What do I mean when I use words like 'physical' or 'nature'?

A Slightly Modified Facebook Exchange

Martha:
Wim, it seems to me that you see traumas - even the mental, emotional or spiritual ones - as fundamentally physical. (Perhaps even just chemical?)
As I see it, the body itself is extremely complex and interacts not only with its supraphysical bodies (beliefs, thoughts) but with the environment (relationships and nature) as well.
To say (if I understand you well) that chemical changes occur only as a result of physical trauma, leaves out a whole range of possible causes...


Wim: 
Alright, appreciated, but perhaps you are jumping into this topic (the nature of traumas) not fully aware of how I define things, how I identify and define certain notions.
Yes, it would definitely be worthwhile to explain what I mean when I use the word "physical".
I would of course be good if you read my deliberations on this issue [they are on this website] but let me get to it from the beginning... going to the root... 
What is important to know about what, how and why I write, is to see where I'm coming from...

In principle I can only live, work and describe from a strict non-dual insight.

In the enlightened view there is no 'physics AND metaphysics', no 'body AND spirit', no 'mind AND body', no 'factual reality AND illusive reality', etc..

Those are only interpretive distinctions that help make sense of the SEEMING complexity that all this APPEARS to be in a 'pseudo-world' that is confused by unenlightened views and ways of behavior.

Even if the above distinctions have a mental interpretive value and do serve a function, they still do not represent reality (TAT SAT).

We can use those interpretive distinctions to heal or help heal - 'healing' meaning to stop the unquestioned firm belief in the so called 'reality of dualities'.

The tool to distinguish - the tool of analysis - can be compared to the use of a scalpel in surgery, it is NOT the cutting though (to get to an unwholesome organ) that is quintessential (although very useful - but still and most of the time in lieu of holistic approaches), it is the healing that is...: the restoration and 'sewing back' - the tool of synthesis.

The scalpel (or analysis) is a temporary tool to help us find out what went seemingly awry with our original whole state. The tool to return to that whole state is - again - temporary: the tool of synthesis.

So analysis and synthesis are temporary dualistic 'services' to rediscover, recover, reclaim and realize our integral wholeness.

I always go back to original even ancient meanings of words, and as much as possible I use words that way...

So what does 'physic' mean actually?

It came to the modern Western languages via the Greek:

. from 'physike episteme' - 'knowledge of nature',

. which came from 'physis' - 'nature',

. which came from 'phyein'- 'to bring forth, to grow'" (cf 'phyton' - 'growth, plant')

. which came from from the PIE root *bheu- "to be exist, grow" (Old English: 'beon' - 'to be, be').

The (unconfused) experience of self is 'dynamic being'...:

TAT SAT - What is, is.

TAT TUAM ASI - Thou art that 

SOHAM - I AM.

Thus when I use the word "physical" it includes everything that has 'interpretively-and-artificially-and-unduly-and illusively' been excluded from our innate original integral being.

The word 'nature' (the translation of 'physis ') is the native state, it came to us via:

. the Latin 'natura'- 'course of things, natural character, the universe'

. which came from 'natus' - 'born'

. which came from 'nasci' - 'to be born'

. which came from PIE *gene- 'to give birth, beget'

Altogether our innate sacred reality that is naturally experienced...

(when not illusively and deludedly -  pseudo 'maya' - messed up :-(.

Martha:
I 'understand' what you are saying, Wim, but is it helpful to the majority of people.?

Wim:
Not in that form for sure :)
The gist of what I wrote above of course always needs to be put into a format that is relevant to the individual... And that 'in-formation' meant for that individual will necessarily require a number of iterations - in a spiral kind of manner - eventually zeroing in on reintegration and Unity.
You are saying, "majority of people"...hmm...Is it not so that the "majority of people" believe in duality in such a way that reality is fully overshadowed by pseudo-reality: the 'world' of conditional sub-sistence (not existence)?
So, yes what I wrote would not make immediate sense.

When individuals eventually "run into a wall" - a wall that does not give in to conditional behavior anymore, e.g manipulating OR not wanting to be manipulated anymore) - when they reach the end of the rope, that obfuscating "belief" may at some point dissolve under the light of clear insight and then lead to right action...  as in the Buddha's eightfold path:
. Right or All-encompassing Insight.
. Right or Truthful Vocal Expression.
. Right or Constructive Action.
. Right or Wholesome Lifestyle.
. Right or Well-Measured Effort.
. Right or Pure Mindfulness, Clear Mindedness.
. Right or Steadfast Unwavering Concentration.

http://www.freebynature.org/2008/03/buddhas-eightfold-path.html