Inquiry from a "Minimalist"

 Q.  I've been listening to your lectures on YouTube for a while now and have slowly been incorporating Platonic ascetic practices into my own lifestyle. And while I understand that we should not dedicate much focus to the trappings of this physical existence (e.g. fashion, social status, wealth), nevertheless we must live in this world to some extent.

Over the years, I've often wondered if you had a personal rule or rules regarding physical possessions. As a follower of the extreme minimalism movement, I strive to own as little as reasonably possible. For instance, my ideal possessions include two changes of clothes, the minimum amount of toiletries to maintain hygiene, a phone, identifying documents, and a bag to hold them in. The application of extreme minimalism in my life extends further to include things such as property and social obligations.

I'm aware that some of these concepts apply to your own life per your recorded lectures, but I'm writing to see if you can elaborate more on how possessions play a role in your life. For instance, how do you decide the amount and type of clothing to own? What is your stance on furniture and bedding (many followers of extreme minimalism forgo furniture and simply live on the floor so to speak)? How does technology play a role in your lifestyle (e.g. do you own a phone)?

A.   Thank you for listening to my videos and for reaching out.  It is nice to hear that you have been gradually taking up some Platonic ascetic practices I have described.

As regards material possessions, I want and try to have as few and little and inexpensive as is reasonably possible for survival in this complicated brave new modern techno-world and in a temperate climate and still having to work part-time (I am not yet retired).  Of course, I don't have and never have had and never would have a car or a television or a stereo or any expensive or 'big ticket' items or any property or my own condominium or house (by far, the single most expensive thing I have is my prescription eyeglasses, which are a necessity I can't do without), but beyond that I don't really have a rule or rules about those few necessary things I need to have--I just decide as I go along on an ad hoc basis.  Also, whatever clothing or other things I have, I keep until they are fully worn out and no longer functional, so I have various things that are more than 30, 40, or even 50 years old.  When I do need to get something, which I really don't like doing or have interest in doing, I just try to decide what is reasonably in accord with voluntary ascetic poverty and what effect it might have on my soul and its constitution.  As regards clothing, I do wear out a pair of running shoes every several months (and I can't wear them once the heels are too worn out because it makes my knees hurt), since I have to walk all the time, even just to get to the bus, but only purchase new (vegan/non-leather, of course!) ones that are on sale or less expensive.  I only wear Dickies' work pants, of which I have a few pairs, keeping at least one that is in fairly good shape to wear to work.  I have one pair of vegan Adidas Stan Smith sneakers that I got on sale to wear to work and going to and from the bus, when it is raining or there is snow.  I have some shirts, some very old and worn, and have to have my separate work shirts (imprinted with the Mathnasium, where I work, logo).  I have to have some outerwear for when it is cold, an umbrella for when it rains, some separate thick socks for when it is very cold, etc.  I just live in a room I rent in an old run down rooming house.  It is already furnished with a bed, so I do have one, a couple old rickety chairs. a warped fold up table, etc.  I also have an old bookcase that I brought with me here for my Greek books and texts and auxiliary English ascetic books (though these I usually give away as soon as I have read them).  I am 65 now, and can no longer sit cross-legged on the floor or sleep on the floor (though a mattress on the floor would be OK when I might have to move some time) like I used to when I was younger.  As far as technology goes, I have a small inexpensive Chromebook, on which I am writing this to you.  I do have a cell phone, but only a flip phone, not a 'smart phone'--just a phone to talk, not as a computer with 'apps' and so forth--for the service for which I only pay $20/mo.

Anyway, this has already gotten pretty long.  I hope I have answered your question somewhat at least.  In sum, though I long for the old days and places where and when a renunciant could manage with just the clothes on his back and a few utensils, and dislike having material possessions and anything that binds to or is involved in or directs attention to this world, and want to have as few as possible, it is no longer possible to do this entirely in our present circumstances and at least where I live in suburban Maryland in the Washington DC area where winter can be quite cold (especially lately!), there can be heavy rain, etc.  So, I do the best I can just to survive in minimal fashion--again, without a specific rule or rules except the principle of voluntary monastic poverty, just deciding as best I can as I go along.  Still, all my material possessions all together (except the bookcase) could fit in the back of a car.  Incidentally, I don't use the word 'minimalism' or think of it.  I think in terms of renunciation and ascetic and monastic poverty, which is absolutely essential spiritually, along traditional lines.

What Is To Be Done

                                                What Is To Be Done

by Eric S. Fallick

“So that for him some acts will be contributing towards blessedness (eudaimonia), but some will not be for the sake of the goal (telos) and won’t be of him at all, but for the thing being yoked together (with him), which he will take thought for and bear, while it is possible…”

[Ennead 1.4, 16.21-24]

For many thousands of lifetimes, over countless eons, throughout the long dark night of time, we have been undergoing repeated rebirths in all sorts of forms, human and non-human, in the beginningless and endless cycle of genesis, becoming, samsara, birth and death, individuated sensate existence in space-time.  This is nothing but darkness and non-being, pure and constant misery and unsatisfactoriness and impermanence.  It is nothing but separation from the Good, the experience of multiplicity and individuality instead of the experience of the One–this in itself is the most horrible intrinsic suffering and fallen and undesirable state.  Now, we have the extremely rare and precious opportunity to implement and follow the Path to liberation, to re-union with the One, to release forever from the cycle of rebirth and all the attendant inherent pain of individuated spatio-temporal sensate existence.  To not make the most of this opportunity, to be concerned about and devoted to the ephemeral and momentary and worthless things of this world instead, is the most foolish and tragic thing possible.  Nothing else at all matters in this world and this brief life.  Our only concern is striving towards the goal of release and return.  In this world, the only thing that actually determines whether someone is blessed, well off, in a good condition, happy or not is the distance or closeness of the soul to or from the One/the Good, and with it the progress towards or regression from release from becoming.  Everything else that goes on in the world or that people experience is really and ultimately trivial and unimportant.  The only real distinction to view among people is between those aspiring for and working towards re-union with the One and release from samsara and those who are not, between those who have renounced this world for the Absolute and those who have not.  So, apart from this, all the goings on and 'news' and problems and sufferings and so forth that we see and hear about in the world are really meaningless and indistinct--just more and more endless samsara and just another unvarying drop in the bucket of becoming.  The specific details don't really mean anything from this broader and more general and truer perspective.  Of course, some people are creating better mundanely good karma and some, most perhaps, are creating bad, and the good will be happier than the bad in a mundane sense, but it is all still just endless turning of the wheel--only someone aspiring for the Path in some way is really significant.  The only thing worth doing in this world is turning from it and working on the Way.  However, alas, we also have to maintain this skin bag (body) and psycho-physical organism and mind to the minimum extent necessary so that we can continue in the askesis.

Given this state of affairs, the way things are, there are only two legitimate, acceptable, real reasons for doing anything, for any act or action or thought or word:  Either it is part of contemplative ascetic practice, is part of traveling on the Path, leads to and makes progress towards liberation from birth and death, to return to the Good, to the end of individuation, to the telos; or it is necessary, really necessary, to maintain one’s existence, to maintain body and mind, to maintain the psycho-physical organism, to continue to live in the mundane sense in a reasonable manner so that we can continue the askesis.  Everything else, every and any other motivation, every other act is proscribed, illegitimate, and deadly foolishness.

Of course, this is not easy to implement.  It is probably especially difficult in the beginning and early stages of the practice when withdrawal from sensual pleasures and worldly activities and interests is new and still ongoing and capability for and power of practice is still undeveloped.  Also, some people may have various worldly obligations, duties, commitments, and burdens that they took on before they raised the aspiration for the Way in this birth and which have, of course, to be discharged properly with due righteousness and dutifulness.  It is fairly clear what acts constitute the contemplative ascetic practice and fall under the first criterion; but the difficulty lies in accurately and honestly discerning what are the really necessary actions under the second criterion of mere survival in accordance with one’s individual capacities and abilities and circumstances and having the awareness and presence of mind and discipline and determination to act according to such correct discernment of what is minimally necessary for psycho-physical survival and adequate functioning to optimally maintain the askesis.

The activities that constitute the actual contemplative ascetic practice, that fall under the first criterion, that belong to the true higher soul, that lead to the goal and release and re-union, that are real, include all aspects of ascetic withdrawal and practice, the actual practice of formal sitting in contemplation, spiritual reading and study (and, as ancillary, for those capable of it, language study to learn Ancient Greek to be able to actually read the primary spiritual texts, such as the Dialogs and Enneads, the reading of which constitutes a form of auxiliary contemplation and for which translations are inadequate), and, possibly, sharing and discussion with true spiritual friends (if you can find any here in the depths of the modern Kali Yuga!).  That’s it!

The minimum actions that are merely necessary for psycho-physical survival, for maintaining mind and body in good condition to serve for the contemplative ascetic practice proper, that don’t really belong to the higher self or soul and the sage, that don’t directly conduce to liberation, are not always quite so clear, especially in the circumstances of the present day.  Obviously, what ones are really necessary include eating/food and water (and, of course, subsequent excretion!), sleeping, clothing, housing, some exercise, healthcare (including dental care and vision care), bathing and washing and other forms of hygiene, and so forth.  These generally require some money and so working is generally required to earn it and is included here.  The rub here is that exactly how much and what form of each of these things is required and how they are best obtained and done varies and depends on the individual’s capability and capacity and ability and given physical and mental and emotional karmic factory equipment and individual situation and circumstances.  Always, though, of course, we are talking about only the minimum necessary of such things, with no luxury and no regard for sensual pleasure or enjoyment or the opinion of worldlings or social expectations or etc.  Thus, each individual has to discern and decide these for themselves and their circumstances, based on a sound understanding of ascetic and spiritual and contemplative principles and consultation with the spiritual texts and, if and when possible, with true ascetic spiritual friends.  This can often be unclear and difficult to ascertain and an ongoing process of discernment and adjustment.  Nonetheless, these basic items needed for minimal physical survival in consonance with proper ascetic poverty and conduct are comparatively clear.  One thing that is obviously and most uncompromisingly clear is that the discharging and obtaining of these physical necessities must always be done in the most scrupulously righteous, honest, and non-harming (and, of course, this means vegan in food, clothing, shoes, accessories, medicines, personal care products, etc.!) manner no matter what–this can’t be compromised even if it were to mean not having necessities and dying!

What is even more difficult to discern and understand, however, is what activities and to what extent are permissible for maintaining one’s mental and emotional state in a condition suitable for the contemplative ascetic practice, including how much and in what manner it is necessary to refresh and rest the mind and emotions and have something resembling ‘recreation’ and how much and what sort of people contact is necessary to avoid excessive depression and anxiety and mental distortion.  It is, of course, being assumed here that fully committed and devoted celibate, solitary, vegan, teetotalling, contemplative, etc. renunciants and ascetics are being addressed.  The practitioner has to discern, at any given stage of practice, just how hard they can practice in a sustained manner without undue emotional and mental disruption, how much social isolation they can handle, and how much time they have to devote, however unwillingly, to a little mental, emotional, and human rest and refreshment and by what means they can properly fulfill this reluctant need.  Some means are obviously proscribed and not acceptable:  movies, television, fiction, popular music, worldly social events, excessive reading or viewing or hearing of the news, social action, political activities, premeditated socializing with worldlings, etc.  (Those who still have family obligations and commitments may not be able to avoid all family functions and gatherings and so forth.  They will have to decide and discern about this on a case by case basis.)  Acceptable forms of ‘recreation’ may be such as reading various works of and about ascetics and spiritual understandings and practices in different systems, which can be helpful for company and encouragement as well as relaxation and can also sometimes provide helpful ancillary knowledge and background, discussing such, if you can somehow find anybody now with whom to do so or who at least likes to hear about it, walking outdoors, which also provides the needed exercise to maintain the physical body, watching videos about ascetics in different systems on the internet, looking for and researching books and works on asceticism and the like, reading outside, weather permitting, researching about veganism and acceptable products and how to manage doing least harm, such as also to the environment, and learning about the intelligence and sensitivity of animals, and so forth.  The hardest thing, probably, is the problem of social isolation in the circumstances of the present day in which we find ourselves.  Ideally, all ordinary human social contact that is necessary to keep from going crazy and being over-tense at any given stage and progress on the Path would be provided by interaction with true ascetic spiritual friends–the only other people truly and really worth having anything to do with.  These are hard to find even in the best of times and circumstances, but now are especially rare and one can hardly count on this being available at present.  So what to do?  Of course, premeditated socializing and attending social events with ordinary worldlings is out of the question.  In the absence of spiritual friends or enough spiritual friends, probably about the best one can do for a little human contact is to get by with just brief unplanned casual encounters with people one meets or has to meet with in the course of discharging the other necessary actions: neighbors, coworkers, housemates, passersby, fellow passengers on public transportation, etc. (those still with family relationships they can’t get out of too much can include interaction with family–which may be more than too much for this purpose!).  One has to be careful, especially early on in the askesis, not to be sucked into and influenced by their worldly views, attitudes, understandings, opinions, advice, and acts, but, hopefully, this can be done, one can get a little human contact of however an undesirable sort without too much harm, and come out largely unscathed.  One can try to talk to them about what one actually does and is as an ascetic, however uncomprehending they may be.  Not ideal, but maybe the only option possible.  It is important to note that interaction with bad, false alleged spiritual friends is actually an even worse option.  Casually talking and interacting with chance worldlings one can more easily distance oneself from them, recognize their foolishness and evil, admonish oneself not to be like them, protect oneself by talking about such things as veganism, and turn to the writings and records of the ancient true practitioners for inspiration and guidance, to the “community of saints”, as it were.  But with bad supposed spiritual friends and false ascetics or non-ascetics, “wolves in sheep’s clothing”, (and such are mostly all there are these days!) one is liable to be subtly drawn in and mislead by their sophistries and fall from the Way!

The key in this matter is:  First, to understand and accept and commit and be devoted to the principle outlined here that there are only two acceptable and legitimate and justifiable reasons for doing anything–either because it is part of contemplative ascetic practice and leads to re-union with the Good and liberation from birth and death, or because it is indispensably necessary to maintain psycho-physical survival in this birth.  Next, with understanding and discernment of what is necessary, to honestly assess one’s own motivations in performing any act or doing anything.  Is it really necessary, if it is not part of the askesis, or is it really because of remaining worldly desire and interest?  Lastly, to discern as best as possible what really is absolutely necessary in any doing in this world, apart from the contemplative ascetic practice, and to do only that regardless of the latent habits and desires of the lower defiled worldly self.  Every act we do either moves us further on the Path to the telos, if we choose wisely, or binds us further to the wheel of birth and death and creates more suffering samsaric karma.  In everything we do, we must try to discern as best as we can which this action is and be honest as to our motivation and what we are doing, and with great discipline, enthusiasm, love, effort, and joy try to always take the upward Path!

Why was this essay written?  “...but the gardens in writings, as it seems, he will both sow and will write for the sake of play, whenever he would write, storing up reminders both for himself, if he should come to the “forgetting of old age”, and for everyone following the same track…”  [Phaedrus 276 d1-4]

© 2024 Eric S. Fallick

A Q. and A. on the cenobium vs. eremiticism

 

Q. We talked about the cenobitical vs. the eremtical life approaches.  A point that I didn't think of while we were talking, but was hovering in the back of my mind, is that cenobitical approaches live in accordance with a rule (like the Rule of St. Benedict).  That is to say that every member of a cenobium has to align their daily activities in accordance with an objective rule that is the basic structure of that way of life.  I think this has advantages for spiritual practice.  It means that those who participate in this way of life have abandoned personal choices in many areas of life (e.g. when to eat, what to wear, etc.).  I see this as a form of renunciation that opens up the possibility of a higher goal in life, beyond that of self-satisfaction in making one's own choices.  

 

A. Would you like me to respond briefly to this observation?  We could always talk about it more sometime if you like, but a few quick thoughts follow.  I understand that this is a common argument made by the cenobium in its favor, but I don't think it is really valid or is a superiority of cenobitical monasticism over eremitical.  (By the way, as I'm sure you know, all the monastic traditions that I know of--Buddhist, Jaina, Hindu, Christian, Quanzhen Daoist--started as eremitical and then only in time developed cenobitical forms that eventually took over and declared themselves to be superior, but were never able to entirely eliminate the original eremitical ideal.  Reform movements within them tended towards a return to the original eremitical way as superior for actual spiritual practice and attainment.  And there have always been individual renunciant practitioners within them who were truly striving for liberation who took to and remained in the eremitical life of spiritual necessity, who were the greatest in their systems, and often the systems always retained this as an option.  Anyway, it would take a long time to discuss all of this and various examples in detail.)

Eremitical renunciants, at least real ones, also very much, at least as much, follow an objective rule that is the basic structure of their way of life and renounce and give up personal choices of the lower self and self-satisfaction therein.  They, however, have to have the discipline to do it themselves without external enforcement and be able to do it with understanding of the principles and reasons involved (though some may not always have had such understanding).  Further, their objective rule or way is, at least ideally or at least for Platonists, the actual 'rule' or requirements in the very nature of reality, not a more or less conditioned rule created by a specific temporospatial figure or group.  They must conform themselves to the 'paradigm laid up in heaven for those who want to see it and seeing it establish a colony in themselves', which is the most objective and least self-satisfied and of idiosyncratic choices 'rule' or 'way' possible.  This, I think, even more, much more, opens the possibility of a higher goal in life, indeed the highest.

Many of the arguments that the cenobium and other institutionalized spiritual groups use for their advantages, including, I think, this one, I think are confusing conditioned, and ultimately mundane, personal development with actual unconditioned based spiritual advancement.  Of course, individual eremites can confuse these also, but real spiritual practice has to be based on a genuine aspiration and determination from within that comes from the Good starting to re-manifest Itself from within the practitioner/ascetic, and thus is very far from a self-satisfied personal choice.  (The decision to follow a cenobitical rule and be part of the group and let them make the choices in certain regards can be just as much a self-satisfying personal choice without necessarily having real unconditioned spiritual motivation.)

These are big and most important topics that are a lot to go into, but here are a couple quick thoughts of mine to go with yours.  Incidentally, as I guess you know, historically, many eremitical monastics have actually had written 'rules' like those of cenobites that they had to follow given to them by preceptors or institutional authorities or written by themselves.

If it is of any help to think of it in this way, not going to social or worldly events like the fine dining experience that you narrowly escaped is an objective rule for eremitical renunciants and one that is inscribed in Reality Itself and something that you don't really have a personal choice about--you simply can't do such things but have to be 100% focused on the askesis, especially given impermanence and your age and condition and the urgency of 'the Great Matter of Birth and Death'.

If Platonism had ever manifested as an organized religious institution or an organized monastic institution, it would have become, by definition, another thing of this world, another conditioned phenomena, and, like all things of this world and conditioned phenomena, been subject to impermanence, change, decay, decline, corruption, destruction, and disappearance.  It would have lost its pure transcendence and liberative power, like all the other systems that did become institutions for the many.  It would have become, to whatever degree, just a shadow or phantom, rather than a real being, like everything else in the sense world, including the other religious and spiritual systems and institutions that are part of the sense world.

 

We are trying to get free entirely from this world and all phenomenal sensory spatio-temporal individuated worlds.  We renounce this world entirely and completely as far as we can in all its respects and hold only to the Absolute, to Transcendence.  Organized, institutionalized monasticism doesn't actually do this.  It just creates another alternative conditioned phenomenal world of its own, complete with costumes, uniforms, rituals, ceremonies, ranks, hierarchies, positions and offices, laws and codes, etiquettes, properties, finances and maintenances,  family structures and bonds and attachments, politics, entertainments, emotional appeals and satisfactions, etc., etc.--all the things of this world that we have renounced and they are supposed to have renounced!  Thus, while it is certainly much better than ordinary worldly life and can be a useful, and, for many, necessary, half-way house, it is difficult to attain full true liberation within it.  This is why most of the real people, even if they formally belonged to a monastic order and were initially brought up in the cenobium, even in the highly institutionalized systems, tended to eventually become hermits, solitaries, forest ascetics, etc. to try to really practice and pursue liberation and perfection.

A Platonist "precept"/"vow" of monastic poverty

 Given here is an explicit statement of philosophos conduct/practice that could be added to a list of such surviving explicit "regulations" compiled from the extant written Platonist texts, from the Dialogs to the end of Platonism in antiquity, though so much appears to be lost or never committed to writing, though the Phaedo also enjoins voluntary monastic poverty, I think, pretty explicitly, and it is also at least implied, if not outright stated, in the Politea:

 

"O both dear Pan and how many other gods (are) here, give to me to become/be beautiful/noble inside: but how much I have outside to be friendly with the things inside for me.  And may I consider the wise person rich: and may the quantity of gold for me be how much no one other than the one having control over sensual desires, the sane person, would be able to bear or manage/observe."  (Phaedrus, 279 b9-c3)

 

The above is my own rendering, which may differ noticeably from other translations of the Phaedrus.

 

Here are a few other explicit  statements for a list for a philosophos’ “rule” from some surviving fragments (all in my own quick, rough draft, off the cuff translations):

From Olympiodorus' commentary on the Phaedo:

" "The philosopher, as far as is not absolutely necessary, looks down upon/disdains the care of the body"...The are three (kinds of) activities:  either natural and necessary, as taking nourishment and sleeping; or natural, but not necessary, as sexual intercourse; or neither natural nor necessary, as finery and how many things there are of variegated clothing--there being these three (kinds of) activities, therefore, the philosopher will have nothing at all to do with the natural but not necessary and the neither natural nor necessary, but will thrust them away from himself/reject/despise them (for nocturnal emissions will suffice for him in regard to secretion of semen), but he will make use of the first (i.e., the natural and necessary) a little bit perfunctorily/pro forma, as not to take his fill/make much of them.  "If, then, these things are thus, the philosopher, as far as is not absolutely necessary, disdains the body; such a one is willing to die; the philosopher therefore practices death."..."

This is a clear and explicit statement that the Platonist philosophos is a celibate ascetic. 

From Damascius' commentary on the Phaedo:

"...the contemplative philosopher is one wanting as his goal having been made one with the (hypostases) above himself and to be theirs rather than of himself:  on which account (Plato) says "(it is not lawful) for the not pure to touch the pure".

It is necessary for the one being purified and hastening to be made like the Pure first to reject pleasures and pains as far as he is able; second, he must nourish himself with plain, simple food without luxury, but also food that is righteous and temperate (but this is untainted with blood and spotless) and that is holy and in accord with ancestral practice (for the food that is unholy and harming animals and coarsening the spirit makes the body intractable to the soul and unfit for contact with God); third, he must cut off the unharmonious wrong motion of the appetitive irrationality (for what would one standing aloof from all external things desire and with what would he be angry?), but if ever such a sort of thing would be moved either awake or asleep, it is most quickly put down by the reason; fourth, he must keep away from all sense-perceptions and imaginations, as far as it is not necessary to use them; fifth, the one wanting to be released from the multiplicity of becoming is to be separated from the opinions of all various sorts; the sixth precept out of all of them, is to escape the variegated complexity of thought and pursue the simpler expositions and distinctions with a view to becoming accustomed to the undivided intelligence."

This is an injunction to vegetarianism. 

The Timaeus is explicitly vegan, as is the Epinomis.

Of course, Porphyry tells us in the "Life" that Plotinus "didn't abide to take medicines made from wild animals, saying that neither did he allow foods from the bodies of domesticated animals" and Porphyry, of course, wrote his whole book on the necessity of vegetarianism, and with it philosophical asceticism.

Though it is not directly from Platonism, but from Neo-Pythagoreanism, which is likely more derived from Platonism, in Philostratus' LIfe of Apollonius of Tyana, Apollonius is given as explicitly and in detail setting forth as necessary 'precepts' 'the big three':  celibacy in all respects,  vegetarianism and probably veganism (including not wearing leather, etc.), and teetotalling:

“For if someone has come to my standards of conduct, he would choose to get rid of all food (lit., how much of a table) of (i.e., coming from) animals; and he would utterly forget wine and not make turbid the vessel of wisdom that stands in the souls of those abstaining from wine; neither a cloak will warm him, nor wool, that has been shorn from an animal, and I give to him shoes of papyrus, and to lie down to sleep as it chances; and if I perceive him giving way to sexual desire and love, I have pits of perdition down into which Righteousness, the attendant of Wisdom, bears such people and thrusts them (into them)...”

I think that probably the above examples could be expanded and multiplied many times through searching the fragmentary surviving texts and probably there were many more such explicit prescriptions in the likely much greater bulk of Platonist literature that is lost to us (for example, because of the Muslims burning the great ancient library of Alexandria and the Christians burning whatever may have escaped the Muslims!), but just the above, with, of course, the Phaedo, Republic, and Timaeus and others, may perhaps be enough to obviate concern about any lack of structure or definite prescriptions in Platonism.  It seems that the ascetic Path of Platonism is pretty clear, it's just that it is left to the individual, who is one of the few not the many and is presumed to have some spiritual discernment himself, to work out the exact details in each particular circumstance, without, for instance, the sort of long lists of silly, absurd, and neurotic details given in, for example, the Buddhist Vinayas and the sort of attempts criticized in the Republic to endlessly create detailed rules for every particular circumstance to try to make up for a lack of actual righteousness, renunciation, asceticism, and spiritual discernment and informed-ness and intelligence enabling the ascetic to decide more correctly what to do in each case in accordance with the actual principles of the contemplative ascetic life and practice and the single-minded striving for release and the telos without worldly concerns and desires. 

 

I might make another suggestion of a resolution to feeling a want of a set of formal precepts or regulations for Platonist contemplative ascetics/philosophoi in the extant texts--in fact, a more really Platonist, perhaps, and ultimately more satisfactory and definitive solution.  It is, though, one that is not necessarily easy to implement and hardly anyone now could do it or even try to do it.  If one can manage to clearly and fully "see" or "touch" or "know" or come in contact with in contemplation, having ascended to the noetic realm, to the level of Nous, and entering into it, the actual Form/Idea of "contemplative-ascetic-in itself" or "contemplative-asceticism-in-itself" or "philosophos-in-itself" or "Platonist-renunciant/yogi-in-itself" or etc.--however, one might choose to label it just as a means of focussing on that one particular Form as it truly and really and paradigmatically exists in Nous--one will find that it contains in itself, is the higher source of, (in unity and interpenetration with the separate Forms of the individual virtues, etc.) all the practices/"precepts"/necessary prescriptions/standards of conduct/"regulations”, etc. that we talk about--celibacy, veganism, teetotaling, monastic poverty, abstaining from worldly entertainments, simplicity of food, drink, and clothing, world-renunciation, solitude, sitting in contemplation practice, etc., etc.  All are there, though, of course, not in a series or list of statements in English(!) at the level of discursive thought, but as the actual really existing aspects of the complex level Form.  After thoroughly contemplating this Form at the level of Nous, when the soul is not even really, in a sense, itself but has entered into a degree of unity with Nous, when the soul returns to this level the logoi corresponding to or emanating from the Form will appear clearly in the soul as the statements of necessary practice or conduct at the discursive verbal level.  Hard for me to put the matter into words and a hard thing to do, but I think this is a much more ultimately satisfactory source of and point of reliance for, the real thing, what constitutes ascetic practice and conduct than feeling dependent on karmically appearing sensory experience, which is, after all, really what any text we have is.  As Platonist contemplative ascetics, we have a great advantage and freedom in that our "regulations" of renunciant/ascetic conduct are eternally there and always accessible and real and unerring and not a matter of opinion in the realm of being, in the noetic realm, and we don't have to depend on karmically chancing to encounter teachings of such in the uncertain, always changing, impermanent, only the object of opinion not actual knowledge, sensory realm of becoming like practitioners of other systems.  (And, ultimately, even further, our askesis comes from the source of all knowledge, the Good Itself, and direct contact and union with the Good will also, even more, upon the return, lead to all the logoi of contemplative ascetic practice being present at the discursive level in the soul.)  All the prescriptions and ideas of ascetic practice that we read about in Platonist texts and/or in the texts of other systems can then serve as reminders to help the soul recollect the real ascetic standards that it once knew in itself and now recontacts or remembers or learns in contemplation.  (The Platonist teaching of learning being recollection solves a multitude of difficulties!)

 

The Reason for Asceticism

Q. I've read a few chapters of your book, and it has prompted me to think more about asceticism, attempting to answer the question: Why is asceticism important and even necessary for the moral and spiritual development of the person? In short, what is the reason for asceticism? 

At this stage, my understanding is that asceticism functions to counteract the cause of our corporeal existence. When the nous fell or broke from unity, there must have been some initial movement, creating the momentum to cause the nous to fall or precipitate from the Good to the lesser, temporal goods (and evils) of mortal and bodily existence. This initial movement was an act of carelessness or negligence with regard to the nous and its unity with the Good. The nous carelessly and negligently turned away from unity to multiplicity in order to pursue individuation, which divided the nous into nous, soul, and body. 

Asceticism is carefulness and thoughtfulness (the antithesis of negligence) functioning as a therapy or antidote or the application of justice to the careless and negligent movement of the nous away from the One, underpinning a process of purification via the instrument of the body that removes the passions from the soul, and allowing in turn for the recovery and return of the nous to unity. 

I was wondering if you could comment on this, confirm my understanding, or correct it in any way? 

A. Thank you for reading some of my book. I don't know if you have read or will get to some of the other essays that explain more of the reason for asceticism, though most of them do in one way or another, and also point out that asceticism is not just instrumental, but the very manifestation or reflection of the Good in this world. In the divine Plato, the Phaedo, especially, among the dialogs, gives extensively the rationale for asceticism, though parts of others do also, and much of the Enneads also explains this (in relation particularly to what you say, see, eg., the beginning of Ennead 5.1). 

I wouldn't say that what you say is incorrect, though I wouldn't say that it is the whole story. One thing I would 'correct', since you ask, is where you say "...purification via the instrument of the body...". I would say, rather, that asceticism is purification from the body, not using the body as an instrument, but rather having as little to do with it (and the sense world) as possible. As you indicate, the fall of the soul is from unity, the Good/One and Nous into cyclic individuated sensate existence in space-time, into the cycle of repeated reincarnation and sensory/bodily existence, and this we have to get free from and return to just being Nous and the One only. To do this, we have to turn the soul, and the whole soul, back around 180 degrees from looking and being in the direction of this lowest darkest least real level of multiplicity and individuated temporal-spatial quasi-existence to looking only at and being only in (and this is the only true being) Nous and the Good. Being involved with the body and the things of this world and pursuing the things of the senses and sensual pleasures and the things of this world of every kind and in every sense is exactly being in the fallen state and pursuing it further and running ever deeper into it and birth and death and looking towards and having the soul turned towards the darkness. Asceticism, having as little to do with the body and the sense world as possible, just doing the minimum necessary to keep the psycho-physical organism going until we can be rid of it, being unconcerned with sensual pleasures, dealing with and seeking only those things of this world minimally necessary for survival, and voluntarily being concerned only with the 

things of the soul and the divine, turning the whole soul as much as possible from the body and sense things to look at and strive for the higher hypostases, is this very process of turning from this fall into and state of becoming back to Nous and the One. This also points towards why I say that asceticism isn't just instrumental, isn't just a means that has to be justified. The highly accomplished contemplative, but who still is bearing his last body and not completely done yet until he is completely free from body, sensory experience, individuation, and being at all in this 'material' world and becoming, would be permanently turned back to Nous and the One except for such minimal attention as still being embodied for a while yet more requires for maintaining the remaining psychophysical existence, and couldn't give more attention to and be concerned with this world and especially sensual pleasures, possessions, etc., etc. than that even if he tried. Not being an ascetic would be not being a contemplative, would be being back in bondage, would be being back an ordinary worldling again. Contemplation and asceticism necessarily go together, are two aspects of the same process, two sides of one coin. Sensual and worldly indulgence and involvement is the exact opposite of contemplation and spiritual practice and moves the soul in the exact opposite direction. One, the soul, can only move in one direction at a time, so there is simply the choice of either pursuing sensual pleasures and worldly things and anti-contemplation and going deeper into bondage and binding oneself tighter to the wheel of birth and death, or renouncing this world and the things of this world and the senses and pursuing asceticism and contemplation hand in hand and going towards freedom from becoming and re-union with Nous and the One. 

I hope that this answers your request for comment a little. It could be a lot to go into in thorough detail and in all aspects. Incidentally, your question sort of reminded me a little of how completely different my way of looking at things, and that of true contemplative ascetics generally, if there are any now, is from that of the world and worldlings, especially now in this modern brave new world. Contemplative asceticism, renunciation, is the obvious necessity and fact and true way and only life that is really life--this seems so obvious and the reasons so clear that the rationale hardly needs to be rehearsed--the burden of proof would be on those who might claim that asceticism and renunciation isn't the way and for any worldlings who would attempt to justify their way, though it would, of course, be impossible for them to do so and they and their thoughts are not in any way in accord with Reality! 

These Writings Now Available in Book Form

The essays, pieces, and translations on this blogspot site up to this date are now available in printed book form from lulu.com and all the regular online retail booksellers.  The full information:  Eric Fallick, Platonist Contemplative Asceticism:  Practice and Principle, ISBN 978-0-359-77301-5.
http://www.lulu.com/shop/eric-fallick/platonist-contemplative-asceticism-practice-and-principle/paperback/product-24173074.html

Platonist Contemplative Asceticism in the Present Day

Platonist Contemplative Asceticism in the Present Day

By Eric S. Fallick

We find ourselves separated from the One, the Good and trapped in the cycle of repeated birth and death in individuated sensate existence in space-time, in genesis, in becoming, with all its attendant and intrinsic misery and pain. Under these circumstances, the only at all sane and joyful thing to do is to strive single-mindedly and exclusively, as much as possible, to attain release from the cycle of reincarnation, liberation, and re-union with the Good, to re-become the One. How is this to be done? There is only one way, that of thorough renunciation of the world and exclusive devotion to asceticism and contemplation, as incomprehensible and incredible and uncongenial as this may be to the deluded worldlings of this modern brave new world where the whole idea of true renunciation and contemplative asceticism has almost been completely lost and so few are left who really understand and are willing to follow the Path.

What does this renunciation and practice entail? There are some essential and indispensable minimum requirements. Celibacy, literally and completely and in its fullest and broadest sense, is a first requirement and dividing line from the worldly life. Essential also is vegetarianism, or, preferably, veganism. This includes not only not eating any animals or anything derived from animals, but also non-harming in all respects, including not wearing leather, not using any animal products, not killing insects, and, in general, not harming or killing any sentient beings at all, human or animal, in any way as much as possible. Also necessary is complete teetotalling or abstinence from alcohol or any other intoxicants or intoxicating non-medicinal drugs of any sort. Complete honesty in all one’s speech and dealings is, of course, necessary, as contrary as it actually runs to the way of the world. One also should not earn one’s living or gain necessary worldly survival items by any means that harms other beings physically, morally, or spiritually. Being completely devoted to spiritual practice, one should avoid attending worldly entertainments, watching television and movies, etc. One should also avoid attending worldly social events, engaging in idle worldly talk, etc. as much as possible in one’s individual circumstances. In general, the principle is to be totally and exclusively devoted to and engaged in spiritual practice and study, beyond what is minimally necessary to maintain this psycho-physical existence until we can be rid of it in final liberation, and to avoid all worldly things and activities and engagements. The individual needs to work out the exact details of what to do in each situation and in their own particular circumstances with understanding, sincerity, and discernment and in accordance with the essential principle of renunciation and the desire to be solely devoted to attaining release and re-union. An extensive or exhaustive list of individual detailed rules is unnecessary and ineffective and only leads to legalism and self-deception and obsessive-compulsiveness.

Established and continually further establishing oneself in full renunciation as the practice progresses, doing the best one can and always working for the renunciant ideal in accordance with the necessities of one’s circumstances and minimum psycho-physical survival, study and meditative reading is also an important and valuable part of the Path. The dialogues of Plato (starting with and especially the Phaedo) and the Enneads of Plotinus (and, allegorically understood, the Odyssey of Homer), supplemented by such works as the Dissertations of Maximus of Tyre, Boethius’ Consolation of Philosophy, etc. are the principal texts for reading and study, but much can also be learned from the different texts of the different systems. In general, I think that wide study of and working knowledge of the different ascetic, renunciant, monastic, contemplative, and mystical spiritual systems of the world is quite helpful and useful, especially in the circumstances of the present time. To be able to read the essential texts in the original Ancient Greek, though a non-trivial endeavor to say the least, is also helpful as translations cannot be relied upon and are always missing something.
With renunciation and knowledge, one can devote oneself to the actual practice of formal sitting in contemplation. This is the central practice and focus of the contemplative ascetic and the core and thrust of the effort towards the One and out of becoming, and is how the contemplative ascetic spends the greater part of his time apart from all the necessary activities for psycho-physical survival. I have described Platonist contemplation practice in detail in The Practice of Contemplation and given beginning instructions in Q. and A.’s, including beginning meditation instructions. It is important to have a thorough knowledge and understanding of the practice of contemplation and of the texts on contemplation.

Hopefully, a reasonably clear picture has been given of the proper renunciant and contemplative ascetic life and what it entails. It is the life that is engaged with and involved with the world and worldly activities of any and every sort only to the minimum extent absolutely necessary to maintain the psycho-physical organism (and that always done only strictly in accord with the principles of morality, honesty, and non-harming) and totally and solely and sincerely devoted exclusively in intention and concern and, as much as possible, in deed to spiritual, ascetic, and contemplative practice to attain liberation from becoming and re-union with the One/Good. Something, however, more may be said about its practical implementation in the circumstances of the present day. People, as another symptom of becoming, genesis, and the delusion associated with it, tend to see renunciation and contemplative asceticism in terms of institutions, institutionalized monasticism, rituals, initiations, titles, uniforms, merit badges, etc. This is, of course, particularly the case in terms of organized, institutional cenobitical monasticism. Eremtical monasticism has always tended less in this direction, has usually been the original less structured form from which cenobitical monasticism has eventually evolved and has often later even been associated with a rejection of institutionalized forms and an attempt to return to original ideals, but the same tendencies tend to come in in people’s perceptions here also. In traditional societies, there has usually been at least some sort of niche or place and respect for renunciants and eremitical renunciants, but this is largely gone in the modern world. Platonism, while being the purest, most austere, most rigorous, and most otherworldly of renunciant and ascetic systems, has never had an institutionalized monastic structure and never become an institutionalized religion for the many. Thus, each Platonist contemplative ascetic and renunciant has always had to work out the particular and practical circumstances and logistical arrangements of his eremitical renunciant contemplative ascetic life and practice on his own, or with whatever few fellow travelers he might in some cases be fortunate enough to find, on a sort of ad hoc basis following and in strict adherence to the renunciant principles such as outlined above with care and discernment relying on his own developed understanding in his particular time and place and circumstances. He has often or generally had to do this without any of the financial, material, logistical, moral, social, psychological, or emotional support or props of the monastic institutions, cenobitical or eremitical, and institutionalized systems. Thus, this may still be done in implementing eremitical contemplative asceticism and renunciation in the adverse and unsupported time and place and circumstances of the present day.

In the atomized, anonymous, urban modern world, if one has sufficient devotion, determination, resolve, sincerity, understanding, and discernment, it is possible to practice devotedly and fully as an eremitical renunciant and contemplative ascetic alone and incognito and without support in the midst of the city. One can try to find a job or work of right livelihood to just earn the necessary minimum subsistence level income with a minimum of distraction. One can try to find simple minimum housing to rent even if it means sharing with worldlings while not doing anything they do and doing only one’s contemplative renunciant life. One can obtain and prepare simple food in a manner requiring a minimum amount of time and attention, considering only maintenance of the body and health, not taste. One can be purely celibate surrounded by women and pornographic and sex-obsessed society and culture. One can be vegan and non-harming surrounded by inter-species cannibals and killers. One can be teetotaling with drinkers and smokers and so forth all around. One can abstain completely from entertainments, including the ubiquitous electronic entertainments, among those who know little else. And so forth--one can be solely concerned with transcending this world and with the higher supra-sensory realities among worldlings who know nothing beyond the senses and the fleeting phantoms of this world. It is, of course, very difficult to do this, especially without any kind of support at all and especially in the procrustean modern society that has no place or respect for renunciants and presents all sorts of obstacles and difficulties to and discrimination against any who don’t fit into the norms of society. It presents all sorts of logistical headaches and great emotional and psychological hardship and loneliness (as the true renunciant life always does), but it is, at present, the only feasible and spiritually effective and viable option for pursuing the true wholly dedicated Platonist contemplative ascetic way and release from becoming, and this is all that really matters. As the Ancient Greek saying goes, “noble and beautiful things are difficult”.

Again, the principle, whatever the particular details of practical implementation for a given individual in a given time and place, is to totally renounce this world and the things of the senses as much as possible outwardly and inwardly in all respects and solely and exclusively as much as possible devote oneself in every way, in intention, desire and deed, to striving for re-union with the One, the Good, and release from becoming, genesis. One must turn both the love and eye of the soul completely around from this world of the senses and becoming to the One or the Good and bring all one’s life and actions and attitudes around in accord with this to the exact opposite of that of the worldlings and the world around one. This must be done even while all the time attending to the burdensome necessities of maintaining the psycho-physical organism until we can be rid of it and even if one is without any support at all--financial, physical, logistical, moral, spiritual, emotional, social, institutional, or psychological--in the quest. There simply is no other possible way to go and the thought of just wallowing in becoming in this and future births like all the worldlings around one cannot even be entertained even for an instant.

Ⓒ 2019 Eric S. Fallick

Silly Moderns Claiming to be 'Non-dualists'

Silly Moderns Claiming to be ‘Non-dualists’

by Eric S. Fallick


Q. I wonder if you would be willing to deal with those who take an immanentist perspective, such as western non-dualists. They would argue that ascesis is a kind of attachment and not necessary. I believe this denies causation as well as the nature of the One, but I would be interested in your thoughts about this.

A. The modern alleged 'non-dualists' you ask about are not actually 'non-dualists' at all, but rather the most extreme dualists and actually pluralists. 'Non-duality' means that there are not two (or more) things, that there is only One. In the One as such, there is only the One, nothing else at all. As I have written about elsewhere, all the appearance of multiplicity is the darkening and lessening of the One. The silly people you refer to denying world-denying-ness and claiming that the most extreme world of multiplicity is the Absolute as it is are completely denying true Oneness and taking duality/multiplicity as the real and the ultimate, and are thus the real dualists or pluralists. The ascetic and renunciant is the real 'non-dualist' since he turns from the sense-world of multiplicity and focuses as much as possible on the One. Even in terms of the second hypostasis, Nous, these people are among the many mentioned in, for example, the Politea who can see many beautiful, etc. things, but can't see or understand or believe in a single beauty, etc.-in-itself even if someone points it out to them and pass their lives as if dreaming rather than awake. The same applies to modern alleged 'immanentism'. For the One to be immanent in the many means that the many are really the One mistakenly perceived to be many due to delusion and darkness, and that one must awaken through contemplative asceticism to see only the One and no longer see multiplicity at all, which, of course, means that asceticism and renunciation that involves decreasing experience of the many as real, desirable, etc. is the only real spiritual practice. The alleged spiritual practice of the silly moderns amounts to no more than grooviness in everyday life, being just an ordinary deluded sensually indulgent desiring worldling but thinking one is cooler than others who don't exalt and rationalize their desires and attachments.

You are quite right that these so-called modern 'non-dualists' and 'immanentists' (really just pluralistic realists and positivists, and not restricted to the West) deny causation and the nature of the One, of Reality, and they are the most deluded and foolish of deluded fools. They are so ridiculous and silly that they wouldn't even be worth a thought except that they are now in this modern world so ubiquitous and numerous, like demons, plague vectors, or a cancer. In Christianity, they hide under the cover of 'creation spirituality' and post-Vatican II and modernism; in Hinduism and Buddhism, they go under 'tantra' (a perversion to begin with, as you have noted); in Buddhism, they also hide under 'emptiness', 'compassion and bodhicitta', misuse of Chan/Zen rhetoric, confusion about Hua-yen teachings, etc., and in Hinduism, also under 'advaita' and sometimes 'bhakti'; the few who now claim to be what they think are Platonists, use 'theurgy' and the perversions and nonsense of Iamblichus, etc.; and etc. and etc. They are all just really simply rationalizing their worldly desires and attachments that they don't want to give up and twisting alleged spirituality and spiritual teachings to allow them to do so, and to fit in with their modern this-worldly prejudices. Their karma is simply very heavy and their minds and souls most clouded and deluded so that they can't see even the most obvious, simple, and basic of spiritual principles. Most of them probably will be lucky if they even manage to get reborn as human beings again! Yet, they are so prevalent now (there have always been some, but not so many and so much the norm) that I tend to think that they and their nonsensical ideas are another symptom of the modern world and its inability to comprehend transcendence, renunciation, and genuine spiritual practice. (I have been waging this fight against this kind of nonsense for 40 years since my days at the so-called 'Zen Community of New York' as a young man. (As is, or should be, well-known, Japanese so-called Zen and Buddhism largely went down the tubes this way long ago.) And I still encounter it all the time.) As you know, no real spiritual teaching or teacher has ever gone their way in the history of mankind. It just doesn't make any sense at all and is self-contradictory--if what they say is correct and just everything as it is the Absolute and the ascesis is not necessary and is just an attachment, then, logically, their own teaching and such little practice as they themselves do is also not necessary and just an attachment! If they are correct, then everything is already OK as it is just like ordinary worldlings who don't believe in anything spiritual say--they should just look around them and see if this world is really so wonderful! If enlightenment and spirituality is such a simple and easy and effortless thing as they say, then all the sages of all the systems of the past who renounced and exerted tremendous efforts in the ascesis were the stupidest people in the world, and they are the first who have ever really understood how things are on a large scale! Is such worth even entertaining? Even the slightest actual understanding of how Reality, karma, the spiritual Path, causation, etc.--even ordinary life (it is like someone saying that one can become a concert pianist without practicing because music is already present in the world!)!--works indicates the absolute necessity of the ascesis and the absurdity of their ideas. Their ideas simply destroy all spirituality and philosophy and practice of any kind. It is hard for me to understand how they can think the way they do when it is so obviously silly and erroneous--I guess it must be their heavy karma and delusion just like ordinary worldling secular materialists who deny spirituality and transcendence and from whom they are hardly much removed.

It seems that it should be obvious that one's experience is what one is and if one is involved in worldly pursuits and desires and sensual pleasures and involvements, etc., etc., then one is ipso facto experiencing and in samsara with all its misery and if one is not doing and pursuing and involved in any of these things but is involved with the sense world as little as possible and directed to contemplation and noetic things, then one is, to that extent at least, less experiencing and more out of samsara and its misery! In Plotinian terms, the soul is contemplation, as everything is contemplation, and worldling life is per se a dim, dark, obscure, false contemplation, but contemplative ascetic life is per se a brighter, clearer, truer contemplation, and, hence, a truer and happier state of existence. Truly, worldlings actually exist and are less than true renunciants and contemplative ascetics; their state of being is less real! Such has seemed obvious to me for a very long time, but no one understands.


It is intrinsically impossible for someone with a significant and stable degree of realization or experience of the One/Good not to be an ascetic and renunciant and not to lead an ascetic life. One who has fully realized re-union with the One is, of course, not even here or experiencing this world or individuated sensate existence in space-time at all, so any phenomenal questions are no longer relevant, but one who has gone significantly along the Way but is still in becoming no longer can even perceive or experience or experience as really real the sense world enough to pursue worldly and sensual desires. To pursue worldly and sensual desires, pursuits, and life is inherently to turn the soul towards darkness, non-being, and non-knowing and darken and dim and lessen the soul's own light and being and knowing. When the light of the Good/One has illuminated sufficiently and stably enough the soul, it can no longer darken itself enough to experience the pursuit of worldly things beyond survival and of worldly and sensual desires and pleasures--it is simply no longer possible to be in that state of non-being--and thus such a one perforce is an ascetic and renunciant.

A Couple of Q. and A.'s About Beginning Renunciation

Q. I am a 18-year-old (nearly 19) soon-to-be renunciant and ascetic,
hopefully, as it cannot be ignored that you cannot have the world
and the great rewards of salvation and freedom. I found your blog in
my investigation of Platonism, as it is a pure system where the
majority of (if not all of it completely!) it's teachings are true. Of
course, as I am new to studying it, I have to keep researching, and
read all of Plato. Your blog has been extremely helpful in this
effort, and the starting point of renunciation for any genuine
spiritual practice is self-evidently true. How doing this reflects God
("the One" or "the Absolute" as you call Him) is amazing. Though, to
begin, although some things can be renounced immediately with ease
("don't read fiction books, apply yourself to spiritual text" and
"don't lust after sweets, and don't eat meats", etc), I had a few
questions about the whole process, and your experience with it.

The first is about how to begin the initial efforts and survive the
fatigue when the excitement of a new, more proper, life begins. I
expect there to be failings and relapses (though it should be avoided
at all cost). I see one method to possibly use is continued meditation
on why you began this, escape from the world, and how perfect God is.
How did you overcome this period? How would you recommend someone who
has lived a very sedentary, and "pleasurable" life to do this? After a
while, does it just become more natural? If so, how long is this?

The second is about the temptation to return to the world and it's
ways if it arises. What methods do you have for overcoming this? Or is
it that after a while, and true cognitive change has happened,
temptation doesn't really happen (or is very weak)?

I hope that you can answer these, and again I thank you for your blog
and your efforts to spread this information.



A. Thank you very much for reading and appreciating my writings. Of course, I greatly encourage and exhort you to retain your new-found understanding of the necessity of renunciation and asceticism and to practice this for the remainder of this birth and, indeed, for all future births until you attain liberation. Please stick to it no matter how difficult it may be in this present world where there is so little, to say the least, appreciation, respect and support for renunciation and true spiritual practice. I hope, as you kindly say, my writings may be of modest help in this regard.

I began, or renewed, my spiritual practice in earnest in this birth when I was just your age forty years ago. Not encountering any renunciants or real spiritual practitioners, not even the degree of guidance or encouragement that my writings might provide, I had to learn on my own by 'the school of hard knocks' and gradually come to understand the necessity of renunciation and move in that direction despite all the silly people around me discouraging it. It was by reading the records of the ancients, the primary source texts of, at that time, Buddhism, that I understood that the moderns are for the birds and that it was clearly necessary to follow the real Path of the ancients and of all ascetic practitioners of all time, regardless of whether anyone else was or not. Thus, for example, it wasn't until four years later at the age of 22, while I was living at a so-called Zen Community in NY (which I long since repudiate as being completely fraudulent, corrupt and silly), that I took my vow of celibacy on my own (though I had never actually not been celibate and was still virginal anyway). I had already gradually become a most committed and ardent vegetarian by the time I turned 20. I had never been a drinker or party person and had always been of sort of naturally monastic and solitary temperament. I was, however, in my youth and when I was your age, what you have described in your email as 'one who has lived a very sedentary and "pleasurable" life'. I was, and have always been, not very tough physically and have always had much anxiety and was quite a 'wimp' as it were. I just kept gradually working and gently pushing myself and becoming more and more dedicated and ascetic and devoted as my understanding and devotion increased--though, as I say, in various respects other than physical and emotional toughness, I was already naturally of monastic, ascetic, renunciant temperament. The most important thing is to have great sincerity and devotion and dedication and determination to attain release and be devoted to true spiritual practice and renunciation no matter what, and then just gradually and steadily work towards renouncing more and emulating the ideal. Be patient and steady and don't be dismayed by any lapses of the sort that you refer to that may occur. If you fall down, always just pick yourself right up and keep on going. You seem to show remarkable insight into how things could work, recognizing that after the initial excitement fades the spiritual path is really a lot of hard continuous work. The kind of meditation that you suggest is a good way to keep yourself going on the right track and also to overcome any temptation to return to the world as you ask about in your second question.

In regard to both your questions, yes, it does get easier and more natural as you go on, and you backslide, even in thought, less. The more disciplined you are the easier and more natural discipline becomes. Once the cognitive shift has really been made and the aspiration for the Way has really been awakened in the soul, there is less and less serious temptation to return to the world--in fact, the thought of doing so is horrifying and revolting. How long this will take in a particular individual case such as your own, I can't say. Everyone is different and has their own individual karma to deal with. But I can say that it will definitely become easier and more natural and inevitable over time, the more diligent and devoted you are within your capacities (though again go gradually without overreaching yourself too much if it becomes discouraging). Also, some things are more difficult than others. For example, sexual desire is one of the very most difficult things to eradicate and deal with and you can expect to struggle with it and have it around for very many years to come. Of course, we don't act on it at all and don't really dream of doing so, even when thoughts and fantasies run off at length in that direction, but we still have to deal with it and be very careful about it. Perhaps, more renunciants, especially now, have fallen because of women than anything else. Other things, though, also can be hard to leave--even such as if you are still living at home and your family has a television and you get drawn into watching it!

A couple of concrete suggestions: It is very important, however much long struggle it may take, to establish a regular routine of going to bed early and getting up very early before dawn to spend time in meditation/contemplation practice. Being disciplined in different areas reinforce each other and make it all easier. A regular daily meditation/contemplation practice is essential to, is the essence of, the Path and of great assistance in developing renunciation and asceticism, indeed, is part and parcel with it. Read regularly and widely in the records and writings of the authentic great ascetics and renunciants of the past of the various systems (much is available in English). This will be of great help and importance in gaining understanding, getting encouragement, and sticking to your devotion. I'm afraid that, except perhaps for myself, you are not very likely in this present age of darkness and this modern brave new techno-world to encounter any living examples to help you and provide support, so you need to take the renunciants of the past (and future and present, though just not visible) as your support, 'the communion of saints' as the Catholics say. Vegetarianism, or, ideally, veganism, is of the greatest and most essential importance and not really very difficult at all and can be implemented rapidly and will be of great help in supporting all your other efforts. Similarly, it should go without saying that any alcohol or intoxicants or illicit drugs (not to say that I think you are doing any of that anyway) are to be immediately and permanently stopped. Even decent ordinary worldlings don't drink and spiritual practice can't even be begun without teetotaling, and, besides, you are legally underage for that anyway. If you can keep 'the big three'--celibacy, vegetarianism, and teetotalling--and keep a regular schedule of meditation/contemplation practice and be devoted to meditation/contemplation practice and spiritual and ascetic reading and study to the best of your ability, the rest will gradually fall into place.

I hope this answers your inquiries somewhat. Again, be patient and diligent and work steadily, gradually, and devotedly, and keep clearly in mind that there is no question that renunciation and asceticism and devotion to contemplative practice is the only way to go and any alternative can't even be entertained.