|
|
|
|
Theory of Eating
It has been said vegetarianism is an illusion. Carrots, for example, have been suspected of screaming bloody murder when they’re consumed, but their cries of anguish are always too soft to be heard by any but the most sensitive of consumers. The question is whether or not a diet makes a consumer more spiritually aware, healthier or more prone to disease, and whether or not they are in harmony with the universe of edibles and their fated lives. Strict vegetarians and those who adhere zealously to a limited, carefully precise diet are said to be capable of enormously greater spiritual insights, and regularly enjoy the benefits of their eating austerity in profound experiential meditations. At the same time, however, there are also stories of just such spiritual elite who upon their visit to spiritual India or Tibet die rather abruptly due to something they’ve eaten locally. It’s always possible that their immune systems were ill prepared for the lesser hygienic standards of India and/or Tibet and that their vegetarianism had made them more sensitive and susceptible to all manner of bacteria, viruses, and revenge-plotting edibles. It’s a case of use it or lose it -- in this case losing the effectiveness of the immune system by placing severe limits on exercising it. While it has not been suggested a massive plate of nachos (with every toxic ingredient known to man or bar patrons the world over) should be eaten once a week purely as a matter of preventative medicine, it is nonetheless quite likely that Guatama Buddha, himself, upon occasion, ate meat. Thus from a spiritual or health basis, fanatic restrictions on diet are not always valid. There is also the story of the writer in Utne Reader, who after trying every conceivable, allegedly healthy diet known to modern man, came to the conclusion that: “It is better to eat pizza with friends, than to eat tofu alone.” Meanwhile, Robbins in his book, Diet for a New America, makes a good argument for respecting the food we eat by not subjecting it to horrendous treatment while it is alive and/or just prior to it being eaten. Veal is, of course, one of the more notorious examples, where in order to maintain the meat in the most delectable form for later consumption, the cattle contributors are subjected to grotesque treatment and lives of utter misery while they are being fattened. Factory chicken “farms” use similar techniques, and not surprisingly, such chicken meat reckons a distant second in taste tests between it and meat provided by chickens who had previously lead relatively normal, “open range” lives. Orthodox Judaism, of course, has long maintained a tradition of Kosher foods and their counterpart, non-Kosher foods (or in the technical jargon of the trade, “yuk” food). In some cases the difference is due to the manner in which the animal is dispatched. The theory is that a cow with its neck cut very quickly and with a very sharp knife, experiences much less trauma and pain, and is therefore likely to provide improved nourishment for the individual who later consumes the cow’s flesh. Non-Kosher foods might be envisioned by going to a meat packing plant, where cows are dispatched by one or more sledge hammer blows to the head which render them unconscious prior to their necks being cut with much less sharp knives. There is the suspicion, furthermore, that the cows are in enormous fear as they approach the loading bins, where their fellows are being dispatched nearby. Ultimately, however, it may not be entirely a question of how food was raised or how an animal was killed that makes the critical difference -- or else it could be one variable in the greater equation of what’s healthy and what’s not. Instead, or additionally, it may be important to consider how the food is consumed -- a responsibility, incidentally, which cannot be foisted off on the establishment and is, instead, solely that of the consumer. I.e., no more Scapegoatology with respect to what Corporate Rule (for example, Monsanto, et al) bad guys are doing to our food supply. Consider for a moment the comparison between an MBA from one of the finest business schools in the country unable to find suitable employment and making ends meet by cooking hamburgers at McDonalds, and a kid from skid row making it big as an entrepreneur on Wall Street. The idea is that it’s not so much the circumstances of one’s birth or upbringing, but rather how one has utilized their talents in the recent past and present now that determines how one might feel about the quality of their life. Perhaps we should worry less about where and how one’s food came from and more about how it is prepared and consumed. Several years ago, this author was reading Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. The novel relates the story of a prisoner in a Siberian labor camp whose primary, almost solitary task is to survive. Simply to survive, if need be, one hour at a time. Obtaining food, dealing with the cold, and avoiding the wrath of the guards consumes all of the energies of the individual. In reading the story, I recall at one point going to the refrigerator and pulling out several slices of cheese, which I then ate. I remember vividly that I found myself almost hoarding the food, protecting it from any possible loss to someone else, and in general consuming the food with the gusto of a starving man, who was being fed his favorite dish. While such enthusiasm and intensity in eating the food may be a testimony to Solzhenitsyn and his ability to relate an intense and consuming story, the more relevant factor might be that my state of mind at the time of consuming the food might have had a major role in my thinking of that particular piece of cheese as being the best cheese that I’ve ever tasted! Could it be that it is not entirely (or even particularly relevant) with regard to either the type (beef, vegetables, fish, etceteras) or source (factory farms, range free, etceteras) of one’s nourishment that is significant in one’s growth, maintenance, and spirituality... But rather on the state of mind with which one eats the food? Assuming that one is not contributing to the horrors of factory food farms -- where animals are grossly mistreated and abused -- the question then becomes one of how you ingest your food. Some tribes of American Indians are known to thank their prey immediately after the kill for the intended nourishment that prey would provide the Indian and his family. Similarly, many ancient and modern individuals and groups make a special point of giving due reverence to the food they are about to consume, and in effect blessing it before eating it. Bear in mind that this is not necessarily the same as saying grace, where the motivation for the latter is often limited to thanking a divine being for providing access to the food and not necessarily for transforming the food into the highest form of nourishment. Instead, the blessing of one’s food in this view is intended primarily to place the individual in a state of mind whereby he or she is properly attuned with the benefits the food is capable of providing. Think of it as a ritualized harmonizing of the mind of the recipient with the specific attributes of the food, which will benefit the consumer in the highest and wisest sense. At the same time, perhaps, the potential detrimental effects of the food -- including the chemicals, vibrations from traumatic death and other deleterious possibilities -- can be reduced or eliminated by such a food blessing. The best part of this concept is that the consumer does not necessarily have to be fully appraised of “where this food has been”, and can, instead, take full responsibility for blessing the food themselves. The consumers can thus ensure that they will achieve the maximum benefit from the food. It might even make the food taste a whole lot better -- even to the extent that one may quickly become a “gourmet eater” without having to rely on gourmet cooks or, better yet, providers of gourmet products. Among other benefits, it could be enormously cheaper, and immensely more convenient. The approach one might take toward the mundane practice of eating, might also be more than appropriate if one were taking medicines, supplements, and most importantly of all, samplings of ORME, Star Fire, the elixir of life, or similar ingestations. Superconducting Nutrition David Hudson, working with chemist, Don Carl Duke, has analyzed several forms of food and supplements to ascertain the amount of such elements as Rhodium and Iridium contained in each. A very brief overview of these results include:
100 mg (milligrams) per day of either Rhodium (Rh) or Iridium (Ir) would constitute a significant dosage, and 500 mg/day of each would constitute a megadosage. Duke has noted that the amount of the two elements in carrot juice is strongly dependent upon where the carrots were grown -- in some cases the carrot juice contained zero amounts of both elements. The larger concentrations may depend on how recently the soil was embellished with volcanic ash (volcanoes appearing to be a basic source of these precious elements -- mother earth being the prime producer). Duke also notes that the inside of the Aloe Vera plant, where there is no taste, is the best. Meanwhile, Essiac is a combination of four herbs (sheep sorel, burdock root, slippery elm, and rhubarb), and that Calcium tends to precipitate Iridium out of the body -- making one wonder about the advisability of consuming large quantities of such calcium-rich products as milk, cheese, and other dairy products. (Just what you needed, right? Another reason not to drink Cow’s Milk!) Ultraviolet light (direct sunlight) and carbonated drinks may also be something to avoid! The question that remains is whether or not a “heavy-metal diet” would be beneficial. Actually, there is every reason to believe that heavy metals are decidedly not good for humans. But in their Monoatomic Elements form, there does in fact seem to be evidence supporting not only the value of a wide variety of these elements in a diet, but even as an essential ingredient. Some of the information on this subject comes from other sources, particularly from information on colloidal minerals. Colloidal Minerals The great advantages of colloidal minerals was first seen in animals. Dr. J. D. Wallach, DVM, (a veterinarian pathologist) has spent years of research on the effects of minerals and mineral deficiencies in animals, and has concluded that mineral deficiencies were the cause of death in most animals. Farmers, have learned as well that they can prevent 98% of birth defects by having the female on adequate nutrition 2 to 3 months before pregnancy and continuing that nutrition through the pregnancy. There is even evidence that minerals of the rare earth variety may extend the life span of laboratory animals. It is noteworthy that the loss of a farm animal is an economic loss, and consequently, farmers and ranchers have demanded results in their quest to have healthy and long-lived animals. Humans, on the other hand, have been treated by Medical Organizations as more valuable if as patients they continually require medical assistance and treatment. The truth of the matter is that it is in the economic and vested self-interest of the doctors and hospitals to keep their patients unhealthy and requiring additional medical services. Curing a patient would actually constitute a conflict of interest on the part of either. But perhaps, not all is lost: Medical doctors have a significantly shorter expected life span than their average patient! Perhaps veterinarians know something that medical doctors don't. There is evidence, for example, that colloidal minerals slow down the aging process in humans (as well as animals). According to Dr. Young, for example, there are a number of cultures that are long lived. One such group, the Abijonies of Russia, live in high, arid regions with no more than two inches of rainfall a year. They get their water from melting glaciers. This water is named "glacier milk" by the inhabitants due to its opaque whiteness -- a color due to the water's extremely high mineral content. This culture not only drinks this water but has used it for thousands of years in irrigating their fields. The plants then convert the metallic minerals in this water into colloidal minerals, such that these people take in an abundance of colloidal minerals throughout their lives. It is, in fact, common for these people to reach an age of over a hundred years, and with no health problems. Gold, long used for medicinal purposes, has an even greater potentially beneficial effect. In its colloidal form, for example, it has been used to treat arthritis, skin ulcers, burns, dipsomania, and various types of punctures. It allegedly improves blood circulation, digestion, weakens the desire for alcohol (leading to a lessening or craving for it), and can promote renewed vitality and longevity. There is also the possibility it can be beneficial for rejuvenating glands, nerves, sluggish organs (including the brain and heart), and can even be used to treat unstable mental and emotional states, ranging from depression, melancholy, fear, anguish, frustration, sorrow, all the way to suicidal tendencies. Gold would also likely have a very positive effect on one’s financial health. Such health restorative properties of colloidal gold were believed as a matter of course during the Middle Ages. The anecdotal history of that time suggested Alexandria, Egypt as the original founding place for the use of gold in medicine, where it was developed by a group of adepts known as Alchemists. The Elixir of Life made from liquid gold by the alchemists purportedly had the ability to restore youth and perfect health. Paracelsus, perhaps the most famous alchemist, founded a school of medicines and used gold to cure the sick. Later, Alchemy spread to Arabia, the Middle East, India, China, and eventually Europe. Even today in China, remnants of the belief in the restorative properties of gold remain intact in rural villages, where peasants cook their rice with a gold coin in order to help get gold back into their bodies. There is the distinct possibility that colloidal minerals, and more significantly, mono-atomic elements of key minerals such as Rhodium, Iridium, Silver and Gold, may have extremely beneficial effects for the health, longevity, and general welfare of humans. The primary obstacle would appear to be the lack of adequate and acceptable laboratory research necessary to justify the use of these minerals on a large scale, and at the same time, to react to the counter-productive reactions of the established medical industry and the governmental bureaucracies and/or co-conspirators. In the interim, one might take note of one of Dr. Young's admonitions: "Sugar in all forms will interfere significantly with mineral absorption and may need to be eliminated." One can only wonder at the inherent possibilities of a much improved diet, which provides critical minerals in the proper form, and which at the same time, allows for the absorption of the minerals. What would happen, for example, if an individual were to go on a fast, drinking only water, and then begin taking dosages of monoatomic Gold, Silver, Rhodium, and/or Iridium? The possibilities are... intriguing. Health and Responsibility Scapegoatology Woundology Or forward to: Healthy State Drug Pushers Iatrogenic Drug Enforcers Medical Organizations Inexpensive Remedies Mental Health
|
|
The Library of ialexandriah
2003© Copyright Dan Sewell Ward, All Rights Reserved
|
