At its core, it means being a separate, autonomous, emotionally independent, critically thinking person with healthy ego boundaries and a healthy sense of responsibility. Its opposite is the person who feels victim to external events and other people, resists the inevitable constraints of life, and, therefore, fails to develop mature boundaries of personal responsibility. He is emotionally dependent, with a reactive, blaming attitude.

It means kindness, capacity for empathy and genuine concern for other people. Thanks to differentiation (the first criterion), the relationship with others is characterized by high tolerance and respect for free will and choices. There is a desire to contribute to society and serve the Whole. It is understandable why selfishness and hard-heartedness are expressions of low mental health – humanity would have no future if the majority of people showed concern only for their own well-being.

This means flexibility and openness to feedback. Life is a complex system that is constantly evolving and changing, so high levels of mental health coincide with the factors that support it. These are receptivity to external feedback and readiness to change. Individuals with lower levels of mental health are too rigid; their guiding motivation is the desire for security and preservation of the status quo. They are too invested in adapting to society and lack the resources to change when change becomes necessary.

At lower levels of mental health, the individual is internally fragmented and swings between opposing views and emotional responses. Here are those who suppress large parts of their mental life in order to meet other people’s expectations. As a result, they are insufficiently sincere and consistent as the rejected parts of them continue to reside in their subconscious, forming what is called the Psychic Shadow. When the rejected material accumulates critical values, various neurotic symptoms erupt, the basis of which are unresolved inner conflicts. Relationships with other people also begin to suffer and become conflict-ridden. At high levels of mental health, we have a person with a strong self-center who has unified the opposites within himself. This strong center is experienced as a source of inner strength that manifests in the outer world as moral integrity, as well as through the courage to be authentic and take risks in situations where most people retreat.

Mental health should not be seen as a division between two different groups – the mentally healthy and the mentally ill. Rather, it exists on a continuum in which people may exhibit different levels of mental health. Within this perspective, mental health is viewed as a spectrum in which different people exhibit varying degrees of qualities associated with different mental well-being. The so-called average person, which is often used as a measure of normality, is statistically in the middle range of this mental health scale.

Different spiritual beliefs are associated with varying levels of mental health. Some spiritual beliefs and practices can be detrimental to mental well-being, while many widely followed religions can have a positive impact. At the higher end of this spectrum, there are forms of spirituality that promote mental health, but these are typically embraced by a small percentage of the population.

Both individuals and religious systems can display different levels of mental health, and this also applies to organizations and families. Those with low levels of mental health, as well as those with high levels, may struggle to adapt to their environment. As a result, the challenges they face can differ significantly.

There is a significant difference between neurotic suffering caused by an inauthentic way of life and suffering caused by processes of spiritual awakening. Moreover, dealing with suffering, which is an expression of spiritual transformation, requires that a person already has a high level of mental health, i.e., has freed himself from neurotic suffering. It is, therefore, extremely important to distinguish between these two types of suffering and the resulting differences in psychotherapeutic work with them.