>> I think the Taoists have a lot to offer here, in that some people
 >> may be more adapted to a diet containing meat, while others do best
 >> without it.  It is something you have to determine for yourself.

 >I agree 100%. Each of us has to find his/her correct path. Blindly
 >ollowing the party line of whatever school of thought benefits only
 >those who happen to be constitutionally fitted to that particular
 >party line, IMHO.

Hi Chet and others,

For what it is worth, Ayurveda classifies people into three constitutions:
"vata", "pitta" and "kappa". One may fit completely into one category, or
straddle multiple ones. Ayurveda states further that those with a strong vata
component have weak digestions, also that they need to eat meat to remain
healthy.

Another aside while we are on the subject of Ayurveda: from discussions with my
East Indian Yoga teacher, it appears that vegetarianism in India is a relatively
recent phenomenon. According to my teacher, in ancient Vedic times around the
time Yoga was born, it was common for people to eat meat, particularly venison,
raw. RAW!

These are people who figured out hundreds (thousands?) of years ago that the
energy in the food we eat comes from the sun, that "sattvic" food had more of
this prana. Except mushrooms, which were classified "tamasic" (or food that
dulls the mind.)

Impressive?

Roy