What is mental illness from nondual perspective ?

[Gesundheit]

3 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@Gesundheit

Sun is a thought, a label.

Both of which are also existence. Thoughts and labels are just the language of the mind. Imaginary or not is also a thought or a label, so.

[Nahm]

@Gesundheit

There is no sun in reality. 

[Gesundheit]

12 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@Gesundheit

There is no sun in reality. 

Is a false statement.

Feel free to disagree. You're probably talking about how it's not possible to define the sun or capture its essence, but that'd be deflection of the point I'm making. When we say sun, we're referring to a certain memory of a direct experience, or a current direct experience, that we assume other people who share similar qualities, can relate to. We don't need to be scientific or neurotic about it. Language delivers the message, and that's enough. Now to say that there is no sun, that does not even make sense, and it only creates confusion for other humans who use language casually.

[Someone here]

I'm getting lost.. I admit it's a tough inquiry.. And honestly I don't see the link between existence and non-existence and my op...lol ?

I would say tho what is possible to see is only existence.. Non-existence is more of a second order mental projection. 

 

Edited October 11, 2020 by Someone here

[Gesundheit]

26 minutes ago, Someone here said:

I would say tho what is possible to see is only existence..

Form. The manifest world. Perception.

26 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Non-existence is more of a second order mental projection.

Formlessness. Infinite potential. Imagination.

26 minutes ago, Someone here said:

And honestly I don't see the link between existence and non-existence and my op...lol ?

I tried to stay on topic but your mind is sloppy.

Edited October 11, 2020 by Gesundheit

[Someone here]

10 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

I tried to stay on topic but your mind is sloppy. 

 

I'm sure Nahm is trying to point to something that is related to op.. Let's wait and see lol 

Edited October 11, 2020 by Someone here

[Nahm]

@Someone here

You could think of it this way... if one is not fully aware of the actuality that one is dreaming / being “the sun”, or, if one is not ‘seeing’, ‘experiencing’ from prior to the concentration of the finite mind...how can one see how ‘mental illness’ is constructed? One ‘holding’ the thought of it, isn’t in the same as one aware of the actuality of it. Another way to say that is there is no physical self or reality, and that is where all the trouble begins. How could one ‘walk back’ (with respect to the mind of another) out of the states of creation of the finite mind, without already being behind it? 

[Nahm]

9 hours ago, Gesundheit said:

Is a false statement.

Feel free to disagree. You're probably talking about how it's not possible to define the sun or capture its essence, but that'd be deflection of the point I'm making. When we say sun, we're referring to a certain memory of a direct experience, or a current direct experience,

‘Memory of a direct experience’ is a misnomer. 

9 hours ago, Gesundheit said:

that we assume other people who share similar qualities, can relate to.

More accurately, ‘that you assume’. 

9 hours ago, Gesundheit said:

We don't need to be scientific or neurotic about it.

Missing the actuality of direct experience, such as believing in ‘memories’, and assuming on behalf of what other people think or feel, is not ‘outside’ of neuroticism, to be ‘seeing’ from the vantage prior to the actuality of ‘mental illness’. 

9 hours ago, Gesundheit said:

Language delivers the message, and that's enough.

Again, nothing ‘wrong’ with that, but when you say that, it is for you. 

9 hours ago, Gesundheit said:

Now to say that there is no sun, that does not even make sense, and it only creates confusion for other humans who use language casually.

To say there is a sun is nonsense (no offense). The confusion is in the beliefs which support I am not the sun / that there is a sun, and that there is language and that it is being used. 

[Gesundheit]

@Nahm Yeah, I'm trying to talk down to earth, and you're getting technical about everything and deflecting the message. I could do the same but that would be lame of me, and it's not my thing. But just to give you a good idea of how you distort the discussion I could get technical with this statement:

8 minutes ago, Nahm said:

Again, nothing ‘wrong’ with that, but when you say that, it is for you.

You're talking about me, but does "me" exist in your direct experience? There is no me, to say there is me is nonsense (no offence).

..

I hope you'll get a laugh out of this and perhaps more importantly contemplate the productivity of a dialogue of this kind.

[Someone here]

15 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@Someone here

You could think of it this way... if one is not fully aware of the actuality that one is dreaming / being “the sun”, or, if one is not ‘seeing’, ‘experiencing’ from prior to the concentration of the finite mind...how can one see how ‘mental illness’ is constructed? One ‘holding’ the thought of it, isn’t in the same as one aware of the actuality of it. Another way to say that is there is no physical self or reality, and that is where all the trouble begins. How could one ‘walk back’ (with respect to the mind of another) out of the states of creation of the finite mind, without already being behind it? 

I'm not sure if I understand correctly(as always lol) ..

You mean if I'm not experiencing it directly how can I understand it (mental illness)? 

[Nahm]

7 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

@Nahm Yeah, I'm trying to talk down to earth, and you're getting technical about everything and deflecting the message.

I can only offer that it is not semantical, technical nor deflection. Awareness is not per se ‘down to earth’ when the subject matter is mental illness. 

Quote

I could do the same but that would be lame of me, and it's not my thing. But just to give you a good idea of how you distort the discussion I could get technical with this statement:

You're talking about me, but does "me" exist in your direct experience? There is no me, to say there is me is nonsense (no offence).

..

I hope you'll get a laugh out of this and perhaps more importantly contemplate the productivity of a dialogue of this kind.

There is no intention of distorting a discussion. To say there is you as a separate self is nonsensical, to say you are me in the understanding of how this is apparent is sanity. Yes I’m laughing, yet there is no mindset of productivity.

[Nahm]

12 minutes ago, Someone here said:

I'm not sure if I understand correctly(as always lol) ..

You mean if I'm not experiencing it directly how can I understand it (mental illness)? 

First the ‘sanity’ of what is actual, must be seen. Clearing of existence is most fundamental.  Then how mental disorders are created, or, ‘what they are’ can be seen. If there is delusion in the lens, how delusion is being created, appearing, isn’t clearly seen. If there isn’t, it is effortlessly seen as it stands out. Then there is what existence really is. Then there is the mistaking of the content in term of mental illness as characteristic of a finite mind and missing the mirror of the environment, or you might say ‘what we’re doing with this place’ and the effect it has on the “reincarnating”, or “swirly pools” of the finite minds, or ‘us’. 

[Gesundheit]

2 minutes ago, Nahm said:

I can only offer that it is not semantical, technical nor deflection. Awareness is not per se ‘down to earth’ when the subject matter is mental illness. 

There is no intention of distorting a discussion. To say there is you as a separate self is nonsensical, to say you are me in the understanding of how this is apparent is sanity. Yes I’m laughing, yet there is no mindset of productivity.

Look, I am pretty sure it's not just me, but it's really hard for me to understand your posts. I understand that you are very well knowledgeable and that that may be your modus operandi in your ordinary life or maybe just in your head. Honestly, most of the time, your message is so over my head that I can't really see your point clearly. That's what I mean by "down to earth". Something the average person can read and understand clearly without much effort or problems. A little bit of effort is okay, but dude it's always too much effort and rarely do I succeed and really "get it".

[Someone here]

@Nahm I didn't understand. Perhaps you should try to put yourself in the shoes of the person who is reading your message.. Your messages are always kinda like you talking to yourself.. You use phrases and ways of conveying that maybe only you yourself can understand. 

Appreciate your input and patience tho. 

[Nahm]

4 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

Look, I am pretty sure it's not just me,

But it is! The first believed thought it is not is actually delusion. I am not saying “you” are delusional. It’s not an attribute, it’s an appearance. 

4 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

but it's really hard for me to understand your posts. I understand that you are very well knowledgeable

No!  There is no more ‘knowledge’ than there is a me or a sun. 

4 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

and that that may be your modus operandi in your ordinary life or maybe just in your head.

No.  It’s literally empty! Nothing! 

4 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

Honestly, most of the time, your message is so over my head that I can't really see your point clearly.

It’s under, if anything. Not over. Take ‘me’ out of the thinking. Don’t look for ‘my point’, look at what is pointed to. 

4 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

That's what I mean by "down to earth". Something the average person can read and understand clearly without much effort or problems. A little bit of effort is okay, but dude it's always too much effort and rarely do I succeed and really "get it".

Yes. I’ll return to a more comfortable lens. I ‘get it’. No worries. 

[Nahm]

2 minutes ago, Someone here said:

@Nahm I didn't understand. Perhaps you should try to put yourself in the shoes of the person who is reading your message.. Your messages are always kinda like you talking to yourself.. You use phrases and ways of conveying that maybe only you yourself can understand. 

Appreciate your input and patience tho. 

No worries. Love ya. 

[Someone here]

@Nahm love you too man. I really wish I could easily understand your thoughts. 

[Nahm]

@Someone here

I hear ya. ?

In a way, What is mental illness from nondual perspective?, is not a short order. Could be said to be the full circle of full circles. A certain actuality, or the transparency of seeing through ‘understanding’ “itself” is in order. Seeing through something, is seeing prior to something, and only ‘direct experience’ is this. But I digress, as I trust I am sounding crazier by the word!

 

[Someone here]

5 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@Someone here

I hear ya. ?

In a way, What is mental illness from nondual perspective?, is not a short order. Could be said to be the full circle of full circles. A certain actuality, or the transparency of seeing through ‘understanding’ “itself” is in order. Seeing through something, is seeing prior to something, and only ‘direct experience’ is this. But I digress, as I trust I am sounding crazier by the word!

 

LOL wut ?

[Gesundheit]

31 minutes ago, Nahm said:

But it is! The first believed thought it is not is actually delusion. I am not saying “you” are delusional. It’s not an attribute, it’s an appearance. 

No!  There is no more ‘knowledge’ than there is a me or a sun. 

No.  It’s literally empty! Nothing! 

It’s under, if anything. Not over. Take ‘me’ out of the thinking. Don’t look for ‘my point’, look at what is pointed to. 

Yes. I’ll return to a more comfortable lens. I ‘get it’. No worries. 

Sigh.