killing lions. They're lower on the food chain and it's just not an option. Furthermore, you'd lose this bet. Scientist tend to agree that animals live in the present moment. They most likely don't feel any way about the past or the future ;-)

"Vegetarianism is a step in the right direction. Murdering wild animals instead of murdering domestic animals isn't a step in any direction. Peace"

Eric. Torture + murder is worse than murder. Come on now.

David

P.S. It's okay to be passionate about something as long as it doesn't cloud your reasoning capabilities.

Eric Dubay said...

No, torture and murder is never moral, no matter what your excuse. Mac wasn't always vegan, and improved his record and won The Ultimate Fighter after going vegan, so you're wrong about that too. He says and he's proven that going vegan has helped, not hindered, his fighting.

Mac Danzig on Veganism

I've fought against Muay Thai, BJJ, Wrestlers and many other styles and haven't had a problem completely dominating any of them regardless of style, size or skill level. Shaolin monks are undoubtedly the toughest guys on the planet and they don't eat any meat. Here's one taking a power drill to his head!

Shaolin Monk Drills His Head

Eric Dubay said...

Oh, and you act like there's no plant foods to be found in Alaska or Siberia. Sorry to burst your Hollywood bubble, but these people aren't living on icebergs in igloos, they can eat a plant-based diet if they want. And if you're living somewhere on the planet where you have to eat like a carnivore just to stay alive, I'd recommend moving to more hospitable climates instead of blaming geography for your unethical eating.

David said...

"No, torture and murder is never moral, no matter what your excuse."
----------

I think you're missing my point here, but hopefully other readers get it. I'm simply contrasting the inhumane treatment of farmed animals vs. hunting, which does less harm.
-----------

"Mac wasn't always vegan, and improved his record and won The Ultimate Fighter after going vegan, so you're wrong about that too. He says and he's proven that going vegan has helped, not hindered, his fighting."

That might be true.. For him. Maybe different diets have different effects for different people. Or maybe the other fighters like Frank Mir were doing veganism wrong.

I said Danzig might do better because TUF is not professional fighting and Danzig hasn't been able to get where he wants to be yet. I hope he does!

As for me, I rarely eat meat. I lost 10 pounds (which I don't really like as I already had a muscular build) and I feel the same. Mentally, I feel healthier and better about myself, but I can't say that I physically feel different.


"I've fought against Muay Thai, BJJ, Wrestlers and many other styles and haven't had a problem completely dominating any of them regardless of style, size or skill level."

I guess you're the exception to the rule! Based on what I've seen trying to do "Sticky hands" on someone trained in boxing has disastrous results!

The consensus among professional fighters is that the most effective martial arts in real fights with other trained fighters are a combination of boxing, greco roman wrestling, Brazilian jiu-jitsu, and Muay Thai. All of the extraneous nonsense that Bruce Lee envisioned doing away with(Jeet Kune Do) has evolved into modern day MMA. And in MMA Wing Chung doesn't seem to work for most people. I'm not sayin' it wouldn't work for you! I'm just sayin'.

Joe Rogan On Wing Chung Kung Fu
http://youtu.be/D9L5vr3HKdE
-------

"Oh, and you act like there's no plant foods to be found in Alaska or Siberia. Sorry to burst your Hollywood bubble, but these people aren't living on icebergs in igloos, they can eat a plant-based diet if they want."

My point is, they don't want to. If people are naturally herbivores/fructovores then why is it that you need to convince them otherwise with books and videos and documentaries?

Eric, you remind me of the early missionaries who would basically travel to foreign countries and attack the natives with Christianity. They often had problems leaving alive and eventually began to change their tactics.

According to you I'm unethical, immoral, stupid, living in a Hollywood bubble, and you've vaguely threatened to beat me up with Wing Chung Kung Fu. And I'm 90% vegan! Holy S#@t man,lol.

You're making me want to go eat a hamburger just out of spite :p

Eric Dubay said...

Hey David, glad to hear you've reduced your meat intake and hope you continue to do so. I get what you're saying about farm/wild animals, I just think it's splitting hairs and you should focus on vegetarianism, not "wild cruelty." As for Wing Chun, you don't "do sticky hands" in a fight against a boxer or anyone else. Chi sao (sticky hands) is simply a training drill used to develop sensitivity. I wrote an article explaining why Wing Chun is more effective than all the martial arts you listed, you might enjoy:

Why I Train Wing Chun

Eric, you remind me of the early missionaries who would basically travel to foreign countries and attack the natives with Christianity. They often had problems leaving alive and eventually began to change their tactics.

You're accusing me of being like someone who travels to a foreign country and attacks the natives "often having problems leaving alive." All I do is write articles about veganism David... I'm simply speaking up for those who can't speak for themselves, trying to encourage ethical eating. I'm not invading your home David. If you don't like my articles on veganism nobody is forcing you to come to my website, read them, and argue with me about them.

David said...

"If you don't like my articles on veganism nobody is forcing you to come to my website, read them, and argue with me about them."
----------
No no, I like your articles and your website. I just think some of your comments towards others on this topic contain logical fallacies and may be a bit irrational and over-emotional.

I compared you to an early Christian missionary merely to say that your approach is probably less effective than it could be because of all the condescension and personal attacks.

You're passionate about it, I get it. This is your truth. But as Pilate rhetorically asked Christ(a meat-eater according to the Bible, btw)..

"What is Truth?"

David
aka The devil's advocate

Eric Dubay said...

Okie Dokie, I hope our dialogue has been beneficial. I'll admit to being "over-emotional" (by society's standards) when it comes to animal and child abuse. As for being irrational and illogical, I disagree of course and think vegetarianism / veganism is the rational and logical choice for humans. And I would argue with Christ himself if he tried to tell me torturing and murdering animals was perfectly moral. Peace

David said...

"Okie Dokie, I hope our dialogue has been beneficial."
---------

Definitely! I enjoy conversations like this and especially when they prove me wrong or lead to new insights.

Just out of curiosity, do you feel the same way about killing flies, gnats, rats, and roaches?

I absolutely hate when these creatures come into my space or try to get my food. Of course, it's not really "my space" or "my food". But I've chosen to act as if it is.. and to enforce the death penalty for any and all violations.

In your opinion, is this the same as killing a cow or a pig? I'm not trying to be funny here.. I really want to know.

Thanks, Eric.

David

Eric Dubay said...

Though everything in nature is conscious, there is clearly a sliding scale of sentience and ability to experience pain. Humans, for example, undeniably are more sentient and have more pain receptors than fish. Insects are lower still, and try as they might, Buddha, Jesus or anyone else is just as likely to accidentally murder a few ants during their walk in the park. "Accidentally" murdering a pig so we can eat bacon, however, just doesn't happen. My fiance is really impressive in this matter as I've never seen her purposely kill a spider, cockroach, ant or any other living being... she consciously doesn't want to kill any living creature. Personally, I'll admit to occasionally killing cockroaches and some other creepy crawlers that come into our apartment, though this is an issue I consider often and I think it would be more congruent and consistent of me to be as compassionate as my partner.

David said...

"Personally, I'll admit to occasionally killing cockroaches and some other creepy crawlers that come into our apartment, though this is an issue I consider often and I think it would be more congruent and consistent of me to be as compassionate as my partner."

The sliding scale of sentience is interesting. Definitely something to look into.

Thanks for your replies, Eric.

David

Anonymous said...

Aslong as any human can survive, without the sacrifice of animals, it can never be justified. I assume some people would die before killing an animal. For me Im unsure. If I hunted, the animal would be the greatest symbol of life, praised, and respected in the same fashion i imagine certain tribes to portray. Predators of the animal kingdom kill fast. Ive wondered, aside from the meal escaping, if their speed to kill is also compassion driven. Meaning, they also want not suffering of the prey. I can see dudes^ motivation for contrasting wild from commercial. Eric is right tho in all his points. Except im unsure how eric could gauruntee an ass whoopin. WingChin for life tho.Eric :) also long live Bruce Lee