 |
|
 |
Why Register? |
 |
|
|
|
 |
Access to the latest raw food articles, recipes,
and interviews! |
|
Full access to post your own photos and start
your journal! |
|
Test your raw knowledge at our quiz section! |
|
Establish contacts with other raw foodists,
vegetarians and vegans! |
|
Click here to register! |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Quick Pointers |
|
|
|
|
 |
Raw Newsletter! |
|
|
|
|
 |
Latest Threads |
|
|
|
|
 |
Latest Review |
|
|
|
|
 |
Featured Article |
|
|
|
|
 |
Site Sponsors |
|
|
|
|
 |
Latest Events |
|
|
|
|
|
Murfreesboro TN Raw Food Meetup Group
Murfreesboro Vegan/Raw Food Meetup-
We meet the 4th Saturday of each month from 12-2 for Potluck, discussions and guest speakers. Raw food expert and author Tonya Zavasta will be visiting us on Oct...more
in Raw Food Potlucks
In progress!
1 day until
What to do with that pumpkin
Pumpkin-What to do with the left over Jack-O'-Lantern
The author of Pumpkins Do Grow on Trees will teach you some wonderful things to do with pumpkin.
7:00 PM ( $10 suggested gift donation)
Call an...more
in Raw Food Lectures
10 days until
Healthy Holiday Fun
Healthy Holiday Fun
Raw Food Class
10:00 AM
846 Expressway Ln, Spanish Fork, UT...more
in Raw Food Lectures
|
|
Add Your Event | |
|
|
|
|
 |
Latest Recipes |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
05-06-2006
|
#21
|
|
Administrator
|
Join Date: Jan 2006
|
|
Location: Tampa, FL
|
| Posts:
231
|
| Karma +/- Power:
10 |
Karma:
(10) |
|
Interview with a Breatharian
1. What is a breatharian?
It is a person who does not need to ingest any
kind of food, be it in either solid or liquid state
for physical sustenance since the body has re-learnt
to derive its sustenance from its natural
surroundings. More on that in the answers that
follow...
[b]2. How ol
Last edited by RawGuru : 05-07-2006 at 02:13 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
My response to Mike Part 2
Now to be sporting and perhaps take a chance of sending you running, what exactly did you mean by ??what you fear most ??? That seems like a loaded phrase. I know it was based on a misunderstanding of what I said, but still points to the fact that you think I fear something regarding breatharianism. If you are saying that I fear those people that have and do cause harm through manipulating weak minds ?? well ?? then ?? I ??d have to agree with you there again. That is what I fear most. I fear unchecked belief and all the harm it causes. I fear that more than anything else. I do fear the collective when it gets some belief system going that causes pain, suffering and death to groups of people.
The way I first interpret what you think I am afraid of however, is that you beilieve that I fear a world of people running around living on nothing but air or trying to evolve to that point in ways that will hurt no one! But if you think that you are wrong. The very reason I get upset with people telling other people to slowly go off food until either they are breatharians or they die is just because I do believe that breatharianism is a possibility and would be utopian. I ??m in love with the idea. Why do you think that I have been following it so many years (I ??ve been searching for at least 25 years for someone who truly has done it!). Like I said before, I would jump on the opportunity to meet a REAL breatharian. Similiarly, I believe that we live in a fundamentally spiritual, thought created universe. Those are beliefs that I have that have been verified in my life over and over again. When something that is so close to my heart is used so badly and turned to hurt others it gets me upset and makes me want to jump up and defend it. I believe that breathariansm is a possibility. People that go around telling other people to stop eating no matter how badly they feel denegrades the whole idea. The best way to make sure that the idea gets positive attention is to make sure that it is treated logically. Not everyone that believes it is a possibility is crazy or illogical or believes anything any one says or thinks that people should just stop eating at any cost. I have had a strong intuition that it is possible since I was a child. So, what I DON ??T want is more people dying or suffering needlessly and what I DO want is for someone eventually to show up and sit in a room for three months so that I can go meet them. I have no fear at all of breatharianism as our next evolutionary step. The idea appeals to me - to both my Spirit and my Ego. If more and more people hold it as a possibility in their minds, all the better. That ??s why it ??s so important to me to write so much on this subject here. I want to prevent anything more happening to denegrate the idea. I would like to prevent anyone else from getting hurt if they read this. This interview and these messages have been sitting here a long time. They will probably be here longer and might come up if someone searches the word ??breatharian ??. If some na ve person was planning on starting to starve themselves because some lady on the internet said anyone can be a breatharian and I talked them out of it here, well then I would consider that a success for the idea in general as well as for that individual and worth my effort.
Mike, one more time, do not take anything I say personally and I have taken nothing that you say personally. We don ??t know one another. I am just writing my opinions on a subject that I feel strongly about trying to do my little part. If I have been unclear or my style incomprehensible or what I have to say is not to your liking, skip over me and talk to other raw foodists here on any subject you like. Most people here are much less intense and are more nice, sweet and cordial than I am. This site is such a resource to anyone interested in raw foods, that it would be shame if a conversation on the unrelated topic of breatharianism turned you away from the support of such a generally wonderful group of people.
Greenbunny
|
|
|
|
|
|
First off, thank you for clearing everything up. I'm glad nothing got ugly and we can all get along.
To answer some of your questions... yes, I believe the interview, but no, I don't plan on trying this any time soon. I'm still new to raw, and I'd like to explore that for a while longer and see where it takes me. I feel that I'd need to be in a much more advanced mental/spiritual state before I'd ever even consider phasing out food. That is one of the reasons I felt so many failed, they thought it was a good idea but weren't mentally prepared.
I understand your views on the ego and your own ego, and I must say that I do not subscibe to any religious belief. Rather, I try to educate myself about as many religions as possible and take from each one a few messages that I feel to be true. That being said, I've found that the loss of the ego as prescribed by some eastern religions is an excellent way to live. I don't feel that I, or my life, is of any importance. I wish to make others happy instead of myself. I feel that the ego is contrary to these truths that I hold.
And about the fear thing.. you got it right in the first paragraph, we agree. I was assuming that you don't want innocent people to starve themselves, and that that was what you feared most.. innocence decieved by manipulation.
I'm sorry if I missed any of your questions, but it was a lot to read and comprehend. I feel that we have reached an understanding and that there has been no love lost. I hope to have many more sporting debates with you in the future. I agree that this community is awesome to have, and can't wait to meet some more members. Until then, I will keep eating (raw) food and readying my mind for future starvation. haha
-Mike
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know that I think fast, and type faster than I think, so those messages were long weren't they? I wanted to make sure that I was understood and sometimes more words helps. I'm glad it did.
More sport if you want to play.....
Interesting that you should say that your life is of no importance and that you wish to make others happy instead of yourself and that you are male. That is an attitude more usually held by women than by men. The selfless, self denying caretaker role. Whenever a woman has said such a thing to me my response is usually, why are you less important than anyone else? And, in order to make others happy one has to be happy oneself - or at least it's much easier that way. Happiness is usually shared with others from a place of happiness. It's harder to make others happy if you are not.
I studied Eastern Philosophy in college and since and the Mahayana idea that you are supposed to forgo your own enlightenment and only help others made no sense to me... here I go with that pesky logic again. Wouldn't someone who had gained enliightenment themselves be infinitely more capable of helping others to gain it?
Let me see if I interpreted a sentence of yours correctly. You said that you find the loss of ego as prescribed by some eastern religions is an excellent way to live. Does that mean that you think that not thinking of yourself as important and only wanting to make others happy to you means loss of ego? That wouldn't be what is meant in terms of Eastern Philosophy or psychology (I've also studied psychology - I like to study) so that is a bit confusing to me. Do you feel that you have been able to experience living without ego? If you have been able to dissolve your personal ego into Superconsciousness then you would be at the most advanced mental/spiritual state according to some forms of Eastern religions. If you have not had the experience of living without ego, how do you know it is an excellent way to live? I personally have not met a fully enlightened person or anyone without an individual ego that I have been able to discern (no Mahayana Buddhist like the Dalai Lama would ever claim to be enlightened for the reasons stated above) and so I do not know that the ego really must be denied, or that you must put yourself lower than everyone else on the planet in order to get there. I actually hardily doubt it. In Eastern Philosophy it is said that one must first have a very strong ego before one is capable of letting it go.
It sounds like not only do you think you need to wean yourself off food, but also your ego???
If my ego needs to go to reach the highest heights, well then I'll say goodbye when I get there. In the mean time I'm going to be happy myself AND make others happy (if I can - making others happy when they can't or won't make themselves happy is quite a challenge) and enjoy and make use of my mind and my entire self AND other people's minds and their selves. I do not believe that that makes me a lesser being. I believe that it gives me more to share and more tools to help.
I also love that I can give other people in my life the gift of making me happy. I'm so happy already that it's easy for people to make me even happier. That way they get those good feelings. I think happy all around is better choice. At least it has been for me.
Greenbunny
|
|
|
|
|
Quote:
|
I know that I think fast, and type faster than I think, so those messages were long weren't they?
|
Ya think? 
Just kidding with you GB. I can tell you put a lot of time and effort and thoughts into your posts. 
As for the religious discussion, some people who believe that the universe was created by one intelligent supreme being, also believe that the fruits of the earth were put here and provided for human consumption and enjoyment (as well as for all creation)...so to me that refutes any future ideas of breathariatism for all mankind.
Last edited by Double Helix : 12-06-2007 at 04:03 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your assumptions are not needed. Why do you assume I'm not happy? I feel of no importance, and I am not afraid to die. This makes me happy. If that doesn't make sense to you... why can't you just let it be?
You've said it a dozen times, you don't know me. So why make all these assumptions as to what I have and have not done? I'm 21 years old, and feel great knowing that I know nothing. I'm not claiming to have any answers, yet you still feel the need to issue challenges to me. I probably have not studied as much as you have on the subject, but I'm also not concerned with anyone proving anything to me. If you leave yourself open to all the messages the universe is constantly sending you, you will know what is right. I can know and believe without experience or proof. I think you'd be a much happier person if you weren't so concerned with how others live their lives.
-Mike
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike, You wrote that you felt that you were of no importance and that all you wanted to do was make other people happy. This sounded like your own happiness was unimportant to you, that you would not attempt to make yourself happy, only others. I never said that I thought you were, or that you said you were, unhappy.
I was asking you if I understood you correctly and I was expressing how I felt about what you said in my own life and put forth what associations came up from my own studies, thoughts and experience. I appreciated what you said as a philosophical approach to life and thought there could have been an interesting dialogue about it. I am used to having abstract and philosophical discussions. I enjoy them - especially when I’m talking in a friendly way with someone who disagrees with me. It helps me to grow. I have met many people who have changed my life in fabulous ways through discussing with me why they believed or thought differently or how they looked on things from a different angle.
If you don't want people to respond to you, this probably isn't such a great place to write out your thoughts because people do respond on sites like this and ask questions and try to interpret what you are talking about and then comment on it.
I will just chalk up your hostility to youthful insecurity or inexperience since you say you are only 21 ... and/or my lack of communication/writing skills. You say that I would be happier if I wasn’t “so concerned with how others live their lives”. Usually, it makes me very happy to get to know people, care about them and learn from them. I will not stop being interested in or concerned about others because you did not appreciate my attention. You seem to take what I say as personal affronts and challenges, and your reactions have gotten quite intensely negative therefore, I will do what you have asked me to and “let it be” – at least when it comes to you. Now that I have explained to you that I meant no affrontry and no harm I would like to end this and any other conversations between us for now. Maybe we can try again at a later date if it can be done in a kindlier spirit.
Wishing you light, happiness, blessings and all good things,
Greenbunny
|
|
|
|
|
Hey DH,
Thanks for being nice to me. I really needed that. 
You hit the nail on the head with the difference in the Western and Eastern approaches. The Western view is that everything here is at our disposal to use and that we are the pinnacle of creation. The Bible talks at one point about how all the animals are here for us. I read recently someone saying that we owe all industrialization and modern civilization to the Jews because of just this. Actually, he said that we owed our "televisions" to the Jews. I thought that was amusing. Because of this view that we are at the top of the material world and very much supposed to be rulers of it, tremendous advances have been made in agriculture, animal husbandry, science, intellectual persuits, and in two words ?? modern civilization.
Most Eastern Traditions are radically different than this. Perhaps that's why most of the studies on breatharians were done on Indians. Eastern philosphical traditions would argue that we are primarily spiritual beings stuck in these physical forms and the whole idea is to figure out how to liberate our spirits even if we are still in bodies, that all things are connected or one and that part of the way to get free is through compassion. Hinduism (one of the most ancient of religions of the east) has a strong tradition of "Ahisma" doing no harm to any living being. The animals most certainly are not here for us to use them according to eastern religions. Buddhism was actually an offshoot of Hinduism originally and the idea of doing no harm is strong in that religion as well. The Jains take ahisma to an extreme and the best case for a living breatharian is a Jain. The other case is a fakir (a Sufi who performs feats of endurance or apparent magic). The Hindus and Buddhists believe that through yogic practices in the path to enlightenment you naturally will gain siddhis ??supernormal perceptual states. Things like being able manifest things from thin air, move things without touching them, dematerialize yourself and materialize yourself somewhere else, slow down your heartbeat and/or breathing to close to nothing, knowing the future, healing others, etc. including no longer needing to eat are considered siddhis. The thing about siddhis is that they are supposed to be traps along the way to enlightenment. If you get too into your fabulous powers, you can miss the jackpot. They are like pitfalls more than goals. But, they are part of the path and universally accepted as not only possible, but proven to have occurred. It is part of the Eastern mindset to believe that this world is an illusion of the mind, created by and for us. When you wake up, you are no longer held to the laws of the material world as Westerners see them.
So, if you are a Christian or a Jew or a Muslim the idea of breatharianism would be a totally foreign concept boarding on blasphemy. If you are a Hindu, Buddhist or Jain, it would be a perfectly logical possibility based upon all you were taught your whole life and what you have heard and perhaps seen of yogis and fakirs with special powers.
I personally find these different viewpoints all simply wonderful! I love modern civilization and the ideas of the East both. Thank goodness there is so much variety in the world and that we are living in a time when we can be exposed to so many interesting ideas and ways of life.
Greenbunny |
|
|
|
|
|
GB yes I do notice the differece between those philosophies. I see it as more of a "one God" vs. "many gods".
Those believing there is one God & creator look OUTSIDE of themselves for their spirituality.
Those believing in many gods look WITHIN themselves for their spirituality.
To me that is the main difference without having to go into all the different philosophies & religions of the world.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote:
|
The Western view is that everything here is at our disposal to use and that we are the pinnacle of creation.
|
Some take that literally, others take it to mean that we should take care of our resources and not abuse them.
I guess it is like anything - you can give the same 2 brand new cars (toys, etc) to a spoiled child and a caring child and see how long they lasts with each child.
Back to the OP though, IMO it wouldn't seem logical to waste good fruit since they are beholding to the eye, lovely to the palette and whole to the body. It seems apparent to me at least that it's natural to eat the fruit, and deposit the seeds to make more fruit.
It also seems to me that if animals and other creation are using other plants and animals to survive off of, then we should as well. Animals in nature instinctively fast when sick, and some hibernate but still eat at other times.
|
|
|
|
|
|
That was a cool analogy of the spoiled child - and of course still decidedly a Western point of view. The resources are ours to use and it is up to us to either use them wisely or foolishly. You also speak from the material vantagepoint well about how in nature animals live off plants and other animals - the cycle of life. The trees live with us in the material plain making fruit, our perfect food, so that we will distribute their seeds - the entire natural world as a symbiotic relationship. That reminds me more of a Native American way of approaching life.
The cycles of nature would in Eastern philosophy be considered the cycle of dharma ?? with suffering, death and reincarnation intertwined in that cycle and enlightenment as the path out of it.
I would agree with you when you say that the Eastern religions look within themselves for spirituality but I think you might have a misconception that Eastern religions in general believe in many Gods. That is not true. It most certainly is not true in Buddhism. My understanding of that religion is that the concept of ultimate consciousness is not anything you can understand from a limited consciousness so the only thing that Buddha would talk about was the path out of that limited consciousness. As Buddhism travelled across Asia from Burma some of the native religions intermingled with it and made for some interesting fables and stories and religious rites. Much like pagan rituals have made their way into Christianity like Christ ??s birthday at the winter solstice with an evergreen tree to be decorated and celebrated and the spring equinox celebrated with eggs and march hares ?? pagan symbols of renewal and birth. You might have the idea that eastern religions believe in multiple gods from Hinduism, but the thing that I just love about Hinduism is that they take into consideration the abilities of people at many levels, stages and inclinations. In Hinduism there is an ultimate consciousness that is beyond all attributes or qualities or polarities and is beyond most human ??s abilities to relate to, therefore, they also put faces and bodies on symbols of limited qualities for people to worship (that are into that kind of thing) so that they can use love (bhakti yoga) to make progress on the path. Other yogas are very different and use some radically different means to gain the same end including: the intellect (jnana yoga), focused work (karma yoga) and others. There are many forms of yoga designed for different kinds of individuals. Hatha yoga that they teach at gyms in the West was designed just to develop the body enough to be able to withstand the other yogas. The one kind of yoga that would be most abstract is kriya yoga which is the path and practice of perfect God / Truth union. God not as a person or being but way beyond that, something that some can perceive and be one with. It ??s a bit too complext to get into here, but be it enough to say that it is most certainly the direct path to union with the one ultimate God in Hinduism without any side trips through the purely symbolic lesser gods.
It is true that eastern religions do not see the ultimate force that creates and moves all as a man with a white beard sitting on a cloud, a burning bush, or as a man that was born on earth from a virgin mother, but they do have at their center that one force that moves through all things.
When it comes to the Western one God religions there is a reaction against the many god religions from which they sprang. Eastern religions don ??t fight that battle. It ??s all one to them. But you are definitely right. Most eastern religious paths are internally oriented.
I think that the mystical sects of western religions have that focus on gaining God from within that you talk about. Sufism (the mystical form of Islam) certainly does and hence the Fakirs. The Kabbalah (mystical Judaism) and Mystical Christianity I believe also look more inwardly for their connection to the Almighty but I am not very familiar with those. I believe that they combine more of the eastern views into their ideologies so there might be a precedent for the merging of East and West through them. I have been wanting to learn more about them.
Well, that is certainly enough thinking and typing fast for me and more than enough for you to read!!!
Shalom, Blessings, and Namaste!
Greenbunny
Last edited by greenbunny : 12-07-2007 at 07:37 PM.
|
|
|
| Interview Tools |
Search this Interview |
|
| |
