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
Friday, July 26, 2019
Tuesday, July 2, 2019
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 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
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 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
Sunday, January 27, 2019
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.
Sunday, January 13, 2019
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.
Saturday, October 13, 2018
Silly Moderns Claiming to be 'Non-dualists'
Silly Moderns Claiming to be ‘Non-dualists’
by Eric S. Fallick
Q. I wonder if you would be willing to deal with those who take an immanentist perspective, such as western non-dualists. They would argue that ascesis is a kind of attachment and not necessary. I believe this denies causation as well as the nature of the One, but I would be interested in your thoughts about this.
A. The modern alleged 'non-dualists' you ask about are not actually 'non-dualists' at all, but rather the most extreme dualists and actually pluralists. 'Non-duality' means that there are not two (or more) things, that there is only One. In the One as such, there is only the One, nothing else at all. As I have written about elsewhere, all the appearance of multiplicity is the darkening and lessening of the One. The silly people you refer to denying world-denying-ness and claiming that the most extreme world of multiplicity is the Absolute as it is are completely denying true Oneness and taking duality/multiplicity as the real and the ultimate, and are thus the real dualists or pluralists. The ascetic and renunciant is the real 'non-dualist' since he turns from the sense-world of multiplicity and focuses as much as possible on the One. Even in terms of the second hypostasis, Nous, these people are among the many mentioned in, for example, the Politea who can see many beautiful, etc. things, but can't see or understand or believe in a single beauty, etc.-in-itself even if someone points it out to them and pass their lives as if dreaming rather than awake. The same applies to modern alleged 'immanentism'. For the One to be immanent in the many means that the many are really the One mistakenly perceived to be many due to delusion and darkness, and that one must awaken through contemplative asceticism to see only the One and no longer see multiplicity at all, which, of course, means that asceticism and renunciation that involves decreasing experience of the many as real, desirable, etc. is the only real spiritual practice. The alleged spiritual practice of the silly moderns amounts to no more than grooviness in everyday life, being just an ordinary deluded sensually indulgent desiring worldling but thinking one is cooler than others who don't exalt and rationalize their desires and attachments.
You are quite right that these so-called modern 'non-dualists' and 'immanentists' (really just pluralistic realists and positivists, and not restricted to the West) deny causation and the nature of the One, of Reality, and they are the most deluded and foolish of deluded fools. They are so ridiculous and silly that they wouldn't even be worth a thought except that they are now in this modern world so ubiquitous and numerous, like demons, plague vectors, or a cancer. In Christianity, they hide under the cover of 'creation spirituality' and post-Vatican II and modernism; in Hinduism and Buddhism, they go under 'tantra' (a perversion to begin with, as you have noted); in Buddhism, they also hide under 'emptiness', 'compassion and bodhicitta', misuse of Chan/Zen rhetoric, confusion about Hua-yen teachings, etc., and in Hinduism, also under 'advaita' and sometimes 'bhakti'; the few who now claim to be what they think are Platonists, use 'theurgy' and the perversions and nonsense of Iamblichus, etc.; and etc. and etc. They are all just really simply rationalizing their worldly desires and attachments that they don't want to give up and twisting alleged spirituality and spiritual teachings to allow them to do so, and to fit in with their modern this-worldly prejudices. Their karma is simply very heavy and their minds and souls most clouded and deluded so that they can't see even the most obvious, simple, and basic of spiritual principles. Most of them probably will be lucky if they even manage to get reborn as human beings again! Yet, they are so prevalent now (there have always been some, but not so many and so much the norm) that I tend to think that they and their nonsensical ideas are another symptom of the modern world and its inability to comprehend transcendence, renunciation, and genuine spiritual practice. (I have been waging this fight against this kind of nonsense for 40 years since my days at the so-called 'Zen Community of New York' as a young man. (As is, or should be, well-known, Japanese so-called Zen and Buddhism largely went down the tubes this way long ago.) And I still encounter it all the time.) As you know, no real spiritual teaching or teacher has ever gone their way in the history of mankind. It just doesn't make any sense at all and is self-contradictory--if what they say is correct and just everything as it is the Absolute and the ascesis is not necessary and is just an attachment, then, logically, their own teaching and such little practice as they themselves do is also not necessary and just an attachment! If they are correct, then everything is already OK as it is just like ordinary worldlings who don't believe in anything spiritual say--they should just look around them and see if this world is really so wonderful! If enlightenment and spirituality is such a simple and easy and effortless thing as they say, then all the sages of all the systems of the past who renounced and exerted tremendous efforts in the ascesis were the stupidest people in the world, and they are the first who have ever really understood how things are on a large scale! Is such worth even entertaining? Even the slightest actual understanding of how Reality, karma, the spiritual Path, causation, etc.--even ordinary life (it is like someone saying that one can become a concert pianist without practicing because music is already present in the world!)!--works indicates the absolute necessity of the ascesis and the absurdity of their ideas. Their ideas simply destroy all spirituality and philosophy and practice of any kind. It is hard for me to understand how they can think the way they do when it is so obviously silly and erroneous--I guess it must be their heavy karma and delusion just like ordinary worldling secular materialists who deny spirituality and transcendence and from whom they are hardly much removed.
It seems that it should be obvious that one's experience is what one is and if one is involved in worldly pursuits and desires and sensual pleasures and involvements, etc., etc., then one is ipso facto experiencing and in samsara with all its misery and if one is not doing and pursuing and involved in any of these things but is involved with the sense world as little as possible and directed to contemplation and noetic things, then one is, to that extent at least, less experiencing and more out of samsara and its misery! In Plotinian terms, the soul is contemplation, as everything is contemplation, and worldling life is per se a dim, dark, obscure, false contemplation, but contemplative ascetic life is per se a brighter, clearer, truer contemplation, and, hence, a truer and happier state of existence. Truly, worldlings actually exist and are less than true renunciants and contemplative ascetics; their state of being is less real! Such has seemed obvious to me for a very long time, but no one understands.
It is intrinsically impossible for someone with a significant and stable degree of realization or experience of the One/Good not to be an ascetic and renunciant and not to lead an ascetic life. One who has fully realized re-union with the One is, of course, not even here or experiencing this world or individuated sensate existence in space-time at all, so any phenomenal questions are no longer relevant, but one who has gone significantly along the Way but is still in becoming no longer can even perceive or experience or experience as really real the sense world enough to pursue worldly and sensual desires. To pursue worldly and sensual desires, pursuits, and life is inherently to turn the soul towards darkness, non-being, and non-knowing and darken and dim and lessen the soul's own light and being and knowing. When the light of the Good/One has illuminated sufficiently and stably enough the soul, it can no longer darken itself enough to experience the pursuit of worldly things beyond survival and of worldly and sensual desires and pleasures--it is simply no longer possible to be in that state of non-being--and thus such a one perforce is an ascetic and renunciant.
by Eric S. Fallick
Q. I wonder if you would be willing to deal with those who take an immanentist perspective, such as western non-dualists. They would argue that ascesis is a kind of attachment and not necessary. I believe this denies causation as well as the nature of the One, but I would be interested in your thoughts about this.
A. The modern alleged 'non-dualists' you ask about are not actually 'non-dualists' at all, but rather the most extreme dualists and actually pluralists. 'Non-duality' means that there are not two (or more) things, that there is only One. In the One as such, there is only the One, nothing else at all. As I have written about elsewhere, all the appearance of multiplicity is the darkening and lessening of the One. The silly people you refer to denying world-denying-ness and claiming that the most extreme world of multiplicity is the Absolute as it is are completely denying true Oneness and taking duality/multiplicity as the real and the ultimate, and are thus the real dualists or pluralists. The ascetic and renunciant is the real 'non-dualist' since he turns from the sense-world of multiplicity and focuses as much as possible on the One. Even in terms of the second hypostasis, Nous, these people are among the many mentioned in, for example, the Politea who can see many beautiful, etc. things, but can't see or understand or believe in a single beauty, etc.-in-itself even if someone points it out to them and pass their lives as if dreaming rather than awake. The same applies to modern alleged 'immanentism'. For the One to be immanent in the many means that the many are really the One mistakenly perceived to be many due to delusion and darkness, and that one must awaken through contemplative asceticism to see only the One and no longer see multiplicity at all, which, of course, means that asceticism and renunciation that involves decreasing experience of the many as real, desirable, etc. is the only real spiritual practice. The alleged spiritual practice of the silly moderns amounts to no more than grooviness in everyday life, being just an ordinary deluded sensually indulgent desiring worldling but thinking one is cooler than others who don't exalt and rationalize their desires and attachments.
You are quite right that these so-called modern 'non-dualists' and 'immanentists' (really just pluralistic realists and positivists, and not restricted to the West) deny causation and the nature of the One, of Reality, and they are the most deluded and foolish of deluded fools. They are so ridiculous and silly that they wouldn't even be worth a thought except that they are now in this modern world so ubiquitous and numerous, like demons, plague vectors, or a cancer. In Christianity, they hide under the cover of 'creation spirituality' and post-Vatican II and modernism; in Hinduism and Buddhism, they go under 'tantra' (a perversion to begin with, as you have noted); in Buddhism, they also hide under 'emptiness', 'compassion and bodhicitta', misuse of Chan/Zen rhetoric, confusion about Hua-yen teachings, etc., and in Hinduism, also under 'advaita' and sometimes 'bhakti'; the few who now claim to be what they think are Platonists, use 'theurgy' and the perversions and nonsense of Iamblichus, etc.; and etc. and etc. They are all just really simply rationalizing their worldly desires and attachments that they don't want to give up and twisting alleged spirituality and spiritual teachings to allow them to do so, and to fit in with their modern this-worldly prejudices. Their karma is simply very heavy and their minds and souls most clouded and deluded so that they can't see even the most obvious, simple, and basic of spiritual principles. Most of them probably will be lucky if they even manage to get reborn as human beings again! Yet, they are so prevalent now (there have always been some, but not so many and so much the norm) that I tend to think that they and their nonsensical ideas are another symptom of the modern world and its inability to comprehend transcendence, renunciation, and genuine spiritual practice. (I have been waging this fight against this kind of nonsense for 40 years since my days at the so-called 'Zen Community of New York' as a young man. (As is, or should be, well-known, Japanese so-called Zen and Buddhism largely went down the tubes this way long ago.) And I still encounter it all the time.) As you know, no real spiritual teaching or teacher has ever gone their way in the history of mankind. It just doesn't make any sense at all and is self-contradictory--if what they say is correct and just everything as it is the Absolute and the ascesis is not necessary and is just an attachment, then, logically, their own teaching and such little practice as they themselves do is also not necessary and just an attachment! If they are correct, then everything is already OK as it is just like ordinary worldlings who don't believe in anything spiritual say--they should just look around them and see if this world is really so wonderful! If enlightenment and spirituality is such a simple and easy and effortless thing as they say, then all the sages of all the systems of the past who renounced and exerted tremendous efforts in the ascesis were the stupidest people in the world, and they are the first who have ever really understood how things are on a large scale! Is such worth even entertaining? Even the slightest actual understanding of how Reality, karma, the spiritual Path, causation, etc.--even ordinary life (it is like someone saying that one can become a concert pianist without practicing because music is already present in the world!)!--works indicates the absolute necessity of the ascesis and the absurdity of their ideas. Their ideas simply destroy all spirituality and philosophy and practice of any kind. It is hard for me to understand how they can think the way they do when it is so obviously silly and erroneous--I guess it must be their heavy karma and delusion just like ordinary worldling secular materialists who deny spirituality and transcendence and from whom they are hardly much removed.
It seems that it should be obvious that one's experience is what one is and if one is involved in worldly pursuits and desires and sensual pleasures and involvements, etc., etc., then one is ipso facto experiencing and in samsara with all its misery and if one is not doing and pursuing and involved in any of these things but is involved with the sense world as little as possible and directed to contemplation and noetic things, then one is, to that extent at least, less experiencing and more out of samsara and its misery! In Plotinian terms, the soul is contemplation, as everything is contemplation, and worldling life is per se a dim, dark, obscure, false contemplation, but contemplative ascetic life is per se a brighter, clearer, truer contemplation, and, hence, a truer and happier state of existence. Truly, worldlings actually exist and are less than true renunciants and contemplative ascetics; their state of being is less real! Such has seemed obvious to me for a very long time, but no one understands.
It is intrinsically impossible for someone with a significant and stable degree of realization or experience of the One/Good not to be an ascetic and renunciant and not to lead an ascetic life. One who has fully realized re-union with the One is, of course, not even here or experiencing this world or individuated sensate existence in space-time at all, so any phenomenal questions are no longer relevant, but one who has gone significantly along the Way but is still in becoming no longer can even perceive or experience or experience as really real the sense world enough to pursue worldly and sensual desires. To pursue worldly and sensual desires, pursuits, and life is inherently to turn the soul towards darkness, non-being, and non-knowing and darken and dim and lessen the soul's own light and being and knowing. When the light of the Good/One has illuminated sufficiently and stably enough the soul, it can no longer darken itself enough to experience the pursuit of worldly things beyond survival and of worldly and sensual desires and pleasures--it is simply no longer possible to be in that state of non-being--and thus such a one perforce is an ascetic and renunciant.
Sunday, September 9, 2018
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.
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.
Sunday, September 2, 2018
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)