I find it is helpful to inspect the configurations of ignorance, attachment and aversion which give rise to stress in my own life.
I keep note of the 4NT, within life is the capacity for suffering, There are causes to suffering, There is an uproot of these causes, and there is a path that leads to the uprooting of these which results in peace born of understanding the causes of suffering in relationship to one’s life.
This, paired with the determination to live well, make life work, and to live peacefully & at ease in a way that is conducive to myself, other and All, is what led me to the realisation that I have had.
Wisdom, concentration and ethical noble conduct takes precedent.
The below link is a resource on recovery oriented language for talking to or about people with mental illnesses.
Background
People living with mental health conditions are among some of the most disadvantaged people
in the community. Many live with psychosocial difficulties exacerbated by historical and current
trauma, poverty and poor physical health. Frequently they may also have experienced stigma and
discrimination as part of everyday experiences.
Mental Health Coordinating Council developed the first Recovery Oriented Language Guide in
2013 because language matters. The Guide continues to be important in the context of mental
health, where words can convey hope, optimism and support, and promote a culture that fosters
recovery and wellbeing. The Recovery Oriented Language Guide is recognised as a valuable
resource widely used across mental health and human services in Australia and overseas.
This edition includes updates to reflect contemporary language use, introduces diversity inclusive
language and incorporates new topics, including talking about grief and loss, and recovery
language usage in the written word.
Development of the Guide has been informed by several sources, including international and
Australian literature, conversations with mental health practitioners across service sectors and,
importantly, through listening to people with lived experience of mental health conditions concerning
their recovery journeys, as well as perspectives from their carers, families and support people
Extract of the first part of the guide below. The entire document is about 30 pages.
Oooh I actually really disagree on the don’t label rule for certain DSM labels. For one, I am ADHD I don’t have ADHD. This is a common political ADHD/Autistic move to own our neurodivergence and celebrate our unique brains.
Everyone is different, the advise to ask, further down is more apt.
I suggest the meditators, who are diagnosed with a mental illness, should be carefully advised to continually practice Right View (i.e. vipassana) and mindfulness (i.e. samatha) essentially based on SN/SA suttas, particularly Right View:
First, you should know exactly what a diagnosis means/used in the current healthcare paradigm, and then listen carefully to all criticism against the system, including anecdotal evidence from those who really know, the patient itself.
When all is done, then it’s time to go to the teachings. If the research is done sufficiently, then there will be immediate clarity and letting go, with no need for further investigation.
I’m saying that the current system functions like crude machinery that produces more suffering than it heals, and there’s no one to blame.
To some extent it is correct to understand the current healthcare system first. But note that ‘right view’ (including ‘mindfulness’) path (in the SN/SA suttas) is in a practical sense, rather than on idealistic and systematic theory.
Right view is both mundane and super-mundane. The first is abstract, the second is bare awareness with the abstract embodied. Noen of these are obstructions for gathering facts about the current paradigm.
i think across all diagnoses its probably kinder to not presume a person accepts their diagnosis as an acceptable label. if thats not the case for you great but as a general guide its wise not to label. i for instance have a diagnosis of bipolar 1 i dont find it appropriate to call me bipolar as though that was a final explanation of me.
My point is I actually don’t like it if you say I have ADHD and this is an unkind way to speak about me (it feels invalidating of my disability) and this goes for most ADHDers I know (same with autistic folks I know). Don’t assume either way is much safer. I have been an advocate for ADHD and ND politics for several years and have had my diagnosis for 20 years. We, following the pioneering work of the autistic community, have been developing a very thorough disability politics around the term neurodivergence and neurodiversity. Don’t presume you know the trends in our two communities. Note I am not speaking for all of us and using words like “tend to” and “trend”and referring to people I know (including in online adhd community spaces) here. But absolutely what I am saying is the current trend in our two communities.
Someone explaining it far better than me:
Example of where we are heading as a community (a lot of my autistic AND ADHD friends are reading this book at the moment around learning to be ourselves instead of pretending to be neurotypical, which is part of the whole identity formation process happening in our communities):
the point i was making was the guide addresses a broader community than adhd and autism, and when addressing people from this broader community it is probably wiser to not presume that they accept their diagnosis as part of their identity i.e. to not refer to them as schizophrenic etc. thank you for the adhd perspective.
Basically I was trying to go further than what the guide is saying: which is to not assume either way and just ask how they want their diagnosis to be referred to. Because this will be different from person to person and diagnosis to diagnosis.
This goes for any marginalised group where this could be in doubt, not just mental health: be it race, ethnicity, gender identity and pronouns, sexual orientation. Always ask how people prefer to be called.
There’s a lot of research into the efficacy of loving kindness mindfulness.
One of the early researchers into loving kindness towards others was Barbara Fredrickson. One of the more recent researchers into loving kindness towards oneself (rebranded in the literature as self compassion) is Kristin Neff.
You can review this literature for yourself but my observation is that it’s pretty supportive of loving kindness, both towards oneself, and towards others, as protective for mental health.
I’m a neuropsychologist, and I worked in severe (secure facility) mental health settings. As part of the morning routine I started doing loving kindness (‘May I be free from … May I be well and happy in every way “) as a group exercise. I remember that with a room of about 30-40 individuals, most with diagnoses of schizophrenia (and some frankly psychotic), at the end of doing this, you could have heard a pin drop.
My observations are:
A diagnosis does not matter if you are able to meet psychosis / mood concerns with a sense of kindness, gentleness and compassion.
Self compassion (loving kindness towards oneself) isn’t part of loving kindness as taught by the Buddha. However, it is direct training in mindfulness of mind (the third satipatthana). Practicing the traditional formulation of loving kindness towards oneself (“May I be … “) trains one in becoming aware of mind states and then letting them go. I think this is why it’s so effective - it develops mental resilience.
Loving kindness towards others is protective of mental health in a different way. The traditional way of developing loving kindness towards friendly, neutral, and inimical persons (May he/she be free from … May he/she be well and happy in every way “) generates a sense of connection and relationship with others. This of extremely protective against paranoia and aversion towards others.
I always recommend loving kindness mindfulness in practice.
I generally advise practitioners with mental health concerns to avoid trying to develop deep concentration / jhana, and to avoid focusing on anatta. The possibility for dissociation, and nihilistic depression are there for each of these. The Buddha’s path isn’t limited by sticking to loving kindness - it’s just a different way up the mountain.
Instead I recommend (in addition to loving kindness) that practitioners with mental health concerns to focus on developing the positive aspects of the Buddha’s path: physical calm, mental tranquility, joy, content satisfaction. And of course a very very firm base in the five precepts.
