Is it biologically possible to breath other than your lungs?

[SarathW]

Is it biologically possible for human to breath other than your lungs?

In the following video (counter 11.25) it suggest that it is possible to breath in and out from your pores.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnHHgDHVuQ

[Alexander____]

If you aren't a mammal yes but humans maybe 1% of respiration. If you aren't breathing you aren't going to last very long

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutaneous ... on#Mammals

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

It appears that conflation between the ontological meaning of "cessation of breathing" and the phenomenological experience of "cessation of breathing" has led to much confusion and myth-making.

Metta,
Paul.

[Baloon]

Greetings,

It appears that conflation between the ontological meaning of "cessation of breathing" and the phenomenological experience of "cessation of breathing" has led to much confusion and myth-making.

Metta,
Paul.

You mean that the body and the act of physical breathing do not really exist but just perception of them exists ? The chapter on wrong views from SN "Book of the aggregates" starts with this sutta witch says such a view arises because of clinging to conciousness:

I. STREAM-ENTRY
1 (1) Winds
At S›vatthı. “Bhikkhus, when what exists, by clinging to what,
by adhering to what, does such a view as this arise: ‘The winds
do not blow, the rivers do not flow, pregnant women do not give
birth, the moon and sun do not rise and set but stand as steady
as a pillar’?”249
“Venerable sir, our teachings are rooted in the Blessed One….”
“When there is form, bhikkhus, by clinging to form, by adhering
to form, such a view as this arises: ‘The winds do not blow…
but stand as steady as a pillar.’ When there is feeling … perception
… volitional formations … consciousness, by clinging to
consciousness, by adhering to consciousness, such a view as this
arises: ‘The winds do not blow … but stand as steady as a pillar.’

Furthermore, from 'Iddhipada:

"And how does a monk dwell so that what is below is the same as what is above, and what is above is the same as what is below? There is the case where a monk reflects on this very body, from the soles of the feet on up, from the crown of the head on down, surrounded by skin, & full of various kinds of unclean things: 'In this body there are head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, gorge, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, skin-oil, saliva, mucus, fluid in the joints, urine.' This is how a monk dwells so that what is below is the same as what is above, and what is above is the same as what is below.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

You mean that the body and the act of physical breathing do not really exist but just perception of them exists ?

No, the opposite of that.

What I am suggesting is that the perception of breathing can cease, yet meanwhile, the body still breathes.

Metta,
Paul.

[Baloon]

Then sorry for misinterpreting you. I think you are correct.

[SarathW]

The question is whether body can breath without lungs.

[_anicca_]

This is something I have wondered when practicing under the instructions of Ajahn Lee Dhammadaro as he teaches breathing in through the pores of the body and allowing the "breath energy" to course through your veins.

Thanissaro Bhikkhu teaches in this same style.

From my understanding of the practice, it is less about whether it is physically possible but the experience of breathing in through the whole body.

Namely, it is about practicing in a way that it feels like you are breathing in with the whole body and breathing out with the whole body.

Aside from that, it is not possible to inhale and exhale through other faculties.

[_anicca_]

http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2010/ ... ammals-ab/

Here is a short article in regards to if humans can breathe through the skin.

[chownah]

The question is whether body can breath without lungs.

If you mean can the human body be sustained for an extended period of time without breathing with the lungs then the answer is no....unless an artifical lung machine is used and I think that its use would not constitute "biologically possible".
If someone can actually do this then they should demonstrate it for a scientist....a nobel prize may ensue...but it is too late to get the prize this year as they are already decided and are currently being handed out.
chownah

[SarathW]

it is not possible to inhale and exhale through other faculties.

I remember reading that Buddha in one occasion breathe through his ears.

[justindesilva]

Some years ago a Japanese zen priest claimed a similar situation under water but presume found to be a fraud.
With special dhyana hindu meditators claim to breath from ears and pores of the body.
Recent developments in science has found a capsule which can provide oxygen from a source other than the lungs.
But it is still proved that these are special areas in providing oxygen in to our system and no permanent system without lungs are found to provide oxygen to the body.
Oxygen is the life source in living. This fact also exhibits the impermanent nature of life. The fact of uppada titi banga is through oxygen in life. Oxygen generates life and sustains the system while the dissipation of oxygen say in a cell destroys.
The answer to the question whether one could breath
without lungs is No as it is not nature.

[davidbrainerd]

Pores do breath. Pimples are the result of them being too gunked up to breath. But can you inhale with pores to the point of being able to keep yourself alive? Doesn't seem very likely unless you've figured out a secret nobody else knows or have some genetic mutation.

[santa100]

Is it biologically possible for human to breath other than your lungs?

First the question needs to be framed with the exact context and be accurate to the details. For example, if we ask the question: "Is it possible for human to breathe other than using our lungs perpetually, meaning not only during meditation but also throughout our daily activities"? Then of course Not. But if we ask the question: "Is it possible for certain individual not to breathe using their lungs during a very deep state of meditation, then resume normal lung breathing after getting out of meditation"? Then everything is possible. The Epaulette sharks and other fishes are able to do it, so do other animals in hibernation.

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

The Buddha later described his experience as a Bodhisatta when he forcefully withheld his breath.

Non-breathing Meditation