Spirituality and Madness – are the mad really prophets?

Geoff-Allen

Here's a thought provoking article -

http://www.allconsidering.com/2012/spirituality-madness-prophets/

Loads at that site!

Cheers

ZendoLord84

Seeing is madness in the 'viewpoint' of the blind

Nirvana

The actual article, I thought, was unfocussed. Also, it seemed to use the terms schizophrenic and psychotic interchangeably. I thought schizophrenia was a permanent, organic mental state. Psychosis can be caused by sleeplessness, among other things, and its sufferers need not be pitied. Quite the reverse, indeed, as the Ancients revered people who were capable of attaining those states.

The fact that our modern society has a problem with psychosis is more indicative of our insecurities, I think, than of any insights or knowledge we deem ourselves to have.

lobster

As we learn more about brain function it is quite likely we will be able to realistically simulate temporary mental states. Perhaps with magnetic induction, chemical supressors/stimulants, connection to AI simulation and so on. As well as conflicted states, beneficial models will be available. Mental states that are detrimental will be open to us, as well as the range all the way to their positive or unravelled condition.
Individuals who have morbid mind states, will be offered choices. The mentally ill are not 'blessed' or 'cursed', they are at the mercy of their condition.
In dharma, wherever we start, improvement, through mind training is possible now. We have people here who are genuinely handicapped by their mind state and we should not disrespect them by pretending Buddhist practice will cure them or grow new legs for those without limbs. We can through their example and input be certain that practice does lead to management and coping strategies. Some individuals may need medical intervention just to be capable of meditation or following a disciplined Middle Way.
Buddhas are not crazy. Crazy wisdom is a skilful means, not a pathological expression of illness. There are deeply disturbed but functioning individuals at all levels of society. The same is true in dharma. We should also be aware that quite well and sane individuals are capable of temporary conditions that are deeply disturbed.
Increased sanity is a very good thing. All of us can aim for that. :thumbsup:

Nirvana

Aye, but it's the world that is crazy! An otherwise sane (i.e., literally "healthy") person can undergo a temporary psychotic period through sleeplessness or drug use, and can have prophetically meaningful and life-changing experiences.

To lump those having out-of-the-mind experiences with the mentally dysfunctional is unfairly classifying these phenomena.

As for many psychiatrists --a field where there's an increasing shortage of practitioners-- some of them will not give some newly hospitalized persons the time of day. That really helps. Not!!!

Zero

One shortcoming I notice on her analysis is that she seemingly neither knows the foundation subject that she supports and nor the alternative... everyone is entitled to their view I guess.

Here's an amusing one - you can be as mad as you like as long as you're economically productive - noone cares if you can see what they cannot/will not see (whether it's 'real' or not) - people only want to see what they want to see - it seems to me that everyone values a certain number of things - there is a collective agreement that those things matter - if you consider that they don't matter as much then you could be mad.... 1 against the rest is madness isn't it?

The farce is that we simultaneously consider that we know enough to confidently attach labels and are content to dish out 'dysfunctional' badges like they're in fashion - there appears a stark paradox to me... but hey... I'm not economically unproductive so I can say what I want and still be sane.

Nirvana

I read a lot of Erich Fromm in my youth and he maintained that people who were really mentally dysfunctional were incapable of really encountering another human being on their level. I do not think he was of the ilk of practitioners who'd ever want to classify the life and/or future life opportunities out of a person.

Here's some recent news on the subject from The New York Times:
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/06/the-limits-of-psychiatry/?hp

footiam

Prophets may be mad. It takes mad people to follow.