Nickyy

You should only water fast while supervised by a qualified medical professional. Once per week like you are doing is fine, anything more than that then you're playing with fire. Be careful about taking advice straight from people on the internet, you don't know who the hell they are. What if their entire existence was based on indctinating themselves with yourtube nonsense because they aren't actually emotionally whole or spiritually advanced enough to actually go live their lives? Forums are the perfect place to feel superior and offload the ideas they have spent so long studying. Why? Because nobody else would listen to them otherwise. See my post on the frutarian who died dry fasting. It will hopefully open your eyes.

Nonsense. One glass of raw milk per day is not going to give you oseteoperosis. Think about the studies done showing a correlation between oseteoperosis and dairy intake and you will find they are full of confounding variables. Beware of diet propaganda. Conventional pasteurised and homogenized dairy might not be healthy, you're right about that, but there are no studies done on raw milk consumers. Think about that for a while and you will see how this data can be manipulated to get the gullible to follow a strictly vegan diet. Second, if you eat some fruit and vegetables as part of your diet there is no need to worry about acidic foods being neutralized by the minerals in the bones. Humans have been drinking raw ruminants milk for thousands of years. No need to fix something that ain't broke

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/vegan-couple-florida-charged-murder-toddler-s-starvation-death-n1104816 A Florida couple who told police that they fed their children only raw fruits and vegetables was charged on Wednesday in the starvation death of their 18-month-old son, authorities said. Ryan Patrick O'Leary, 30, and Sheila O'Leary, 35, of Cape Coral, were indicted by a grand jury on charges of first-degree murder, aggravated child abuse, aggravated manslaughter, child abuse, and two counts of child neglect, State Attorney Amira Fox said at a press conference Wednesday. The O'Learys called police on Sept. 27 when they noticed that their toddler had gone cold, and despite their attempts to resuscitate the child, he was pronounced dead when paramedics arrived at their home, according to Fort Myers News-Press Cape Coral police said that early on in the investigation it was apparent the boy was a victim of neglect. The 18-month-old only weighed 17 pounds, according to a Cape Coral police report obtained by The Associated Press, which is about the amount a 7-month-old should weigh. The couple told police they were vegan and fed their children only raw fruits and vegetables. "The evidence in this case is horrendous," Fox said, who accused the parents of "torture" at the presser and said the child died due to "starvation and extreme lack of care." The couple's three other children, ages 3, 5, and 11, were also victims of child abuse and extreme neglect, authorities said. The 3- and 5-year-olds are now in state custody, and the 11-year-old is in the care of her biological father, according to NBC Fort Myers affiliate WBBH. In November, the parents were charged with aggravated manslaughter, but the charges were upgraded after the grand jury indictment. They will be arraigned on Monday, Dec. 23, and WBBH reports they could face the death penalty. If anyone claims that the vegan diet is a species specific diet then show them this article, because they are clearly deluded.

This is a strawman. Not even a deliberate one, just an unconscious misrepresentation of what I said born of the fact that you don't listen to what's being said.

It's very difficult to have a discussion with you if you don't even listen to what's being said. There is a difference between playing the victim (victim mentality) and true healthy expression of being victimised by a situation or abuse. You still fail to recognise where I'm coming from.

You're attacking your own characteristics. You have a problem with belief, yet you are posting your beliefs and opinions on this forum every day. This is a double bind and a clear indication that you are repressing the ego rather than transcending and including it.

Yes I can and yes there is. You're contradicting yourself. By your own logic who you are you to call something dysfunctional? By saying something is dysfunctional you're also saying it's unhealthy. If you were intellectually honest you would have not even said such a thing. No you don't, you only think that because you obviously have no experience of what it's like to have helped a person move from victim mentality to a healthy translation of their feelings. You're making assumptions based on you yourself being a victim and wondering why nobody gave you a pass for your behaviour. To empathize with a set of destructive behaviours is called enabling. The other term for it is called "idiot compassion". Idiot compassion makes the ego feel superior because it can keep itself locked into a co-dependent relationship with other unhealthy individuals. Something may indeed feel more healthy than others. But the two examples you gave are both healthy behaviours. Playing the victim is not a healthy behaviour, and if it's interpreted as a healthy behaviour then that person needs assistance in being able to translate their experience more accurately.

Talking about what is healthy and what isn't is not subjective from person to person. Just in the same way heart disease is not subjective. You have no idea what you're talking about and are just parroting things you have heard. If you dont respond to personal attacks, then surely that's a very obvious and overt indication that you really don't believe what you are saying when you say that everything is subjective. If everything is subjective then you wouldnt feel personally attacked.

@Parththakkar12 Even an enlightened person who's permanent experience is non dual awareness will still see the ego in another and try to help them. Your idea of non duality is purley conceptual and distorted. It's just a philosophy for you at this point.

No it's not an assumption that playing the victim is unhealthy. What you're saying right here is unhealthy and self deceptive. Everyone knows on an intuitive and insitinctive level that playing the victim is not healthy. The same way that everyone knows that putting your hand in a hot flame is not sensible. Being stuck in a victim mentality is not an ok life, and this is incredibly irresponsible of you to suggest this. What you are doing is called spiritual bypassing. It's obvious to me that you haven't lived much..In order to actually have a meaningful discussion about these things you need to have experienced suffering in yourself and others. Rather than intellectualizing, it would be better if you got some real life experience. You just disclose that you know very litte about life yet. You really think that trying to help someone who has come into a forum to be helped is an "attack"? Maybe it's time for you to move out of mummy's basement and start interacting with real people?

You're trying to talk on the level of the absolute and confalting that with relative domain. Forget about oneness. Either talk on the level of functional relativity or talk from the absolute. Stop conflating the two because that's very dangerous territory you are treading there.

@Parththakkar12 Im talking on a personal level here. You can have a false self on a personal relative level. Playing the victim is false, but being the victim of an insult or abuse is not false. I already explained this was where I'm coming from I think you might have some unrealistic expectations of a highly developed person being some kind of perfect character who doesn't react to stimulation. The higher the level of consciousness the more you see. It's not like nothing affects you. The lower the consciousness the less you see

Of course it causes a defensive reaction. But that's not my responsibility, that's the responsibility of the person who is playing the victim role. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink. You are confusing healthy boundaries here. You have to be very grounded in what you are responsible for and what others are responsible for. I am not responsible for Molly coddling another person or manipulating them into trusting me. I am responsible for me, and they are responsible for themselves. By coming to a forum and expressing your issues is already accepting responsibility that you want to be helped. I have already put myself in the position of the person playing the victim, this is why I have a crystal ball and can see that conflict with the false self pays off eventually at some point. The point of confronting the victim mentality head on is not to get an instant result ,but to plant a seed that they can fall back on when the time is right for them and they come to a place where they see for themselves that the roles don't work and close others down. It might take years. It might not happen at all, or it might happen more or less instantly. It all depends on the readiness of the person, which is again not in my control. I have no idea where you got this impression. It feels like you are colouring what I'm saying. I have no idea what you're refering to. Nobody is demonizing anything. Maybe you're spritually bypassing here? In the relative domain playing the victim is ineffective. So it needs to be challenged. If we want to comfort ourselves by saying that from the absolute perspective playing the victim is ok, then by all means continue. But that doesn't solve the problem in the person's life. If you were having a heart attack would you tell me not to call the ambulance because the heart attack is perfect the way it is? Some people will demonize a person for playing the victim, but this isn't the same as discerning pathology from health and contracting appropriately. The contraction on the part of the person challenging the victim facade is healthy. It's the same reaction as putting a hand into an open flame. I feel you are demonizing natural reflexes and relative wisdom here. Everyone rejects roles on some level. That's just a fact because everyone does perceive what is healthy and what is not and as a physical human primate we all gravitate to health and away from sickness. Contracting away from a victim role is healthy.

This is transcend and repress. If you try to repress or deny the first 3 chakras they are going to manifest anyway, but in dysfunctional ways. The healthiest way to develop is transcend and include. What's changed in the last 500 years? Nothing really. Only technology and philosophical advancements have been made. We moved from blue to orange and mastered the material universe. But we still need to eat, shit and sleep. That's never going to go away. The next advancements will be more technology and a philosophy that includes more and more of the manifesntation. Woo needs to be put into it's proper context.

Blame happens, it's part of the grieving process. It needs to be accepted as part of the process , but at the same time it can't be encouraged too much because it just causes stagnation. Actually those stuck in victim mentality are blaming both themselves AND the person / people who abused them. There is no blame of the external without also blaming oneself. It might be the case that the person is not aware of this. In victim mentality mode and expressing genuine vulnerability there can be a sense of feeling powerless. But you will be able to tell the difference via the context. You can feel when someone is defending against feeling powerless and actually contacting the feeling directly. One makes you contract and the other opens you up. "What would be your first reaction to someone doing that?" It depends, if the expression of powerlessness is direct contact with that feeling then allowing that to be would be my response. However if it's a defence then my reaction would be to try to disengage the defence (make it conscious). I don't understand what you mean by "if someone's hostility is making you feel threatened". I don't feel threatened by someone playing the victim role. I feel contracted because it's false, and I feel open when they start to being honest with themselves. Yes, demonizing a person for playing the victim role is a sign of a lack of emotional intelligence. We learn the concept of the victim and we then go about trying to assimilate that concept in order to help ourselves when the time comes. We do that by responding to others on the forum. But until we have actually gone through the experience of doing that work ourselves then we will demonize the other for playing the victim, because we don't yet know how it feels to feel our own hurt directly. Once you have direct experience, you can then truly empathise with the other because you are no longer projecting , you have been there and passed through that process. One is trying to learn how to ride the bike and the other has learned how to ride the bike and is now tutoring others. No, it's not invalidating. It may feel invalidating to the person playing the victim role, because the person has identified with that role. If you're identified with a role and everyone rejects the role, you're going to feel extraordinary pressure and resentment because you have mistaken the defence for your true self expression. Once the defence has dropped those same people calling out the game will more than likely open up and become validating . The one that needs validation is not the one who had constructed the defence and become identified with it.