I lived in Saudi Arabia for two years and did Ramadan, out of not wanting to offend my Saudi colleagues who were fasting.

As a practictioner of fasting, I don't think that "modern" Ramadan has much to do with fasting anymore - at least, in the way I see fasting working for me. Reason being that at the end of each day of fasting, there is a very large amount of food being consumed, and I mean a lot. Fasting is about calorie restriction for sustained amount of time - modern Ramadan (based on the experience I had in Saudi, which is a very conservative country) is not really about restricting calories, but just shifting the time of the day in which A LOT of calories are ingested.

Egyptian here, can confirm this unfortunately. Most here just go all-in when they break their fast. In fact, I would say that they ingest more calories in Ramadan than in regular days. I advise all I know to eat with moderation, but few listen :(

Personally, when I started to eat moderately when fasting, I started to feel much better. Previously, I would be very tired when breaking the fast... I would be so full that I wouldn't be able to do anything except lie down.

I think that the current trends are due to people nowadays seeing it like a mega celebration, and they see that eating a lot and feeling tired after is just a sign of that celebration. Ramadan is more than just fasting, but I am going off-topic.

By the way, there's a sunnah in Islam to fast Monday's and Thursday's. Some here may find it beneficial.

Depending on your intent fasting can be for a lot of things.

The health benefits of fasting aren’t about total calorie restriction, but ARE about shifting when you eat to allow your body to kick over into the fasted state for a period of time to get the benefits of that.

I practice a 24 hour fast once a week, for spiritual and health benefits, not to lose weight, and enjoy a very full dinner after the 24 hour fast.

Ramadan looks very much to me to be about fasting, at least spiritually.

I've heard the same, although it was only with one person I know. I was talking to my friend about Ramadan and how I thought it was a really healthy behavior. She laughed and told me that a lot of people eat garbage (her word, not mine - a lot of fatty and fried foods) and she had to take the initiative to eat healthier stuff during Ramadan.

Still, it definitely gives you the opportunity to reset every year.

In France, from where I stand (I don't have close muslim friends), they also have large meals during the night.

I don't know if that was always the case in history of this religion, maybe in the past the night meal was simply a shared meal with the group, of normal size.

It seems that in your case and mine, we're seeing something that has more to do with symbolism and morals (no gluttony, more thoughtful days, sharing, empathy).

I used to live there too. In the 90s. I doubt total calorie consumption drops during ramadan. Rather, meals just happen at different times.

Ctrl-f also returns no results for Lent. I haven't tried for other religious fasting or abstinent holidays but I'm sure there would be 0 to few mentions. HN skews strongly towards certain industries and demographics so it's a bad sample of "the western world" and it seems that most people posting here would simply lump Ramadan under "religious practices" of which there are several mentions. Most religions include both feasting and fasting practices so I wouldn't single out any single one as more healthy or hurtful for the world.

I agree with the basic premise that religious fasting is an often overlooked but beneficial practice in the modern era.

@zhynn, Buddhists monks eat one meal a day throughout their lives. Even lay Buddhists who maintain 8 precepts do not eat after noon throughout their lives. As a practicing Buddhist I eat during a 4-5 hour window everyday of the year. Why make a big deal about one religion?

Is this true in practice, for most practitioners? It's sometimes hard to tell how ideals match up to reality when it comes to this stuff, for those without first-hand experience. For my part I've read a fair amount about Buddhism but the real-life experience of a lay practitioner or monk remains obscure to me.

In reading about Christian monastics I've found that their fasting practices are, and were even in the middle ages, much less dramatic than they seem at first glance, except in relatively rare cases. For one thing, many fasts aren't so much "don't eat" but "eat somewhat less, but still quite a bit", and there are tons of feast days to counter-balance that. And even those rules are thrown out for older monks and any who are ill, of course. You look at their calendar and think "damn, that's a lot of fasting!" but then you read accounts by actual monks and more detailed sets of rules and find they did very little actual no-eating fasting, in the typical case, and many "fast days" still involve a lot of eating.

In my own Sangha (community) of lay people, we have several who observe the 8 daily precepts. Every retreat I have gone to, I have never seen monks eat more than one meal a day.

> Is this true in practice, for most practitioners?

I think it would be more common to find a lay practitioner adhering to the first five precepts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_precepts

But they eat each day in Ramadan (at certain times), don't they? How is it even "fasting" and why should it be mentioned?

There are different kinds of fasting. They don't eat from sun rise until sunset during Ramadan. I'd qualify that as fasting.

Eating once a day or in a limited time period is called "intermittent fasting".

those who "fast" also eats right? like other living being?

Yes. Like the GP mentioned, fasting is a ritualistic practiced in many cultures.

In India, for example, there are fasting days in a month and many have certain days of the week even where they fast.

Great point.