Images of Emanation and Renunciation
by Eric S. Fallick
In these very dark ages and most benighted times of the modern world hardly anyone understands the necessity and desirability and value and real and proper practice of renunciation, asceticism, otherworldliness and world-denyingness. Yet, there is no true spiritual and contemplative life and practice and no possibility of actual liberation without these. Most of the contemporary alleged followers of the contemplative systems that have, and always have had, renunciation and celibate contemplative asceticism as their very core conveniently ignore this fact or explain it away or as unnecessary and only belonging to the past. They even take pride in rejecting the otherworldly and world-denying and renunciant essence of their systems and claim that their worldliness and delusions and worldly desires and activities and attempts to make these compatible with contemplative practice mark an advance over the renunciant sages and systems of the past. They, further, invert and twist the metaphysics or descriptions of reality of these systems to justify their delusion and worldly desire and inability to see past the sense world (a general symptom of the problems with the modern age) invoking such things as 'creation spirituality', their ideas of huayen, 'zen', tantra and theurgy, an upside down understanding of 'non-dualism', the 'identity of samsara and nirvana', etc. Some have even invoked the Platonic teaching of the three hypostases and the emanation of the lower realities from the One to rationalize worldly indulgence and desire in the context of theurgic practice. The general idea seems to be something like that since this world of individuated sensate existence in space-time is in some sense an emanation of the One, the creation of God, a product of the Absolute, at some level part of the Absolute, etc., it must somehow be an ultimate good and desirable in itself, an augment of or addition to or improvement of the Absolute Itself (!)--rather than a diminution or darkening of the Absolute—and that we should, therefore, wallow in it forever and that the purpose of contemplative spiritual practice and even contemplative union is to allow us to wallow in it more effectively and help others to wallow in it more effectively. They ignore the teaching throughout all the systems that our presence here in this world is the result of a fall, of avidya or maya or desire, of audacity and wanting to be our own separated from the One, etc. and that our sole goal is escape from this world and restoration to our original condition as in union with or at least part of the Absolute or God. When they wish to cite past 'authorities' in this regard, they fix on the few most anomalous and dubious figures of their traditions or most dubious schools or aspects of their traditions, or take a few limited citations out of context of respected figures in their schools. While the modern world is indeed the most deluded of any in history and current circumstances are most unconducive to any true wisdom and understanding and renunciation and spiritual and contemplative practice, still this is ultimately due to their own delusion and heavy karma. In this essay, I would like to present some images for helping to understand the idea of emanation and the existence of the lower realities of the three Platonic hypostases and suggest how a proper understanding of these leads of necessity to full renunciation of the world as the only mode of true spiritual and contemplative practice.
The three Platonic hypostases are the One or the Good, Nous, which I will render as the Divine Mind-Thought, and Soul. These describe and encompass the actual structure of Reality. The One is the Absolute Itself, the only thing that really is, the Source and Origin of all else, totally independent and self-sufficient, completely without time and space, remaining completely unchanged and perfect as the lower realities emanate from or are included within it. Nous or the Divine Mind-Thought is the first level of multiplicity, but multiplicity in unity, the level of the Platonic Forms or Ideas, existing in eternity and infinity, one whole at the same time differentiated, thought and thinker the same but distinct, also remaining unchanged as Soul comes to be from or within it. Soul is the lowest level, that of individuated sensate existence in space-time, both of the Soul of the All and each individual soul, the limit of multiplicity and differentiation, being changed all the time as it produces its own objects in space and time. Only the One is truly real and really is and includes all else. Nous is less real and is less than the One, and Soul and souls are less real and are less than Nous. These are existential levels at which consciousness as a unitary whole can exist, but as we descend the levels we exist less, we are less, have less actual being. Unity is more real, exists more than multiplicity. We must resist thinking of this as a temporal and spatial process and of the hypostases as having separate existences in space and time. Space and time only come to be at the lowest and least real level of soul and have no ultimate reality. The three hypostases are always present everywhere, so to speak, but consciousness at one level, particularly the level of soul, isn't always aware of the presence of the other levels as such. We also must resist considering the lower emanations as being additions to or more than or additional than or outside the One. They are, rather, subtractions from, lessenings of, negations from within of the One.
It is hard to do better than Plotinus' explanation of all reality as contemplation and the descending levels as being stronger and weaker contemplation. The One is complete, perfect, total strongest contemplation without multiplicity. The Divine Mind-Thought is weaker and less real, but still strong and, though not completely timeless and spaceless, at least eternal and infinite contemplation. Soul is the weakest, least real, most incomplete, most multiple, most untrue spatial and temporal contemplation.
In the One, subject and object are completely one without distinction, just a single unitary contemplation. In the Divine Mind-Thought, subject and object have become distinguished but not actually separated. The Divine Mind contemplates the Divine Ideas as itself, not truly separated. At the level of soul, subject and object have separated and broken up completely, at least in appearance and how they are experienced, and each soul considers itself as an independent subject viewing independent spatial-temporal objects.
The One may be viewed as complete, pure, perfect knowing with nothing else—the highest, purest, independent unified knowing with no admixture of anything else. Nous is a lower, lesser, more impure knowing—not complete knowing, but knowing mixed with some not-knowing or nescience. Soul is a still lower, lesser and more impure knowing mixed with a great deal of not-knowing or nescience—as much not-knowing as knowing. These lesser levels of knowing are not additional knowings or knowing more than the pure knowing, but rather greater levels of ignorance or nescience, knowings of less. They are not elsewhere but within the perfect knowing. The perfect knowing includes the possibility of its own negation as not-knowing without Itself lacking any knowing or having any not-knowing or knowing in the same incomplete and imperfect way as the lower knowings mixed with nescience. The One is perfect, complete unitary Thought. As such, it contains or includes, without being, all possible incomplete, impure, divided thought—It's own partial negations.
Imagine a mass of complete, pure brilliant light—nothing at all but light. This is the One. Although the mass is just pure inconceivably complete and full light, it includes or contains within Itself, again without being, the idea of darkness, of lack of or negation of light, which is not actually something in itself, just the absence of light. The first diminution of the Light is Nous—still much very bright light, but not all the Light, but mixed with darkness, having the absence of some light. Soul is a further diminution or dimming of the Light—as much darkness or absence of light as light. The two lower levels are not something more than or added to the great pure Light, but removals from or negations or dimmings of It. They exist less than It.
Imagine a great ball of pure white light. This is the One. It has within Itself a lens or filter that is actually nothing in itself but only a negation or absence or potentiality for negation or absence of the Light Itself. This is Nous. The pure white light passes through this lens or filter producing a still dimmer projection of Itself within Itself as supposed individuated souls and their objects in space-time that is soul. But this projection is just a dull image or darkness within the Light, a negation of the Light Itself, not actually additional content to the Light. The original Light has both the lens or filter and the projection in Itself without being them or as them. They are just potential configurations of the inherent possible idea of darkness within light.
All these images and attempted descriptions are imperfect attempts to explain and understand a state of affairs that cannot really be fully grasped at the level of discursive thought at the lowest level of soul per se, that can only really be known at the level of the One or the Good Itself, but can be more intuitively and intellectually, in the truer sense of the word, or noetically apprehended, with much difficulty and long effort, in ascetic contemplation. It is important to understand, however, as emphasized above, that only the One or the Good is fully and truly real and fully and truly perfect and good and that the lower hypostases are not ultimate goods, not goods in themselves, but only good in so far as they participate in the Good and that the lower hypostases are not additions to or augmentations of the One, but subtractions and declinations from, poor and faint and less real reflections of the One. The existence or emanation of the lower hypostases doesn't affect the Good in any way and it is neither more nor less for their being. The lower hypostases don't exist or emanate as the result of any sort desire or inclination or need or intention of the One. They are the result of the metaphysical necessity of the perfect complete Good or Knowing or Thought or Being containing the Idea of the possibility of Its own partial negation. Our existence here as individuated souls in sensate existence in space-time undergoing the endless cycle of reincarnation is not a good resulting from an intentional production or need or desire of the Absolute, and is not at all identical with the Absolute as such, but rather a fall or declination or diminution resulting from metaphysical necessity of its possibility manifesting as our own audacity and wanting to be our own independently of the One. It is wholly an unfortunate and miserable, though ultimately less or unreal, thing. Our innate love of the Good and desire to return to It and to turn to It and away from this world and our individuated sensate existence is what is real and true in us and is a reflection of the unity and true nature of the One. Our pursuing the things of this world and the senses and thinking that it is real and good and important, our wanting to be our individual selves and turn away from the One is simply being less real and turning further into darkness and nescience and unreality and represents the further negation of the Good.
We may now consider the above understanding and images in relation to individual spiritual and contemplative practice, renunciation and asceticism, and the deluded modern worldly views and practices referred to at the beginning. Again, we find ourselves in this world in a state of individuated sensate existence in space-time as individual souls reincarnating endlessly in different forms. We are in a state of lesser or unreality, at the lowest existential level of separated subject and object, in the lowest level of not-knowing, nescience and ignorance, barely existing at the level of least being and least good, in darkness mixed with only a little light, in greatest multiplicity. We want to move back to, return to union with the One or the Good, to shift our existential state back to the complete non-difference of subject and object, to become real and really be again, to return to full and true knowing again, to return to and become again pure light and unity. It is only obvious, clear and logical that to do this we have to renounce this world and our existence and pursuits in it as much as possible in our present condition of embodiment and needing to maintain our present pyscho-physical organism so that we can continue to practice in order to eventually transcend this world entirely. To say otherwise, to think, as the foolish deluded moderns do, that we can pursue both this world and the things of this world and sensual pleasures and desires and worldly activities and pursuits and also the contemplative spiritual life and practice to escape from and transcend this world and return to the One, is to say and think that one being can go in two completely opposite directions at the same time. It is to say that one can simultaneously go both further into multiplicity and towards greater unity. It is to say that darkness and pure light can both be there together at the same time for the same soul, that we can both know and not-know at the same time, pursue both knowledge and ignorance, pursue both death and life, being and non-being, unreal and real existence at the same time, that subject and object can be both broken up and unified at the same time in the same consciousness. It is to think that we can contemplate both weakly and strongly at the same time. True renunciation, both inner and outer, as much as possible is spiritual and contemplative practice. Obviously, as unclear as it is to so many moderns, there can be no real contemplative and spiritual practice and life without true celibate asceticism. As best as we can, we have to and can only go in one direction or the other—we can't have both. As best as we can, we either love the Good or this world—the first is our true innate love and results in renunciation and asceticism and turning all our attention and desire and love and aspiration to the Good; the second is the false love of marginally existent worldlings and leads to worldliness and continued minimal and miserable existence.
Truly, those who deny the absolute and unquestionable necessity and value and beauty of full world renunciation and celibate, vegetarian, teetotaling, etc. contemplative asceticism can never have really touched and known at all in contemplation the One or Good or God or Absolute they claim to be seeking or following. If they had, they would have been overwhelmed by Its indescribable and inconceivable perfection, wonderfulness, luminosity, knowing, unity, fullness and goodness and realized that this world and the things of this world and the senses are just nothing in comparison and are only to be renounced and forsaken. Renunciation and contemplative asceticism would have appeared as obviously the only possible way of real spiritual and contemplative practice. Even the thought of any other way and greater separation from the One would be unbearable to them. Their love for the Good would be too intense to allow them to think that any other love is allowable or desirable. Real, full and true renunciation and celibate contemplative asceticism is, logically, rationally, metaphysically, mystically and spiritually, the true reflection or representation of the Absolute in this world.
©2016 Eric S. Fallick platonicascetic (with) (Gee)mail (period) com
