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

Q. and A. on Nagarjuna and the MMK

 Q.  Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā contains various refutations of causation, change, "self-existence"/essence/svabh̄ava, and that perceptions and conceptions thereof are illusory and there is only "thusness"/tathata. For example, his tetralemma about causation comes to the conclusion that a thing could neither arise from something identical nor from something different, nor from both or neither (I will ignore the last one as I'm not sure anyone actually believes something can be derived from nothing). Therefore causation cannot actually take place. This is not only an attack on causation but also essence. The Platonist position in this framework, I suppose, would be closest to 3): the effect of a cause is both identical and different from that which is caused yet still possesses a certain self-existence/essence (we do not claim that it possesses independent existence other than the One who is beyond existence, nor do I think any spiritual system does). To Nagarjuna this position is absurd - how could an essence that belongs wholly to itself and is by nature eternal be caused and cause something posterior to it in turn, and, in the case of the eternal soul, undergo any sort of change? How do we square away the ascent of the soul from bodily existence to the Absolute if it is by nature unchangeable, especially since the intermediate - nous, the Divine Mind - is itself atemporal and the soul would have to reside there before finally rejoining the One? On a related note, if the soul once fully identified with the One then how could re-joining the One be permanent? This implies the state it had before its "fall" from the One was in some ways imperfect but the state it acquired after rejoining the One permanently is more perfect or absolutely hyper-perfect. All of these issues can be extrapolated I think from Nagarjuna's MMK, and that, given all these contradictions, it seems erroneous to think in terms of essence, change and causation as Nagarjuna claims.

Now, let me state that I don't believe Mahayana Buddhism actually escapes these conundrums. There's a not-so-subtle sophistry in their claim that while conventional reality is illusory we can still use it to arrive at "thusness", as this implies that the illusion somehow participates in "ultimate reality", meaning instead of being totally and fully illusory there are degrees of reality - this is no different from what we call ontology, in fact it mirrors the Plotinian model of reality. The conventional reality we perceive, instead of being totally illusory, is therefore but a mirror image of actual reality. Of course, at the level of the Absolute there is no causation, change, movement, difference, etc. However, if we follow Nagarjuna's logic to its actual conclusion (instead of the sophistic escape of the two truths doctrine) there would actually be no way for anything to arrive anywhere meaningful. In short, Nagarjuna's conclusions are as absurd, if not moreso, then that which he refutes. 

All this infers that Nagarjuna's conclusions must in some important ways be erroneous and that, at the very least, Mahayana Buddhists do not truly believe what the MMK states and escape from their own philosophical foundations by means of sophistry and rhetorical sleights of hand. However, it is just that: inference and not a direct confrontation with Nagarjuna's claims. The actual truth behind the MMK, contra to what Nagarjuna himself claims, would be a sort of staticness and an "absolute un-truth" that we could never hope to escape. The only other option would be a sort of ontology and it is telling Mahayana Buddhism sneakily opted for the latter. However, I find myself unsatisfied by this indirect refutation and at unease. I believe there must be some way to directly confront Nagarjuna's reasoning instead of merely pointing out the absurdity of its consequences.

(Original question abbreviated and edited.)

A.  I wouldn't worry about all this stuff.  These concerns are not necessary and are not based on valid assumptions.  Nagarjuna's/the MMK's analysis or 'logic', along with the doubts that it makes you give rise to, is based on invalid, realist/nominalist, non-idealist, and unexamined premises that limit reality and the possibilities and explanations just to the lowest phenomenal level, which has minimal reality.  These questions and supposed contradictions about causation, change, etc. could only arise if the attempt to explain causation, etc. is limited to just the lowest plane of phenomenal and supposedly material things.  Causation and phenomenal spatial and temporal change are readily understood without contradiction as the projection of the order and structure of nous onto or into the lower level of non-being, as the life of soul in time and space unwilling to take the whole of nous all at once.  There is only, as Plotinus puts it in Ennead 3.8, contemplation--stronger and weaker, fuller and less full, complete and incomplete, clearer and more obscure, but still only contemplation. The One/Good is the completely full clear contemplation; the life of the most degraded souls is the weakest most incomplete and dark contemplation.  The ascent, and also the descent, of the soul is just a change in the state of contemplation, so there is no problem of an eternal essence undergoing some sort of change analogous to a sort of physical change.  Also, it is not like the soul was a physical part of the One before its fall and then physically rejoins the One, as the language of your doubt seems to tacitly suppose.  The potential for not knowing is present within knowing, the potential for darkness is present within light, for non-being within being.  When the soul completes contemplation and fully knows and becomes the light, the not knowing and darkness and non-being is gone.  You don't have to worry about it recurring.  All this is actually kind of ineffable and only really known in contemplative ascetic experience, since all this discussion and questions and process only occurs at the lowest least real level.

Nagarjuna/the MMK is maybe just being what the Platonic dialogs call an "antilogikos" or a "sophist taking refuge in the darkness of non-being".  Perhaps, you might want to review the discussion about not becoming "misologikos" that refers to "antilogikos" people that are pleased within themselves when they turn everything up and down to make it seem that no definite conclusions are possible in the Phaedo at 89b-90d.  (Actually, it wouldn't be a bad idea to read the whole Phaedo carefully say 50 or 100 times!).  Other dialogs also deal with this problem and the kind of difficulties that the antilogikoi and sophists of the world cause.  You also may want to eventually read through all of the Enneads, even though this is a big project and you won't likely understand much of what you read for a long time, as Plotinus deals with the kinds of concerns you have.  You don't have to be able to understand everything at the discursive level before proceeding with the ascesis.  Indeed, it is impossible to do so.  And being and working as a celibate, vegan, teetotalling, etc. ascetic practicing contemplation is as necessary for coming to even a discursive level understanding of these things as racking your brains over Nagarjuna's attempts at logical contortion.

I don't know if it will be of any help or interest, but here is a link with an added introduction of the original sort of non-sectarian version of one of my pieces that perhaps you have seen in the specific Platonist form that I was asked several years ago to write for an old English language Indian magazine:   https://www.csp.indica.in/an-indo-hellenistic-understanding-of-contemplative-asceticism-eric-s-fallick/

Perhaps, it will be some consolation to you to see that there is a great deal one can do to proceed on the Path and that the essentials of doing so are clear even before necessarily resolving all the possible conceptual doubts that may arise on reading the different texts of the different systems.

Plotinus regularly attained the unio mystica, not just "four times"

 Q. We had a conversation about the experiences that Plotinus had of ultimacy.  There is a passage in Porphyry's biography that suggests that Plotinus had such complete experiences four times, or roughly four times, in Plotinus's life.  As I recall you argued against that kind of reading and suggested a more steady and complete realization.  I hope I remember your views correctly.

 

Apropos this discussion, Ennead 4.8 begins with a rare autobiographical comment by Plotinus on just this topic (Gerson translation, page 512):

 

"Often, after waking up to myself from the body, that is, externalizing myself in relation to all other things, while entering into myself, I behold a beauty of wondrous quality, and believe then that I am most to be identified with my better part, that I enjoy the best quality of life, and have become united with the divine and situated within it, actualizing myself at that level, and situating myself above all else in the intelligible world.  Following on this repose within the divine, and descending from Intellect into acts of calculative reasoning, I ask myself in bewilderment, how on earth did I ever come down here, and how ever did my soul come to be enclosed in a body, being such as it has revealed itself to be, even while in a body?"

 

I looked up the MacKenna translation (page 410) and I think it brings out some points with different emphases:

 

"Many times it has happened: lifted out of the body into myself; becoming external to all other things and self-encentred; beholding a marvelous beauty; then, more than ever, assured of community with the loftiest order; enacting the noblest life, acquiring identity with the divine; stationing within It by having attained that activity; poised above whatsoever within the Intellectual is less than the Supreme: yet, there comes the moment of descent from intellection to reasoning, and after that sojourn in the divine, I ask myself how it happens that I can now be descending, and how did the soul ever enter into my body, the Soul which, even within the body, is the high thing it has shown itself to be."

 

I think this passage gives definitive evidence that, at the very least, Plotinus entered into supreme union 'many times' or 'often'.  And the implication is that Plotinus did this regularly, not haphazardly.  I would infer that contemplation was likely a daily practice for Plotinus.

 

The differences between MacKenna and Gerson are intriguing; particularly in the opening passage.  MacKenna speaks of a process of 'lifting up' 'out of the body', and this seems consistent with the path of 'ascent' to the divine.  In contrast, Gerson's translation speaks of 'externalizing myself' and 'waking up to myself'.  Gerson's translation is, I think, a little more opaque; but I would be interested in your own understanding of this opening passage -- perhaps it is difficult to interpret though the general gist seems clear.

 

 

A. Yes, I mentioned that the usual and oft repeated interpretation of Porphyry's statement in the Life is absurd from a practitioner's standpoint and simply reflects the ignorance of the usual translators and scholars.  I also cited that very opening passage of Ennead 4.8 as direct contrary evidence that the more common interpretation is incorrect.  I did also say that I had no doubt that Plotinus entered into union with the One, into the Good/One samadhi, so to speak, regularly and daily each time he sat down to his regular contemplation practice.

 

First of all, Porphyry's statement simply says (in my own rough, quick, off the cuff rendering):  "But he attained four times, I suppose, when I was with him, this goal in unspeakable actuality and not in potentiality."  There is nothing at all in it to suggest that Plotinus only attained it four times in his life--I don't know where the silly interpreters got that idea from.  Further, while it is possible to take the Greek as meaning 'with him' in the sense of the years in which Porphyry was with Plotinus in Rome, it certainly doesn't have to be, and can just mean while he was literally 'with him', i.e., happened to be in the same room with him when he was or went into contemplation.  So really all it tells us is that Porphyry observed his union four times--nothing more about Plotinus' number of times or frequency of union or his regular contemplation practice.  Besides, how would the unaccomplished and relatively unperceptive Porphyry know if Plotinus was in union or not?  It is hardly likely or even proper that Plotinus would tell him every time he entered into the divine union!

 

As regards the Ennead 4.8 passage itself, I'm afraid that neither the Gerson et al. nor the MacKenna translations that you cite are very good or faithful.  (Armstrong's is a bit better.)  I would give, again, a quick, rough, off the cuff rendering as follows:

"Often (/many times) waking to myself from the body and becoming outside of the other things, but inside of myself, seeing a beauty marvelous how great, and trusting then especially (myself) to be of the better part, and effecting the best life and having become the same thing with the Divine and being seated in it coming to that actuality beyond all the other noetical seating myself (therein), after this state in the Divine coming down to discursive reasoning from Nous, I am at a loss how I ever even came down now, and how ever for me the soul has become within the body being this, of such a sort as it has appeared in itself, even though being in a body."  I have rendered it as it is in the Greek, as one long sentence with lots of participles and clauses, and pretty literally, but hopefully it is clear enough.  I don't think the differences in the translations reflect difficulty in interpreting and rendering the Greek, but rather just the lack of skill of the translators and the usual refusal to literally and faithfully render what the original actually says.  In any case, I think it is completely clear, especially in the original, that Plotinus is stating clearly that he frequently and regularly attained the contemplative union with the One, and that this was his regular contemplation practice.  In fact, I would tend to read it as indicating that his attainment of the unio mystica, as it were, in contemplation was such a regular daily occurrence that he didn't even need to mention or specify it per se, but just say that often afterwards he would wonder what he was doing here having fallen into individuated sensate existence in space-time in the first place.  In other words, the "often/many times" might refer to the wondering, rather than to the contemplative union that was so regular and invariable an occurrence in his practice as to be taken for granted, that happened every day, every time he sat in contemplation, it just being that often he would later wonder or think about it, but not always, just practicing it and assuming it the other times.  Further, a statement of Porphyry's in the Life just before the "four times"sentence supports and, in fact, makes obvious my interpretation of the latter, contra the professors and as confirmed by the beginning of 4.8.  (I don’t know why this statement is usually ignored in the interpretation of the “four times” sentence.)  Here is a quick, rough, off the cuff rendering of my own:  

"And thus most of all to this godlike man many times/often bringing himself to the first and transcendent God in reflection and according to the ways having been expounded in the Symposium by Plato, that God appeared who has neither shape nor any aspect, but is seated above nous and all the noetical."

This seems to me at least to clearly say that Porphyry himself thought that Plotinus regularly realized the One/Good in contemplation and that this was a regular practice of his, not just something attained only "four times", and supports my interpretation of the Greek of the "four times" statement that Porphyry is only saying there that he happened to be physically in the same room, for whatever reason, with Plotinus four time when this happened, not at all that it was restricted to just those four times and was not a regular occurence and practice for Plotinus.  Presumably, Plotinus did his daily contemplation alone by himself, as is only to be expected and is only proper, but Porphyry happened to barge in on him in contemplation those four times.

 

A Q. and A. on the Dialectic and Analogical Reasoning

 Q.  To better understand how Plato thought, I want to learn more about how the Greeks in general thought about metaphor and analogy.  Plato's philosophical style I characterize as heavily analogical. The way the dialectic in general unfolds is never linear or logical.  What are your thoughts?  Are there any texts on analogical reasoning that can help me get a better grasp on the dialectic?

 

 

A.  I’m afraid that this is one that I can't help much with.  I don't know of any texts on analogical reasoning, and have never looked for any such, nor any works on the way the Greeks in general used metaphor and analogy since, again, I have never looked for or been interested in such.  I don't know how many of my works you have read or watched on my internet venues, but you will see that I view Platonism and Plato's own teaching as spiritual teaching for the contemplative ascetic practice and ascent, not as 'thinking' or 'thought' in the modern sense or the modern idea of 'philosophy'.  The dialectic is not a matter of discursive thinking or reasoning based on sense data, but rather is the contemplative ascetic practice of placing the soul in direct contact with Nous and the Forms therein in meditation/contemplation.  The purpose of the 'dialectic' in the dialogs and the 'reasoning' in the Enneads is to facilitate this and help prepare the mind and soul for being able, after long great effort both in asceticism and contemplation/meditation, to make the ascent and enter this condition of contact with and assimilation to Nous, the Divine Mind-Thought--to enter the 'dialectical samadhi', as it were, to borrow a Sanskrit word from the Indian and derivative systems.  (In general, by far, I think, the closest analogies or systems most useful for the Platonic practitioner for comparison are the Indian origin systems of certain schools of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism, rather than Aristotelianism or the later modern Western systems of 'philosophy' based solely on thinking about things without yogic practice.)  I have, if it is of any help, translated, quite literally, Plotinus' (short) Ennead 1.3, On Dialectic at my internet venues and in my book.  I don't know if you have a translation of Plotinus/the Enneads, but some of the more accessible Enneads, such as 5.1, 1.6, and 6.9 might be helpful to you in general, along with the Phaedo, as I have mentioned, and the core books of the Republic, which add more explicitly about the Good/One to the teaching of the Phaedo.  Today, I was rereading Ennead 1.6, On Beauty, in Greek, as I have many times, and was particularly struck by the statement, "But wisdom is the mental act in turning away from the things below and bringing the soul towards the things above."  That is, it is principally and authentically attained in contemplation turning the soul away from the senses and their objects and towards the higher hypostases.  And to do this requires renunciant and ascetic practice and this is as necessary as thinking to understand how things are and Plato's teaching.  Just as an example, as incomprehensible as it may be to most moderns and particularly professor types, being a vegetarian/vegan is as essential to being able to understand Plato as any degree of knowledge of later 'philosophical' systems or historical knowledge!

The Cave and Buddhist Pasts

An understanding or insight came to me to help me better understand two seemingly different things that I was not altogether clear about for some time. The two things are how to understand the fire and the objects being moved along the wall with the people moving them also talking in the cave in the Parable of the Cave in the Republic and how to understand my Buddhist practice and realization in this and previous births (and my practice and realization in other related systems in other previous births) in relation to the Path and Platonist practice. I have always found the Parable of the Cave extremely important and powerful, but never understood the part about the fire and objects in the cave and the prisoner initially having to look at them and see them as more real than the shadows, with great pain and difficulty, before proceeding to actually move out of the cave. I now see that the fire, which plays a somewhat analogous role in the cave to the sun/the Good outside of the cave, represents the individuated soul at the samsaric/genesic/space-time/changing level, the center of experience/consciousness/awareness, the mind and true mind, which at some level at bottom is connected to the One, comes from the One, the Source of all consciousness and experience. (Recall the individual soul centers in Ennead 6.9 that are all connected to the true center of the One.) The objects being moved along the wall and the people moving them represent the various karmic acts and thoughts of different souls that are illuminated by the true mind or conscious center or soul, including the world-soul, to be projected out as our experience of the sense world, including ourselves in it, as the shadows and echoes on the cave wall. All this is entirely within the cave. Even when the newly released prisoner is finally able to look at the fire and the moving objects and people and understand what is actually going on and that this is more what the shadows actually are and is more real, it is still all just inside the cave and he still hasn't yet moved out into the real world outside. I have long explained an important and vital difference between Platonist practice and contemplation and that of the other related systems, by putting it that the other Indo-hellenistic systems in general, e.g., Chan and related forms of at least Mahayana metaphysics based Buddhist meditation, Advaita Vedanta, at least some forms of Jaina meditation, Orphism even, and etc., all teach and are about just withdrawing into the subject, turning the light of the mind back onto itself and such various expressions. Platonist contemplation, on the other hand, involves not only withdrawing into the subject, but bringing both subject and object up together into the noetic realm where subject and object are distinguished but not separated, and finally into the One where they are not distinguished at all. You will note, for example, that in the Phaedo the soul does not only just withdraw into itself alone but does so in and for contemplation of the Forms and that this constitutes its true collection and withdrawal and when it is in this condition it is always in contact with the real beings and contemplating them. In other words, in the other systems the soul or mind or awareness withdraws from objects to focus on or turn back to itself, recognizing only half or the subjective side of Reality, and realization consists in, to use as an example just one of the many forms of expression, in this case from Chan, "seeing the nature", seeing the center of the soul where it connects to the One, but thinking that this is the actual Absolute or fundamental Reality Itself, whereas it is actually only the derived or emanated soul center or a shadow or image of the Good. In Platonism, on the other hand, the soul, through withdrawal from the whole sensate phenomenal level and recollecting the Forms shifts its whole and all of being back up to Nous or the noetic realm, shifting or identifying itself with Nous and its objects with the Forms, the two not actually being separate and being mutually dependent or co-arising, and realization consists in moving, initially, to this whole higher and more real level of Nous/the Forms and then from there to the ultimate highest level of the One, where there is only One and Good, and final release is attained. Thus, the practice of the other systems is only turning to look at the fire and the objects and moving people in the cave and their realization is to be able to finally look straight at the fire and see it and the objects and people clearly. They think that this is the end and release, but it, while certainly a big step compared to the chained prisoners who only know the shadows and echoes and think that they are all there is, is still just entirely within the cave and they haven't even left it at all. The practice of Platonism, though preliminarily seeing and understanding the fire and all within the cave, is to actually go out of the cave and see first the images of the objects there and then the things there themselves and finally to be able to look directly at the sun and this is its realization and understanding, which is true final release from becoming. When I consider my many years of Buddhist practice and even realization prior to becoming a Platonist and practicing Platonist contemplation, I have in the past been puzzled how to quite fit that into my present askesis and understanding, especially in terms of realization experiences in the course of Buddhist practice. I now see, however, that all this and even the realizations attained was just turning to look at the fire and the objects casting the shadows and getting to be able to look at them--an important step in the very long journey through thousands of births and lifetimes to release from becoming, but still only within the cave--and it is now time to get on with actual progress towards getting out of the cave altogether, seeing the real things out there and the sun, etc. (already actually intermittently begun at some occasions in some previous births) and real ultimate realization and release. I think that this also goes a long way in explaining some of the differences in the other different systems and why even what are supposed to be the realized adepts and texts of the other systems often seem to still be caught up in and involved with particular relative reality systems and versions thereof. Even if they have seen the fire and the passing objects, they are still in the cave and still enmired in the particular configuration of passing objects in their cave not having seen the true archetypes of the Forms, still having known only that set of particulars not the universals. They are still in their particular hollow in the lower earth not having popped up at all yet to see the true earth, in the expression of the Phaedo muthos.

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

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.