I definitely can tell when love and care is put into a dish. It increases positive vibes.
4 Likes
There’s also a very warm and comfortable feeling that occurs afterward. At least, with me.
5 Likes
100%
5Char!
1 Like
Yeah absolutely.
I recently ate stake tartaar at a French restaurant and felt extatic.
For those that dont know: TikTok - Make Your Day
1 Like
Our dominant emotions shape our experiences—positive thoughts lead to positive feelings, which in turn attract uplifting situations, and even influence what we’re drawn to, like comforting or joyful foods.
1 Like
This is a well established / well known thing especially in communities that perform spiritual exercises. It is acknowledged and used as part of a more complete “spiritual hygiene” routine. Actually it’s part of the rationale behind vegetarianism in those who are attempting to get closer to God and the spiritual realms, practicing ahimsa aside.
Specifically you’ll find these types of ideas even in traditions which reject the study of such realms such as Roman Catholicism, where exorcists have identified through the questioning of the negatively polarised entities that what allows them to gain a foothold in people is anything that makes the victim similar to the spiritual nature of the attacker or plants such a seed. Although they usually focus on sin and various types of trauma, food is another such vector, which is why even when Paul was trying to say Christianity was for everyone including the Gentiles, there were still laws to follow about not eating food that had been sacrificed to idols. It was always about spiritual hygiene so that nothing undesirable to the group or the individual would negatively affect ones attempts at cultivation.
Food is one vector, but it’s only the most direct. Others have spoken on the Fire vs Saint 4 thread about how the subliminals they are running will sometimes bleed over into the lives of those they are close to, such that lovers, partners, housemates etc will manifest aspects of the script after being around them for a time.
Because these sorts of “non physical” influences are a topic usually not spoken about, since most people are focused on more “tangible” things, it’s easy to forget this is something that is happening literally every day, so unless you make a conscious choice to exploit these subtle things in a way that’s going to benefit your evolution, it’s just going to remain an interesting curiosity or something cool to talk about at parties.
4 Likes
It definitley does. Thoigh, part of my spiritual/magical studies is to learn to takw control of it. If by conciously interacting with the food ita possible only to take in the physical nutrients and not the “bad energies”. Or if it is possible to cleanse meat to get proteins but not the bad energy of farming etc.
Some very deep, energy sensitive traditions go so far to not eat food prepared by menstruating woman, as this is a process of cleansing in them. Not only physical cleansing but emotional. This is normaly only done in special rituals though. Though traditionally it could also be come from a time when menstruating woman were still honored and it comes from a time where those woman were given rest and peace.
Ir definitley changes something when takong a moment of pause with your plate of food and be grateful for it amd value it.
1 Like
Food cooked by my grand mother has always tasted best, because she does so with unconditional love and it adds a completely new taste to it.
1 Like
As you can see, people basically divide into two camps, the same way philosophy basically divides into idealism vs materialism. Do you believe that consciousness is a byproduct of matter, or that matter is an epiphenomenon/byproduct of consciousness? Do you live in uncaring atomic universe, or do you live inside of a type of shared vision that is holographic and interactive in nature?
3 Likes
I used to believe in this, but then I realized that every instance of it involves consciously knowing something about the person and their internal state. If it were truly an external influence, it would occur regardless of whether you knew about them. Now I’m certain that it’s a mix of projection, confirmation bias, and self-suggestion, where once you know the person’s emotional state, your mind starts interpreting sensations, mood, and even digestion through that lens. So it’s not that their energy literally transfers into the food, but that your perception shapes how you experience it, and how you feel afterward. Surprisingly, this explanation is even more mystifying to me than what I previously thought.
TLDR: psychological, not “energetic”.
3 Likes
Noticed that.
How fried eggs can be so bad when cooked in devastated state?!
A numerous times I see that energy transference is real.
1 Like
It makes sense from a surface psychological angle, but in reality the influence is already there because everything has an impact on everything else, even when we don’t notice it, so being conscious of some layers of circumstances impact on the food only helps tune into it more clearly.
your perception shapes how you experience it, and how you feel afterward
This is definitely true, but it’s only the last layer impact that comes in addition to the rest of the energetic signature the food has received beforehand.
So your beliefs and mindset when eating are only one piece of the whole picture affecting the food.
When the sensitivity to your own energetic field and physical body increases you become aware of this fact.
When you’re not too sensitive, you might only notice the impact of the food you eat when there’s a wide gap of the energetic frequency level either positive or negative compared to your own baseline.
3 Likes
It’s good to see only 2 dissenting voices among all the ayes. Shows how many people have a coherent first hand experience of this phenomenon.
3 Likes
It’s not though, lol. It’s solely dependant on you having conscious information.
If a chef in the kitchen who you know nothing about cooks your favorite dish and they’re in a really bad mood, it will still taste amazing to you unless they somehow ruined it (overcooked, etc). This “phenomenon” can actually be easily tested by blind taste testing.
In the example of grandma’s cooking being made with love, everything is dependant upon you having the conscious information that your food was cooked by grandma. The “made with love” feeling doesn’t come from the food itself, but from knowing who made it and what that means to you. Every single instance of this “phenomenon” requires that you have some kind of conscious information beforehand - that is the dead giveaway.
2 Likes
I´m leaning towards both being interconnected, but also that there are levels to where you can place yourself in interconnectedness.
Basically that in general there is some form of transferrence, but once you´ve reached a certain level of self empowerment/manifestation power, these things aren´t necessarily applying to you (as much) anymore. Basically the empowered mirror of the “I don´t feel a difference”, realizing there is one in general, but by that being able to go beyond that.
1 Like
I understand your perspective very well, it’s a classic scientific perspective based on measurable materialistic facts, reality gets much bigger once you expand your consciousness, you’ll have to discover it for yourself.
4 Likes
Bro, you are super smart, but stuck in “materialist bypassing” mode, thinking you can explain everything with mainstream materialist science and psychology.
Ignoring the many titles that Sub Club have done with regards to working with etheric energy, working with auras etc.
Just because you cannot sense energy and thought forms and you don’t know how to work with them, does not mean that they are not real.
I guess you also still haven’t looked into Astral Projection X in order to make some of your own experiences?
Psychologist also like to sound smart using placeholder terms like “suggestions” and “placebo” – which are just placeholder terms for phenomena that they cannot explain themselves because they don’t understand consciousness in the slightest.
Same goes for the term “energy” when scientists talk about what they observe. Just another placeholder term for something they cannot properly define.
In this particular example (abour charging food) you are missing the simple fact of the existence of the collective subconsciousness.
Wth that, it does not matter what you know or what others know or don’t know, bebcause the collective subconsciousness already knows!
Which is also the main reason why ALL blind and double blind studies in mainstream psychology are completely useless.
Food, being mostly organic matter, can be very well charged up with Chi.
The quality of the Chi will decide how it will influence the taste.
Therefore, low vibe people touching your food will have an effect on the taste.
You can also sense whether something is energetically rather high vibe or low vibe, so it is not just “the taste inside your head”, you just need to become more energy sensitive. So much sensitive, that you stop thinking “it is all just psychological in your head”.
2 Likes
So you’re saying that the “collective subconsciousness” already knows about each person’s state, therefore having the conscious information doesn’t matter. Okay, so follow me here.
Let’s say that you applied for your dream job, and went to the job interview. The job interview was tough. You go home and you’re worried about whether or not you got the job. You start overthinking, overanalyzing, and maybe even feeling anxious. This is what you’re experiencing on your side. Now let’s jump to the employers perspective. Right after you left the job interview, the employer checks in with his staff, asking them what they thought about you. Everyone has good things to say about you, and the employer firmly decides right then and there that you’re the one. He intends to call you up later during the week to inform you that you’re hired. At this point, you were still in transit/traffic on your way home. Throughout the week you are full of anxiety, fear, doubt, and pessimistic energy “what if I didn’t get the job, what am I going to do?”. You start looking for other jobs to apply to. At the end of the week, the employer calls you and says you’re hired. You immediately feel a surge of positive energy, relief, and excitement. You internally reacted to consciously hearing and knowing the good news (information). Prior to that, you felt like a completely hopeless wreck. My question for you, is if everyone is connected, and this “collective subconsciousness” knows everything universally and automatically - then why didn’t you instantly just know and feel that you got the job when the employer made his decision. Why did you continue to look for other jobs when there was no point? Why did it take for you to actually hear the good news, to have that positive reaction? Why not right as the employer made his decision to hire you? Are you energetically insensitive?
Useful things to look into to make more sense of this matter:
-
Plants have been observed to grow differently based on what type of music they are exposed to. Soundwaves are not just soundwaves, after all. Vedic Chants, Classical Music and the like seem to have produced much better growth than disharmonious music or even Rock Music(I love rock music, but it is what it is I guess).
-
There is the famous Masaru Emoto, that Japanese guy who did experiments on how water seems to be influenced by human emotions. He also observed differences in rice decay based on what intent was projected on them. However, the scientific community seems to have dismissed him (as in, they cannot replicate his experiments in a statistically significant way).
Interestingly though, I have often come across observations in various cultures that water acts as an amplifier/container, especially for emotions. For example, the archeologist Thomas Charles Lethbridge discussed this many times in his books. The most noteworthy examples are negative strong emotions(such as the places where people commited suicide) leaving an “imprint” for a long time after the passing of the person, which were noticed by people who didn’t know about the events of the place. They would step into a specific spot, and suddenly feel deeply depressed or suicidal, and were shocked to find that just stepping away a few steps would change their emotions again. The key was that there was usually a river, underground river or waterfall nearby. Of course, these are anecdotes, but I doubt there will ever be mass-scale studies on this due to a lack of interest from science. The question is also if these things can be tested on a mass-scale, since scientific double/triple blind experiments assume that humans are largely the same(or that the scientist assumes his independent existence from what he observes), when they clearly are not, at least when it comes to the perception of subtler phenomena. -
In Southern India, I’ve personally met local healers that have explained to me that the industrial production of medications cannot replicate home-made drugs that were made with careful thought and the right emotions. In fact, they go as far as saying that the alchemist himself is an ingredient in any alchemical operation, meaning that if you were, for example, to materially replicate an Alchemist experiment, but your consciousness wasn’t pure or in the right mindstate, it will not work as described. This in itself could also be one of the reasons why many techniques from a long time ago no longer seem to produce the described outcomes, the vessels have changed since most modern people unconsciously operate on the same materialist framework now, even in India.
-
It is a common belief in multiple cultures that engaging in spiritual practices such as chanting specific mantras a long period of time while wearing amulets or bracelets made from specific materials such as metals somehow affects these items, and thus, putting these items on has been individually observed to induce drastic changes. Same, but to a much lesser extent, with clothes. Same as with the plant experiments above- soundwaves seem to affect matter in ways that can sometimes be felt but not measured in a meaningful way yet. But interestingly, mantra practice in India often quickly progresses from spoken words to thought syllables, so there are no sound waves in that instance, but thought forms. And that leads to the same thing this thread is discussing, can thought forms in the form of emotions affect the quality of food?
Now, Luther seems to argue that these are essentially reducible to mere anecdotes and/or the placebo effect- and he is mostly right about that. However, as @JCDenton has already pointed out above, the placebo and nocebo effects are themselves hard to explain, and I find it interesting that psychology so casually uses them, when some instances of placebo are really hard to explain(like placebo drugs curing cancer in some instances I’ve read). If mind was something separate from matter, how can it self-destruct or heal seemingly physical matter? Psychology itself is founded on a a bunch of unproven assumptions(brain creates consciousness, consciousness is an epiphenomenon of matter) and has been used to deal with observations that make materialist people uncomfortable- and the way out for them is physicalist reductionism. My doctor will always assign things he doesn’t understand in my body to “psychosomatic” symptoms, and with that, he simply dresses up ignorance in fancy sounding words. They still happen. I can report them. But they don’t seem measurable and what cannot be measured does not exist, according to materialist science. I think @emperor_obewan made a good point somewhere on these forums that traditional forms of meditation were often designed to make the meditator aware of his unmeasurable consciousness that is behind the manifold forms it takes in thoughts, emotions and so on. But even here, the materialism seeps through in that people usually chase “sensations”, “phenomena” and things that can be measured. They are implicitly seen as the only real thing.
- A classic argument by materialists is that people like Emoto were blinded by confirmation bias. The argument of the scientific community is that double/triple blind trials eliminate this issue- but they still choose the setup of the experiment and what cases/papers to look at and what phenomena to look at or to dismiss, which is also based on confirmation bias(set of assumptions driving your interpretation). Going further, it has been argued before that the strength of conviction influences an experiment in these spheres- for example, someone could be a legitimate psychic, but the presence of the 100% sceptical James Randi would make the psychic fail, even if they didn’t have the intent to scam(I don’t know if this happened, this is just an example). Essentially, this boils down to the idea that in order for magic to work, everyone in the room also has to share the belief in its efficacy. This is actually explored seriously in Medical Anthropology, especially in India. A sceptical mind can be “overridden”, but only by someone who is absolutely sure of themselves/has a “stronger” conviction.
Something in this direction needs to be explored to find out why many things that people experience on a daily basis don’t replicate that well in statistical scientific trials.
My guess, there are unexplained “confounders”- variables researchers are not accounting for, because they either are subtle and outside of the knowledge framework people use right now(philosophical materialism). If this is the case, there will be no change anytime soon, as the framework itself guarantees that most scientists concerned about their “scientific standing” will never want to even touch these topics, and those that do, influence the outcome of their studies with their own predictable assumptions about reality. And the few studies I’ve found that were actually confronted with troubling results that go against the assumptions of neuroscience(such as the paper that dealt with the observation that people that experienced the highest intensity in terms of subjective experience, as in near death experiences or strong hallucinogens like Ayahuasca, are measured to have next to no brain activity, which doesn’t make sense in neuroscience, as the opposite is assumed), usually end the paper with “more studies need to be done” and ignore the implications of their experimental outcomes.
In any case though, Luther’s statements seem far too certain given that he cannot possibly know all instances of such phenomena, and there are no large scale studies to my knowledge that would conclusively prove any of the following statements:
What is certain though is that we are sitting on many centuries of anecdotes and people continue to experience such things. We cannot dismiss these things as hogwash based on a very recent perspective introduced by atomists/materialists. So I would suggest just sticking with what works for you- if you are sensitive to these things- work with them!
3 Likes
@JCDenton Remember it’s pointless to explain colors to a blind person, he will only understand colors the day he can see for himself, until then he might not even believe colors exists and he will only be confused about the concept since he doesn’t have a foundation for it in his paradigm of perception.
3 Likes