Question - I read this sentence: "We are what we eat". This struck me a lot because io up until that moment I was giving a relative importance to food. But then from that moment on I began to get interested in food such as macrobiotics: is this sentence really valid?
Ton the other hand it is said that the greater the health of the physical body, the more there is the possibility of generating a life that has good health. The more the parent is well, the more the child has a good chance of having a physical body in good condition.
That nutrition is important for the individual is beyond any doubt; it is clear that a balanced diet, a diet that takes into account the physiology, the needs of the individual, can only help the body react to diseases, help the body to hold back and to emit energy at the right times and on saying.
But from there to stating the nonsense that you are what you eat the step is really great.
Suffice it to say that, then, this would mean that all those millions of beings who are dying of hunger in the various countries of the world, are all undeveloped beings due to the fact that they have not only a bad diet but even no diet. Weather
D - On that type of diet that uses natural foods, mainly of the vegetable type, with little consumption of meat, etc.
In reality, the thing is much more complex than you can imagine. If, in theory, a healthy diet is always to be recommended and preferred, there is also the fact that your body has become accustomed to certain substances, has prepared particular defenses, particular immunities, so that substances that could be considered harmful, as not natural, in the end they ended up becoming almost harmless for the physiological system of the individual.
In this case it can even happen the absurdity that the body, in a diet devoid of these substances and no longer receiving the quantity it was accustomed to, on which it had built its balance, could have reactions.
However, of course, it is always better to try to avoid all foods that contain unnatural substances in order to make the body freer in its energies, in its various fluids, without being burdened by these substances.
Another point you touched on in your question, the fact that people who feed themselves in a certain way can help, indeed, they create a better body for the child to be born.
This too is only a theory; in fact, it is certainly the task and responsibility of the parents to create the best conditions, not only psychic but also environmental, physiological, in which the new creature comes into the world.
However, remember that, however and always, the creature comes into the world with the body necessary for his evolution, because if it is true, as I said before, that it is absolutely impossible to affirm that the individual is what he eats, it is equally true that it can be affirmed that the individual is as his feel, as feeling is what forms the akasic body, which interpenetrates, which permeates the akasic body, right?
And then the feeling is the index, what feels the pulse of those who are the needs of the individuality that is incarnated and is therefore the one who contributes to send the impulses towards the physical plane so that the individuality has to clothe itself with the body. suited to its evolutionary needs. Here, then, that it is precisely from feeling that the physical body of the individual is somehow formed. Weather
Q – I wanted to ask a question that can be linked to what I asked in the last meeting, regarding nutrition. Can practicing fasting (since it apparently can free the blood from toxins) be a valid therapy to purify the body? Maybe even practicing it once a month?
But look, the speech that I will make seems funny because it seems that we, at times, have a lounge ... but I was talking about fasting lately with my friend (entity) Andrea and with the friend (entity) Thomas and, according to them, fasting is really a stupid thing, stupid because, first of all, the physical body is subjected to a considerable effort and, like all deliberately forced things, in reality, it causes more harm than good.
And, continuing, they said: "Instead of getting to do one day a week of fasting to cleanse the body and so on, because, on the other hand, they don't do that much of the right nutrition so that the body doesn't need the effort of the day. fast?" Georgei
Q - So it is a question of regulating the quantity of food?
Yes, so if you regulate your diet, your way of life day by day, then you will not need to do fasting days because your physical body will be fine! If, on the other hand, you are happy to suffer for a whole day, then this is another matter.
Provided that this fast is not done to show how strong one is, how good one is or, perhaps, how one is ascetic.
Once, when I was alive, I had found a really funny booklet, to the point that I could never tell if it was a joke or if it was serious.
It was something that sounded more or less like this: "How to get to the top of evolution by cutting off a phalanx of a finger every day"! I'm not kidding!
Well, it could also be that, in reality, it could be a way to get to conquer something, because, clearly, it takes a considerable determination, right?
Your Guides, and I agree with them, say it is best to do everything not to suffer. Why want to suffer at all costs? Georgei
Readings for the interior: every day, a short spiritual reading of the Ifior Circle and of the Florence 77 Circle, on Whatsapp.
(Read only, cannot comment) To subscribe
Aphorisms of the Ifior Circle, on Wednesday on Facebook
Privacy policy of this site to consult before commenting, or subscribing to feeds.
Very interesting!
It would be more correct to say "we eat, having the possibility of accessing different types of food, according to our level of understanding" warning more or less clearly that a certain type of diet, an excessive quantity, or poor quality can certainly hinder our evolutionary processes, energetically speaking and by energy we mean the subtle energies. On the other hand it could also be said that we have the food we need and through that or even the lack of that we have to go through.
I believe that any food should be eaten in moderation
I believe that any food should be eaten in moderation
I would like to be a vegetarian; for a period of several years I have been, albeit in a non-radical way and therefore periodically indulging in some meat.
Currently I do not have the will enough to support me in this in the face of a physicist who instead appreciates the flesh.
Saying “we are also what we eat” since the physical body, therefore its constitution, interacts with other bodies, favoring or hindering certain processes. In the same way the opposite is true and that is that the evolutionary level of the other bodies influences the physical one. Again unity predominates .... unity that wherever it is.
“Why do you want to suffer at all costs?”, Georgei tells us.
In nutrition, like any other area, I think it is useful to listen to oneself, to listen to the physical and emotional body for example. Food responds to our basic needs, but it is also a source of fulfillment or clogging. By refining my listening to my bodies, I was able to change my eating habits, in part. There is more attention in the search for ingredients, in understanding the environmental impact, in the choice of products. I would say that over time I have learned to waste less. Adhering in a Taliban way to the vegetarian or vegan diet, has never convinced me, even if I feel the heaviness, when the use of meat is excessive. I agree that we are not what we eat, but eating, like any other process, must be observed because it reflects our way of being in life. Only when I understood things about myself, I was able to change some habits, so I don't think there are recipes or models to adhere to, it's a personal journey, a work of observation, useful for deepening self-knowledge.
I think, like Natasha, that the relationship with food evolves with the individual, and talks a lot about us.
I would say that we are a little more "how we eat" than "what we eat".
Very clear, it removes the earth under the feet of many current theories.