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 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!

An Extremely Brief Introduction to Platonism

Platonism is a spiritual or religious or soteriological system that offers a path to release from the endless cycle of reincarnation and its concomitant misery. It belongs to a family of such systems, comprising Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Orphism, Pythagoreanism, and Platonism, that all accept the facts of reincarnation, the cycle of repeated birth and death, that this works by karma, that this state is wretched and painful and unsatisfactory and a fallen and mistaken condition, and that it is possible through great and correctly directed effort to be released permanently from this state. All these systems consider that the path to this release consists of renunciation, asceticism, detachment, celibacy, vegetarianism and non-harming, abstinence from alcohol and intoxicants, study, and meditation or spiritual exercises. Platonism differs from the others, as they do from each other, in its metaphysics, its description of reality and how it relates to the spiritual path, the nature of release or the condition of having attained the freedom of the goal of the path, the texts that it takes for study, its exact method of implementing the required behavioral and ascetic practices, and its methods of meditation and spiritual exercises. It also differs from the other systems in never having been or become an organized institutional religion or church for the many, in never having had an institutionalized monastic order, in not having devotional or ritual or magical practices to accommodate the non-philosophical many, in not having costumes or ceremonies or holidays and so forth, and in never allowing its ascetic practitioners to become priests/mediators for the populace. In other words, Platonism has never developed a popular religion in addition to or as its central message. It always has been, and remains, a narrow way limited to a philosophical, intellectual, and spiritual elite, for those few who are able and willing to follow its highly morally, spiritually, ascetically, contemplatively, and mentally demanding path and practice.

The texts that Platonism studies, that form the Platonist ‘scriptures’, so to speak, are the Dialogues of Plato and the Enneads of Plotinus. It implements its most stringent moral and ascetic standards and practices purely, with discernment, and without legalism, extensive legal codes, extensive lists of rules devolving down to the level of manners and customs, and trying to exhaustively catalog specific regulations for every particular circumstance that could be encountered in a given relative environment, and, of course, without the extensive prescriptions for ritual and ceremonial practice that preoccupy many other systems. Its meditation and contemplation practices consist in coming to understand the workings of things at the level of soul, ascending to contemplation of the actual Platonic Forms and the Divine Mind, and finally ascending to contemplation of and union with the One or the Good, which is the final release and goal.

The Platonist system or description of reality consists of three existential or experiential levels or degrees of reality that are called the three hypostases. In descending order, from first to last, and from most real to least real, these are the One or the Good, the Divine Mind and the Platonic Forms, and Soul. The One or the Good is the Absolute, the utterly Transcendent, the Unity, the Source, the purest noumenon, “God”, the source and origin and fount of all things, from which all things come but which Itself comes from nothing else, and which remains always unchanged as all else emanates from It. The Divine Mind-Thought, Nous, emanates from the One and is the second most real and perfect thing. It is one unitary divine mind with its objects with which it is neither different nor identical. The objects or thoughts of the single divine mind are the Platonic Ideas or Forms or Archetypes or Things-in-themselves, which, again, are not different or outside the one Mind. This level is a one-many, not a pure unity like the One. Though dynamic and active, it is still unchanging and still transcends, is beyond, time and space. The third level of existence is that of soul, both the World Soul or Soul of the All and all the individual souls of individual sentient beings both human and non-human. This is the level of changing, impermanent, differentiated sensory experience, of space and time, of separate individuals, of cyclic individuated sensate spatio-temporal existence, of the cycle of reincarnation, and of karma. Though still divinely ordered by the World Soul, it is the level of suffering, misery, unsatisfactoriness, and endless rebirth in time and space and change for individual souls. This is the level at which we find ourselves now, and that we must transcend and escape from back to the higher hypostases from which we have fallen. To ordinary people and animals, this seems to be the only real and true level (especially now in the naturalist modern world where so many deny transcendence altogether or have never even heard or conceived of it and think that the sensory world is all that there is), but actually it is the least true and least real. It is the level of mere opinion, not of true knowledge, which is of the higher levels.

The Platonist practitioner and ascetic works to transcend this lowest level of individual soul and escape from it and the cycle of reincarnation dictated by karma and return to and re-become the higher hypostases. Since the soul is imprisoned in the body and sensory existence and takes these things as real, he or she renounces all sensory things and things and activities of this world as much as possible and devotes him- or herself solely to transcendent and divine things alone, to things of the soul, not things of the body and its desires and emotions. Thus, he is celibate and teetotaling (not deliberately dulling his divine soul with intoxicants) and abstains from worldly pleasures as much as possible, is a true ascetic and renunciant. He aims at conforming to the true paradigmatic virtues in the noetic realm (the second hypostasis) and so cultivates all moral virtue and non-harming. He is vegan, completely honest, doesn’t obtain the necessities of life in a way that harms any beings, is kind and gentle, etc. Through study of the Dialogues of Plato and the Enneads of Plotinus, and ancillary works, and reflection, he gains an understanding of the nature of things here at the level of soul and how they work, an idea of what the higher hypostases must be like and of their utter transcendence, of how to live virtuously and ascetically, and of the nature of the Path and what it entails and how to practice it. Then, with all this as a base, he devotes himself to contemplation practice to attain direct noetic apprehension of the Platonic Forms and transfer his soul to the level of and unity with the second hypostasis, the Divine Mind-Thought. Finally, established here at the second level, he devotes himself even further and vigorously to contemplation practice to directly touch and apprehend the One, the Good, and eventually attain complete and permanent re-union with and re-identification with It. This is the release from the cycle of birth and death and the final goal. All this is most difficult and is likely to take many lifetimes and rebirths, with many years of hard work to make some progress in any given birth.

Given the non-institutional, individual, transcendent, and transhistorical nature of the Platonist system and practice, and its lack of dependence on particular worldly structures, the Platonist ascetics, the philosophoi, are rather less likely to leave traces in the historical record. We are most fortunate that the Dialogues and Enneads have been preserved, but if many other Platonist ascetics left any written records, many things were lost or destroyed when Christianity and Islam came to power with their intolerance of anything else and their attempt to destroy all other writings. There has never been a time when the Dialogues and Enneads were not being read, even in the original Greek, from antiquity, through Byzantium, into the Renaissance and modernity, and there couldn’t have been actual Platonist contemplatives, but once Christianity and Islam took over, any such would have had to remain hidden at the cost of their lives. Nonetheless, Platonism has greatly influenced the Abrahamic systems, and the Jewish, Islamic, and, especially, Christian mystical systems owe a great deal to and and in some cases are even largely based on Platonism. After Plotinus, but before the final suppression of all non-Abrahamic practices, some teachers and people, such as Iamblichus and Proclus, who considered themselves Platonists, but departed thoroughly from the actual Platonic system, attempted to incorporate polytheistic, ritual, theurgic, and magical practices and thought into Platonism and make it more like the other popular religions. Unfortunately, most of the few modern people who have attempted to revive some sort of Platonist practice have fallen in with and follow these later ideas or those of the conscious incorporation of into or blending with Judaism, Christianity, or Islam.



Ⓒ 2020 Eric S. Fallick

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

A Note Regarding the 'Historical Socrates'

I personally have little interest in a supposed 'historical' Socrates, whatever meaning such an idea may even really have. The Socrates of the dialogs is just, to my mind, an allegorical symbol, in accordance with the overall nature of the dialogs as a whole. You will note that in the Enneads, although Plotinus quotes Plato a number of times, the only times he ever refers to Socrates is when he uses the name 'Socrates' as a generic example name for an arbitrary person, i.e., as "John Smith" or "John Doe"! I know that most people look to the dialogs as historical documents or records to whatever extent and, in accordance with their (exclusive) preoccupation with the sense world try to understand them as realist historical documents, but I take them just as spiritual documents. The purpose of great true spiritual texts like the dialogs and Enneads is not to provide sensory/sense world information relating to alleged past occurrences in some supposed realist past physical world, but to remind our souls of the spiritual truths they have forgotten (the Platonist teaching of learning as recollection solves a multitude of difficulties) and to practice them and leave and renounce this least real sense world and return to their true home. They are teaching us how to get out of the cave and reminding us what things look like in the light, not giving us information about shadows on the cave wall that are the exclusive concern of worldlings. Ultimately, all spiritual texts that we perceive are, like everything else, just experiences according to our karma with no philosophically realist referent--in this case, experiences of our karma lightening up so that the Absolute is beginning to shine through the sense world and leading us to remember and helping us to practice to get free. All that is real is the higher hypostases, their darkened trace manifesting as this world and the world soul, the underlying spiritual structure of Reality, and the movement of individual souls closer to or farther from the One in their long journey and revolution through countless births in samsara/genesis. Though we must, in our circumstances, of course, deal extensively and honestly with 'history', ultimately all so-called historical records and artifacts are just present manifestations and appearances and experiences in our sense fields with no actually realistic existing physical past referents. Almost no one seems to understand what I am talking about when I say such things, but perhaps even a little glimpse of the One Itself and regular contemplative experience of Nous may show one that this whole sense world of becoming is just a shadow or projection of the higher hypostases, with the least reality, and that all manner of possible combinations of projections or traces of the Forms form all sorts of different relative realities of experience of souls according to their karma.

The Ontological Status of Deities

Q. For some time I have been wanting to ask you your thoughts about the status of deities in Platonism. Because of my long history with Buddhism my tendency is to regard deities in the way traditional Buddhism does. That is to say that I think of deities as beings, subject to karma, and still trapped in genesis / samsara. Though deities are long-lived, they are not necessarily wise.

Platonism appears to take a different view. It seems that Platonism views deities as embodied emanations of a higher status than those beings in the material realm. And some passages suggest that they are immortal (rather like angels in monotheism). This comes in the dialogues when Plato argues against the accounts of the bad behavior of deities, saying that deities could not behave in such nefarious ways because they are close to the One and the Good. This seems to be the dominant view of deities in the dialogues.

It might be possible to integrate the two views: some deities are still in genesis while others are of a higher status. Although technically possible, such a solution strikes me as forced and ad hoc.

Any insights?


A. I also tend to think about deities in what you describe as the traditional Buddhist manner (of course, I have a similar long history with it as you do), and I think that Platonism, as I will further explain, has the same perspective, in fact, actually even more so, and there is actually no contradiction, unless in the opposite way that Platonism accords even less status and importance to deities than Buddhism does, particularly because of its situation as an institutionalized religion for the many, which Platonism happily avoids. There is only experience, mind, consciousness, as Plotinus says, all is contemplation, there is only contemplation. There is no physical, fixed, or enumerated particular structure or cosmology for the alleged universe 'out there', as in the six (or otherwise numbered) realms of Buddhism, for the range of possible relative individuated spatio-temporal phenomenal experiences at the lowest level of the third hypostasis of soul that individual souls may experience according to their karma and which together comprise 'the world' as experienced by the world soul. Individual souls may, for a time, experience rebirths in such conditions as we might describe as deities of various sorts, but they are no more than that and, as you say, still karmic beings, subject to karma, and still trapped in samsara/genesis, and not of importance or spiritual significance, unless, I suppose, they manage somehow to practice as philosophoi in that state. Not only would any deities be incapable of possessing and transmitting true wisdom, which comes only from the higher hypostases of Nous and the One, and the higher soul in direct contact with them, but it seems that we happen at the moment to live in a relative reality system where such deities are not likely to appear, which is not to say that they couldn't in other relative reality systems, and, in any case, even if they do, they are not important and are just to be ignored, while one just directs one's attention solely to transcendent spiritual practice aimed at the higher hypostases. (And I think that this is clearly Plato and Plotinus' view.)

In discussing the position of Platonism, note first that I am not at all talking about the silly theists and theurgists like Iamblichus, Proclus, Thomas Taylor, etc. and their followers both ancient and modern, whom I don't consider to even be real Platonists at all and don't need to be at all taken into account, anymore than, for example, Hindu tantric theists need to be. Rather, I am only referring to Plato/the dialogs and Plotinus/the Enneads (and any following them), whom I consider to be the only real Platonists. Remember that the dialogs are to a large extent and in many places and in their overall dramatic frame allegorical and symbolic and anagogical and expressed in a different language and vocabulary and terminology and mode of expression than we are usually accustomed to. When Plato refers to the gods throughout the dialogs, and in the sort of positive way that you mention, he is referring to/means, not individuated sensory (in the broadest sense that would include even the formless/without sensation deities of Buddhist cosmology) deities such as we are talking about, but the divine principles of, at the lowest level, divine necessity, karma, and providence as mediated by the world soul, and, at the higher levels, of Nous and the Good. One of the things that makes this clear is that he refers to gods plural and god singular alternatingly and indiscriminately, sometimes mixing them even in the same passage, if I recall correctly, indicating 'god(s)' and divinity as an abstract principle, and rarely by name as if he is concerned with the specific Greek pantheon. Even when he does give some by name, note that, for example, that in the Phaedo when Socrates, who symbolizes the higher divine soul and individual nous, not any actual individual named Socrates, says that he is consecrated like the swans to Apollo, that 'Apollo' in Greek is a pun on 'a-polla' meaning 'not-many', i.e., that Socrates as nous is consecrated to the One as non-multiplicity (nisprapanca in Sanskrit). Similarly, when he says that the accomplished philosphos when the soul is released from the body goes to be among the gods or his soul will go to the good and wise god (note again the indiscriminate use of singular and plural) he means that the individual nous and higher soul released from the lower soul and the experience of the body re-merges with Nous and the One. In the discussion of the fact that the gods can only do good and be good, such as in the earlier books of the Republic, which I gather you are referring to, he is not talking about the Homeric/Hesiodic, etc. 'gods', though they and quotations from the poets are used in the discussion, especially since he concerned to counter popular misconceptions of divinity, but showing that the three hypostases as divine principles are wholly good (evil coming from the darkness of non-being) and that the law of necessity/karma/justice operative inexorably throughout the level of soul and becoming/samsara/genesis is wholly just and righteous and divine and always works, so that good is always rewarded and evil always punished. It would be a big project to go through all the instances in the dialogs referring to god/gods and show their actual or undermeaning, but I hope this is enough to give you the idea for now. I want to at least add that in the Enneads Plotinus generally uses god or gods to refer to one or another of the three hypostases, usually the higher two, and even when he may refer to, for example, the sun as a deity is referring to the fact that all is only mind/contemplation/soul and the ordering of even lowest soul level reality is according to divine spiritual principles mediated through the world soul so that one needs to respect this higher spiritual reality and not disparage it or disregard the divine necessity and law. When he does mention conventional lower deities in the sense that you are asking about, just following along with the conventional phenomenal relative consensus reality that he happens to be functioning in in his time and place, and in regard to 'magic', physical cosmology, 'prayers', astrology, etc., he treats them all as unimportant and irrelevant to spirituality and spiritual and philosophic practice and as inferior or irrelevant to the true philosophos, the true renunciant contemplative ascetic.

I hope that this may be enough to resolve the 'aporia' that you raised about deities in Platonism and show that there is no contradiction with the Platonist view as expressed in the dialogs and Enneads and the Buddhist attaching no profundity to deities that we have both held to over the past years. In fact, as I pointed out, Buddhism is really much more concerned with deities, at the popular and institutionalized monastic level at least, with Dharma protector gods and etc., etc., even if they are irrelevant to attaining release from samsara and are inferior to the Buddhist ascetic yogin. Platonism of and in the dialogs and Enneads is, as I have attempted very briefly to show with I hope some success, actually much more purely concerned only with transcendence and dismissive of deities as unimportant, unwise, and irrelevant since it has no need of deities at all, even as protectors of the faith, but is content with the really divine principles of the actual divine underlying structure of reality and of the hypostases and the aspiration for genuine transcendence and release from all relative realities, including any which may include deities, and any seeming reference to a higher ontological status of deities is actually a reference to the higher ontological status of the higher hypostases.

Flesh-eating as the Fall of the Soul in Plato's 'Republic'

Flesh-eating as the Fall of the Soul in Plato’s ‘Republic’

by Eric S. Fallick


The Politea or ‘Republic’ of Plato is an allegorical, symbolic manual and description of individual contemplative ascetic spiritual practice. As the text itself repeatedly states and makes clear, the ‘city’ is just an analogy, a blown-up symbolic picture, for the individual soul. It has nothing at all to do with politics, political ‘philosophy’, or governance of states. ‘Socrates’ represents nous, intellect, and the higher, divine part of the soul and its divine understanding. Nous descends from the noetic realm to this lower realm of the senses and lower soul, ‘goes down (from the town) to the Piraeus’, and in doing so becomes associated with a lower soul and faculties, ‘with Glaucon (son) of Ariston’. Nous initially descends only so far as to participate in divine spiritual activities and contemplation in the lower realm of soul, ‘will be offering prayers to the goddess and wanting at the same time to view the festival’. It then is immediately returning to the noetic realm, but is restrained by more lower souls and faculties, ‘Polemarchus’ and the others, and compelled to remain for a time and instruct them in righteousness and divine matters.

Book 1 then proceeds to establish the correct divine understanding based on the noetic realm and the Forms of righteousness and holiness and their necessity and superiority for living a well-off life against the naturalistic, materialist (in both senses of the word!), physicalist, immoral, worldly understanding, ‘Thrasymachus’. Books 2 through the first part of Book 5 then, using the analogy and symbolism of the ‘city’, though constantly reminding that it is only just that and showing how it is a projection for understanding the individual soul, and the ‘guardians’, the thoughts, understandings, and discursive reasoning and cognitive state of the soul, describes the cognitive and emotional condition and training and disposition and ordering of the soul in this world as a whole with both its true higher part and the lower soul and faculties endemic to being at the lowest level that is the sense world of the beginning and, for a long time, conditioned ascetic practitioner. That is, initially and for long time on the Path, the contemplative ascetic practitioner has proper orientation, thoughts, and ordering of soul only as a conditioned state attained through practice without actual direct realization and understanding and ordering directly from the higher hypostases and spiritual realities. This is a necessary preliminary and stage of the practice, and, indeed, one at which the practitioner will likely remain for many births as he progresses, but is still a conditioned relative state, one of right opinion rather than true knowledge, and, as such, is unstable and has the possibility of being disrupted or lost until it is made into true knowledge and permanence through direct experience of the higher hypostases. The latter part of Book 5 through Book 7 then describe the further practice of actual direct contemplative experience of the higher hypostases, the attaining of actual true knowledge of the way things are and correct renunciant, ascetic practice, the mode of practice with this knowledge and experience, and the transformation of the conditioned contemplative ascetic practitioner liable to the possibility of falling from his conditioned state of practice, however wonderful it is, into a truly divine renunciant with actual stable knowledge and a permanent understanding and ordering of the soul that is not liable to regress until the final end is attained. Book 8 and the first part of Book 9 then describe how the conditioned practicing soul might fall and the various types of lower souls in this world down to the very worst. The rest of Book 9 and Book 10 show the superiority of righteousness and contemplative asceticism over the worldly way and cover various important topics of spiritual practice and metaphysics and transmigration.

In Book 2, ‘Socrates’ initially proposes and begins to develop the model of the ‘city’ as a blown-up analogy for understanding righteousness in the individual soul. The ‘city’, the complex soul in individuated sensate existence in space-time with higher and lower souls and faculties together in relation to each other, develops upon the initial fall of the true soul into the lower realm of soul and body and the senses from the noetic realm due to the need for now dealing with the senses, maintaining the psychophysical organism and body, and dealing with individual apparent objects appearing one after another in space-time. At this point, at its initial minimal descent, the soul and its thoughts and faculties naturally live a simple, reclusive, contemplative ascetic life with only the minimum lower faculties and minimum possessions and involvements in worldly affairs to maintain bodily existence. It, or now the person, just has enough clothing, shoes, and shelter for protection from the elements as necessary according to the season. He reclines on the ground on simple mats and eats from simple utensils made from leaves, etc. He, most significantly for this discussion, eats a simple grain based vegetarian diet with the addition of some modest vegetarian ‘relishes’ for complete nutrition. Note that when the text refers to the modest and moderate drinking of ‘wine’ that ‘wine’ is a symbol for the senses, which are intoxicants to the soul. So the text is saying that the contemplative ascetic recluse living in peace makes use of the senses only to a moderate degree as necessary to the minimum extent possible. A contemplative ascetic and philosophos, of course, never drinks even a drop of wine in the literal sense or any sort of alcohol, and the divine Plato never would suggest that he may. (Incidentally, this symbolism of ‘wine’ as representing the senses and sense experience occurs elsewhere in the dialogs, most notably, of course, in the Symposium.) He passes his leisure in divine contemplation, ‘hymning the gods’, and content in himself with the higher and lower faculties in order, ‘pleasantly being together with each other’. He produces no thoughts of wanting any more, ‘not making children beyond the (present) substance, taking care to avoid want or war’. He passes his life in peace and health maturing these renunciant and contented thoughts and mental states and continuing such as further circumstances continue or develop, ‘reaching old age and handing down another life of such a sort to the offspring’. This, the text makes clear, is the true, healthy, and proper way of life, the minimum declension of the fallen soul if it has to be here in this realm, the reclusive contemplative ascetic renunciant life.

How, then, does this true ascetic pure life degenerate into the mess of ordinary human life and the world as we see it and the people around us, this mess having been such since time immemorial? How does the soul after its initial fall then fall even deeper into becoming, samsara, genesis, the cycle of birth and death? The lowest faculty of the soul embedded in the body, ‘Glaucon’, seeing the bad way of sensual pleasures and desires lived by most all in samsara, is not satisfied with the simple ascetic life and wants all the sensual pleasures and sense experiences and desires that it sees around it. It turns and corrupts the whole person and soul to consider these necessary and desirable and to pursue them and dive headlong into the karmic mess of samsara and create the kind of lives we see around us. Not only does it now require comfortable furnishings and utensils to use while indulging its now excessive and luxurious desire for food and feasting, but, most crucially, now wants, and even thinks it necessary, to eat meat, to eat animal flesh and to kill for this purpose, as it sees those doing around it. This creates the inflamed, unhealthy, licentious ‘city’/soul. In true Orphic fashion, flesh-eating and killing is shown to be a critical turning point in the fall of the soul, leading to the wandering as an alien in the cycle of repeated birth and death. (And, of course, reversing this and becoming vegetarian again is a crucial and essential step in escaping from becoming and returning to the soul’s pristine state.) Once the soul has imbibed the greed for flesh and meat and has abandoned the true ascetic life that no longer suffices for it and has come to require its life of continual killing and production of meat for its consumption, this leads in snowball fashion to desires for all manners of luxuries, possessions, entertainments, etc., as listed in the text, and even for sex, ‘female companions’ and ‘the things concerning feminine adornment’. Following from the perverse desire for flesh-eating, the soul and its thoughts are darkened, and it becomes firmly ensconced in pursuing the desires of this world and ever binding itself to and suffering on the wheel of birth and death (a true Orphic as well a Platonic image).

The explication of the complete meaning of the Politea would be a great task. Perhaps, this short essay has given a tiny pointer in that direction. At any rate, the Politea reminds us that flesh-eating is a great crime and primal transgression, and that vegetarianism is an indispensable prerequisite of genuine spiritual life and practice.


Ⓒ 2018 Eric S. Fallick

A Note on the Crito

I had only read the Crito once long ago and had, except for one particular passage, not paid much further attention to it since I couldn't understand what relation it had to spiritual practice and metaphysics, am not interested in social/political/societal concerns and can't believe that the divine Plato really was also, have no interest in a 'historical' Socrates disqualified as being of interest as being a grhastha and etc. However, I was encouraged to put it in the queue for reading in Greek. I finished reading it in Greek and now have a whole different take on it. Suffering as I do from hypertrophy of the allegorical faculty and seeing everything in terms of contemplative asceticism and renunciation, I now see it as having a clear renunciant undermeaning and not being actually at all about the literal surface meaning and actually being a very good ascetic text.

Very briefly, Socrates, as usual, represents the higher divine part of the soul in touch with the higher hypostases. Crito represents the lower deluded soul or self enmeshed in the body and the sense world and attentive to the opinions and inclinations and desires of the world, the many and society. The prison, as usual, is the prison of the body and life in this world. The polis/city is this All, this world, the lowest level of existence comprehended by the World Soul, and its Laws are the law of karma and necessity and justice. Deluded souls and the many and the world (Crito) want to evade the law of karma and extend existence in this world and gain worldly benefit by acting unrighteously and against the law of karma and in a worldly unascetic unspiritual way (to try to escape from Athens by illegal means), and think that this is to their benefit, and try to persuade the soul as a whole, even the soul properly governed by the higher true part of the soul (Socrates), to do so. The true higher soul (Socrates) responds at length, using also a personification of the laws of karma (the Laws of the polis), that it is not and never is proper and to the true benefit of the soul to pursue worldly gain or what the world considers gain or desirable by going against the law of karma and righteousness and that such never works. Thus, it is not a political, but actually a very ascetic text clearly indicating the necessity of following the Way and being in accord with the Law of Karma and necessity and righteousness regardless or in spite of apparent short term worldly gain and the ways and desires of the world.

One can see countless examples of this in the world around us and how the many behave all the time. Over the years, I have often had worldlings try to tell me that I should act contrary to spiritual and ascetic principles and righteousness for some immediate short term worldly gain and have had to respond either to them or at least internally think of responding as 'Socrates', the higher soul with true considerations, does to 'Crito', the views of the many and the lower samsaric self. No doubt any other renunciants left in this world have also often been in this position. It is nice to have further the ascetic text of the Crito behind us also.

Relative Realities, Spiritual Systems, Genuine Spiritual Practice and Renunciation

Relative Realities, Spiritual Systems, Genuine Spiritual Practice and Renunciation

by Eric S. Fallick


Platonism is very subtle because it requires transcending the sense-realm, and, finally, only Platonism is of ultimate soteriological value among the different systems. All the other systems, especially those involved with institutionalized religions for the many, really take place just within particular relative phenomenal realities, even when they think they are going beyond them, and are very much wrapped up and involved with particular relative consensus realities and confound actual spiritual contemplative ascetic practice aimed at the transcendent and phenomenal sensory experiences and occurrences. (That is not to say that they aren't of value to particular souls at a particular stage of their practice in a given birth, nor that we can't learn from them, but ultimately to get free one has to access the higher hypostases through Platonic contemplative asceticism.) Plotinus has expressed this well at the beginning of Ennead V.9. Renunciation and asceticism is an absolutely necessary corollary of this understanding. A somewhat hokey analogy is that when we look at a website all that is really being sent is the HTML code that the browser converts into the web page we see. All the different systems are really just moving within their given webpages, even when they think they are getting out of it, and so are concerned with the details and things going on within their webpage. Platonists, however, are concerned with how webpages in general are generated and how to get out of webpages of any sort altogether! (For example, the Mahayana/Bodhisattva ideal is all dependent on and wrapped up in a particular version of relative reality that is no more than just another phenomenal sensory experience set that is no more valid than any. Tibetan Buddhism is especially egregious in this regard. Similarly, and even more so, especially given their notion, of the essence of their systems, of a single linear geocentric historical progression, the Abrahamic systems are totally caught up in and involved with and dependent on one particular phenomenal sensory relative reality as being of spiritual significance. Such observations could me multiplied practically indefinitely. As just one of countless examples, some Catholics go on pilgrimage to pray at the relics of saints--just running around all the time chasing after phenomena instead of pursuing noumena through contemplative ascetic practice, which would be real actual spiritual practice! If one tries to explain a little that such phenomenal 'miraculous' experiences occur in all different religious traditions and have no bearing whatsoever on the metaphysical validity of their theological and soteriological systems and are just more phenomenal sensory karmic experiences--things to be ignored and transcended in pursuing the Absolute to really get free--of course, they don’t understand at all what one is talking about. The same quite and altogether applies to Iamblichus and Proclus and other post-Iamblichus so-called ‘Platonists’ or ‘Neoplatonists’ with their theurgy and etc. Most sadly, they have simply jettisoned the true transcendent Platonism of Plato and Plotinus and replaced it with what is really just another worldly, phenomenal, particular relative reality dependent ‘religious’ system.)

All sensory or 'physical' worlds are just shadow relative realities according to the karma of souls, of which there can be very many--the present world of modernity and science and scientism and naturalism, especially, just being one of many possibilities and not one of particular validity, except that it believes itself to be so--actually, it is one of the worst and least valid of many possibilities since it is most unconducive to and makes most inaccessible true spiritual knowledge and practice and renunciation and thus makes most remote the possibility of making progress towards getting out of relative realities and their misery altogether. The true underlying realities are transcendent and spiritual and suprasensory and are the objects of real knowledge--sensory knowledge being relatively unreal and unimportant and variable.

The real unchanging actual Realities are the higher Realities or hypostases of the One or the Good and then of Nous or the Divine Mind-Thought--the realm of the Divine Mind and the Platonic Forms. From the Divine Mind-Thought then further emanates or devolves or darkens the last and lowest and least real level or hypostasis of Soul and the "world" or "worlds" that Soul perceives and creates through projecting the Forms and Itself in the realm of individuated changing sensate existence in space-time. This includes both the Soul of the All or "World Soul" and all the individual souls, such as ourselves. There is only experience. There are no other separately existing objects or worlds or things apart from the experience of Soul or souls. This level of experience where there are different souls and their variety of experiences that change and present the image of worlds and changing worlds is, again, the lowest and least real level and the only one in which there is change and the possibility of a variety of different experiences and, therefore, "worlds". There are as many different sets of experiences or possibilities of experiences or "worlds" as the possible combinations of projection of souls and their projection of combinations of projections from/of the Forms as are possible--effectively, an infinite variety. All these are determined by what we call 'karma'--which is the experience of the individual souls and the World Soul modifying each other's experiential fields through their volitional workings. The relative realities are just all the different sets of experiences and experiential fields determined by karma of the different souls and the World Soul. These are all that there is at the level of soul--there is no other sort of objective world out there. These sets of experiences and experiential fields can take all sorts of forms according to karma. The underlying Reality is only the higher hypostases and the unchanging Law or Way in which these are projected down into the level of Soul. Thus, all phenomenal things, all the things in the supposed phenomenal sense world--so-called physical laws, gods or no gods, miracles or no miracles, etc., etc.--are just parts of different experience sets according to the karma of different souls as mediated through the World Soul. This is what is meant by relative realities and such applications of the idea as that some souls may experience or have experienced a relative world, for example, where 'miraculous' or 'supernatural' things are more likely to occur, but we don't, or we experience at the moment a world where things appear to operate according to the so-called laws of modern science, but others didn't, and etc., etc. These hypostases and these workings are all that there is. One shouldn’t be mislead by all the foolish people and society around one into thinking that there is some sort of objective material world out there and that its workings are real and that different appearances within it, including those that seem to violate its usual workings, are of significance or spiritual importance. One must just strive to transcend all these relative realities and worlds and existence as an individual soul to return to Nous and the One and to create karma only tending to aid in this direction.

It can readily be seen that this nature of Reality means that actual transcendent-oriented contemplative asceticism and renunciation is the very essence of, is, in fact, identical with, genuine spiritual practice of actual ultimate soteric value. The actual ultimately valid spiritual teaching is this of the higher realities and the generation and ultimately minimally valid nature of the many lower relative realities and possible worlds and experiences and how to understand this and to escape from and transcend the cycle of rebirth in these lower relative shadow realities that are miserable as a result of their minimal degree of being and to return to the real higher realities that are freedom as a result of their really being or being beyond being. To do this one must truly renounce all the relative lower realities and life in them and all that is entailed or contained in them and focus, as much as possible, solely on contemplation of the higher hypostases. One must shift one’s entire being from the lower relative realities of individuated sensate existence in space-time and repeated rebirth to the unchanging higher hypostases of Nous and the One. This means having as little to do with the sense world of the lower relative realities as possible while one is still in them (though, alas, maintaining the psycho-physical organism until one is free from it will constantly do more than plenty of pulling one’s attention back to the sense realm!). This, of course, means as much renunciation of the world and all worldly pursuits, desires, activities and possessions as possible and single-minded devotion to ascetic contemplation (and ancillary study, etc.). The very turning of the soul from the shadow worlds of relative realities and relative non-being back to the higher hypostases of true being and beyond being appears in these very shadow worlds of relative realities as the very fact of true transcendent-oriented otherworldly world-denying renunciation and ascetic contemplation.

Ⓒ 2018 Eric S. Fallick platonicascetic (at) (Gee) mail (dot) com

Maximus of Tyre on Homer and Plato

But those ancient things, in which the song of Homer has still been being powerful, have educated and brought up noble and true and genuine nurslings of philosophy. A nursling of that song was Plato: for even if he would forswear a teacher, I see the tokens and I perceive the seeds:

Of him indeed were feet of such a sort and hands of such a sort,
and glances of the eyes and head and loose flowing hair above

so that I myself would dare stand firm to say that Plato is more similar to Homer rather than to Socrates, even if he should flee Homer and pursue Socrates. ...

(Maximus of Tyre, Dissertation 26, draft translation from Ancient Greek by ESF)

Note: The divine Plato does not actually forswear or flee Homer, or chase Socrates. He just protects the proper interpretation or undermeaning of Homer from profanation (though desecration of Homer's sacred text is almost all that is done now by professor-types who claim to study and teach it!), and uses the literary symbol of Socrates as nous or the divine part of the soul or self to indicate the self-contained-ness and independence of the true contemplative ascetic and renunciant from human concerns and socially constructed reality.

Homer on the Platonic Tripartite Soul

Homer on the Platonic Tripartite Soul:
The Adultery of Aphrodite and Ares in the Odyssey

Eric S. Fallick


The Odyssey is a symbolic, allegorical, anagogical description of contemplative ascetic, renunciant spiritual practice through successive reincarnations in the soul’s journey back to its origin from its fallen state. All systems or descriptions of spiritual practice presuppose and assume (whether they are conscious of it or not and have understood it or not) a metaphysics or description of the nature of Reality. In the case of the Odyssey, the assumed and understood metaphysics and nature of Reality is the same as that expounded by Plato and Plotinus. Most of the Odyssey is detailing practice, stages on the Path and experiences that have to be undergone and things that have to be done by the contemplative ascetic practitioner, with the metaphysics and spiritual Reality involved already understood and presupposed without the need for specific exposition per se. There are, however, some places where a digression is made for explicit exposition of certain metaphysical topics and facets of spiritual Reality. In an earlier essay, I attempted to explain one such passage covering the three Platonic hypostases. Another expository passage, this time presenting the understanding of the Platonic tripartite soul, is found in the colorful and much discussed song of Demodocus relating the adultery of Ares and Aphrodite at Book 8, lines 266 to 366. Let me attempt to explain the undermeaning of this famously controversial story, which will turn out to be not at all so scandalous as has sometimes been supposed by those not penetrating beneath the surface level of the text.

In the Republic (and the Phaedrus myth), the soul in its fallen embodied condition imprisoned in individuated sensate existence in space-time is described, for functional purposes, as having three parts. The first and most important part, which is the true and separable soul, belonging both to this world, in a sense, and the higher noetic world, is the rational and divine part of the soul, nous, logos or ‘intellect’ or understanding. The other two parts are only attached to this true and higher soul when it is embodied and fallen and stuck here in individuated sensate existence in space-time and are produced from the soul’s mixture with ‘matter’, material and bodily existence and darkness. These are the spirited or passionate or energetic part of the soul and the desiring and sensual part of the soul. These last two form the animal soul, so to speak, in opposition to the divine soul. These can’t be completely eliminated as long as the soul remains in embodied sensate existence, until it has attained release and liberation from rebirth and re-union with the One, but in the contemplative ascetic and more accomplished practitioner they are controlled by and strictly subordinate to the divine rational soul, to one degree or another as best as possible (part of the Path is the constant struggle to control these and subject them to the divine soul), and used only as needed to maintain the psycho-physical organism until it can be transcended. In ordinary worldlings, the animal soul is most powerful and exerts control and is only moderated to some degree by the divine soul and often only to the degree necessary to keep it from self-destructing the whole organism and keep it, and particularly the desiring part, being satisfied and able to attain its desires to some degree. In the more accomplished practitioner, the spirited passionate part is subject to the divine part and used to control the desiring part and protect the divine part from outside hindrances; in mundane people, it is in the service of the desiring part and its own passions, and fights for them against the divine rational part.

In the symbolic description in the story of the adultery of Aphrodite and Ares in the Odyssey, Hephaestus represents the divine, rational part of the soul, Ares represents the spirited, passionate part, and Aphrodite represents the desiring, sensual part of the soul. Hephaestus, representing intelligence and the divine soul, is ‘famed for art’ and ‘of great good sense’. He is also ‘lame’ and ‘not firm on the feet’ representing the non-involvement of the rational soul in the material world and its being separable and really separate therefrom, and is ‘slow’ since intellect isn’t caught up in impulse and immediate passion. Ares, on the other hand, representing the spirited, passionate and angry part of the soul, is ‘destructive’ and ‘hateful’, is ‘handsome’ because this part appeals to worldly desires, is the ‘fastest’ of the gods on account of its mercurial nature, and is ‘sound and swift of foot’ since it is part of this world and functions only within it. Aphrodite, the desiring and sensual part of the soul, is ‘golden’ and ‘fair-crowned’ and ‘smile-loving’ representing the apparent but illusory pleasures of the senses, like a honey coated razor blade.

Aphrodite is lawfully married to Hephaestus. In the good soul, the desiring part is subject to the rational part and not supported or encouraged by the spirited part. However, as the story begins, while Hephaestus is absent, while the rational part is occupied with its own proper activity of noetic contemplation apart from the sense world, Ares enters Hephaestus’ house and wooing Aphrodite with gifts commits adultery with her in secret, the spirited part usurps the rational part’s position in the soul while the latter is unaware and presenting the lures of helping the unintelligent desiring part to fulfil its desire for sensual pleasures joins with the desiring part and makes it autonomous rather than subject to the rational part as is proper. Hephaestus is, however, immediately informed by Helios, the sun, of the goings on. The divine part of the soul in contemplation is informed by the light of the Absolute, the Source of all knowledge, and realizes that the lower parts of the soul are still acting on and out of delusion and immersion in the material world. Hephaestus goes to his smithy and fashions fine bonds that are invisible to others and spreads them around his bed. The rational part of the soul consults its intellectual resources and spiritual understanding and develops the means to reveal and immobilize the lower parts of the soul in their unskilful functioning and deploys them throughout the soul as a whole. Hephaestus then pretends to go off to Lemnos, ‘the well-built city’ that is ‘much dearest to him of all lands’, but really turns back when Helios, who has kept watch, tells him that Ares, who was keeping watch, has seen him leaving and taken Aphrodite to bed. The rational part turns to contemplation of the well-ordered noetic realm that it prefers to this world, but is now aware that it has to keep an eye on the lower parts, and, when in the seeming absence of rational control the spirited part again tries to join with the willing desiring part, he knows it through the light of the Absolute and the knowing it provides. This time, however, the rational soul has prepared things and the misalignment and malfunctioning of the animal soul is revealed and the lower two parts are immobilized in their misconduct through the understanding of the divine soul that they can’t perceive; the invisible bonds made by Hephaestus fall on Ares and Aphrodite and they are caught and bound and are unable to move.

Hephaestus now reappears at his house, the rational soul now makes its presence obviously known again throughout the whole soul, and calls all the other gods to witness, the lower parts of the soul are revealed for what they are and have done in the light of the divine Ideas and the noetic order. Hephaestus demands the return of his bridal gifts and the assembled gods (the goddesses stay back out of modesty, the animal soul is still required to function to a certain limited extent in maintaining the psycho-physical organism prior to liberation) exclaim that justice always prevails and that Ares owes the penalty for adultery, the divine order requires that the parts of the soul be properly aligned and stay in their proper roles, otherwise negative karma is created that must be worked out as regulated by providence. The gods laugh at the scene and joke with each other, the divine order rejoices at the rational soul’s retaking control and the soul’s being recalibrated back to its proper order. Poseidon, however, does not laugh and keeps entreating Hephaestus to release Ares and eventually promises that either Ares or himself will pay the debt for adultery. Poseidon represents ‘matter’, non-being and darkness. He is the ‘earth-holder’ and ‘earth-shaker’ since he governs much of the material world and is the lord of the ocean of material existence and birth and death. He is thus on the side of Ares, material darkness and bondage desires and requires the malfunctioning of the animal soul, and thus assures that karmic retribution will continue since the divine order of things keeps compensating for the mess-up of ‘matter’ and non-being by bringing things back into order through the working out of the karma taken on by souls mixed up with the material sense world. Hephaestus finally agrees and releases the bonds and Ares and Aphrodite at once spring up and depart for their respective separate preferred locations. The rational soul, as long as it is still stuck in embodied existence, has to concede some continued limited functioning to the animal soul, but this now, through the intervention of understanding illuminated from the Good, is more in accord with the workings of the divine order and karma and the two lower parts of the soul are now separated from their illicit collusion and are assigned to their separate proper places.

Thus, Homer and his divine Muse have expounded and detailed by means of the undermeaning of a myth the same tripartite nature of the embodied, bound mortal soul and its proper and necessary alignment and functioning as has the divine Plato in the Politea in a more immediately explicit and accessible fashion.


© 2018 Eric S. Fallick platonicascetic (at) (gee)mail (dot) com