The Meaning of the Dialogue Form in Plato's Philosophy

27 February 2023

The Meaning of the Dialogue Form in Plato’s Philosophy

“We must now mention the reason why Plato used this literary form [the dialogue].  He chose it, we say, because the dialogue is a kind of cosmos.  For in the same way as a dialogue has different personages each speaking in character, so does the universe comprise existences of various nature expressing themselves in various ways; for the utterance of each is according to its nature.  It was in imitation, then, of God’s creation, the cosmos, that he did this.”

(Anonymous, Anonymous Prolegomena to Platonic Philosophy, translated by L. G. Westerink, Prometheus Trust, Wiltshire, UK, 2011, page 28, ISBN: 9781898910510)

 

1.  The anonymous author gives seven reasons, some of them overlapping, for why Plato chose the dialogue form.  This is the first reason.  The full list of reasons is too long to post here; perhaps I will post some of the others in the future.

2.  The author offers the idea that the dialogues of Plato are a ‘kind of cosmos’; meaning that the dialogues imitate, or reflect, or instantiate features of the cosmos.  This means that Plato’s dialogues are teaching the reader at the symbolic level; that beneath the specific topic of a dialogue, and the discussion in that dialogue, the dialogue itself is demonstrating the truth of the Platonic view. 

I find this idea appealing.  As I have mentioned in a previous post (perhaps more than one) I think the dialogues of Plato transmit to the reader a subtle energy of understanding.  I can’t prove this; on the other hand, others have experienced a similar feeling of a transmission of wisdom from reading the dialogues. 

3.  The author offers that the multitude of characters in the dialogues is an imitation of the multitude of entities in the cosmos.  I think that this means that just as the dialogue as a whole is a symbol of the cosmos, the characters as individuals are symbols of aspects of the cosmos.  Each character has archetypal significance.

In addition, most dialogues make specific reference to a deity and/or a ceremony in honor of a deity.  The deity referred to acts as a symbol of the meaning of the dialogue as a whole.

4.  In this way, the dialogues allow for the attentive reader access to higher hypostases by comprehending the dialogue as an emanation of those realms.  In this way, reading the dialogues of Plato becomes an occasion for contemplation.

The Way of Virtue

25 February 2023

The Way of Virtue

“You will best honour God by making your mind like unto Him, and this you can do by virtue alone.”

(Porphyry, Porphyry’s Letter to His Wife Marcella, translated by Alice Zimmern, Phanes Press, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1986, page 49, ISBN: 0933999275)

 

“The virtues of the man who tries to rise to contemplation consist in detaching oneself from things here below; this is why they are called ‘purifications.’  They command us to abstain from activities which innervate the organs and which excite the affections that relate to the body.”

(Porphyry, Launching-Points to the Realm of Mind, translated by Kenneth Guthrie, Phanes Press, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1988, pages 27 & 28, ISBN: 0933999585)

 

1.  The word “God” is loaded with associations that are embedded in monotheistic traditions.  In Platonism, the word God is used, now and then, in a way that is equivalent to the use of terms like ‘the One’, and ‘the Good’.  It is an appropriate word for designating that which is ultimate and fully transcendental.  But it does have some differences in meaning when used in a Platonic context as opposed to a monotheistic context.  For example, Platonists have the view that the cosmos is eternal in the sense of everlasting.  Proclus wrote a treatise on this called “On the Eternity of the World.”  And some early Christian clerics, such as Synesius, accepted this view, arguing that creation was a metaphorical teaching rather than an actuality.  It is good to keep this difference, and others, in mind so that when reading Platonic works that use the word “God” we refrain projecting onto that usage meanings from a monotheistic context that might not apply.

2.  It was Porphyry’s view that the Platonic ascent to the One, or God, was accomplished through the practice of “virtue”, and further, that it is only through the practice of virtue that the ultimate union with God can be accomplished.  Porphyry wrote extensively about the meaning of virtue, dividing virtue into a number of types and categories such as civic virtue, contemplative virtue, etc.  The different types of virtue were united in their purpose of functioning as purifications.  And purifications were united in their purpose of turning the practitioner of Platonism away from attachments that ‘innervate’ the body (such as alcohol) and ‘excite the affections’; I would interpret ‘excite the affections’ as meaning ‘stimulate the senses’.

3.  Porphyry’s understanding of the Platonic Path was fundamentally grounded in what I call the Ascetic Ideal.  I’m not sure, but I don’t recall Porphyry using the word ‘ascetic’ specifically.  Nevertheless, his vision is that of an ascetic, meaning someone who turns away from a life based on sensory stimulation for the purpose of union with the Divine, the One, with God.

4.  Porphyry’s books on vegetarianism, such as “On Abstention from Killing Animals”, and his “Letter to Anebo”, are specific applications of this general understanding of virtue as purification.  Looking at Porphyry’s writings broadly, vegetarianism/veganism is foundational for his understanding of how Platonism works because it both detaches the practitioner from things here below (I take ‘here below’ to mean ‘the material realm’) and establishes a right relationship, or alignment, to the transcendental, to God.

5.  In one sense, the path of asceticism that Porphyry advocates for is not an easy one.  It is not easy in the sense that becoming a talented musician is not easy; one has to put time and effort into becoming a talented musician, and one has to put time and effort into becoming an ascetic.  On the other hand, the ascetic way offers numerous opportunities for embodiment in practice.  I mean that there are numerous opportunities to refrain from stimulating the senses such as refraining from popular entertainment, refraining from luxurious carnist meals, refraining from ostentatious clothing, etc.  Even small ascetic gestures begin to set up a habit of mind that eventually internalizes the Ascetic Ideal.  And once the Ascetic Ideal has been internalized the path to the One, to God, becomes clear.

 

 

Distinguishing Eternity

22 February 2023

Distinguishing Eternity

“He [Plato] was also the first to develop the notion of eternity, for whereas his predecessors understood by eternity endless time, Plato showed that endless time is different from eternity.”

(Anonymous, Anonymous Prolegomena to Platonic Philosophy, translated by L.G. Westerink, The Prometheus Trust, Wiltshire, UK, 2011, page 12)

1.  The ultimate source of all in Platonism is usually referred to as the One, or the Good, sometimes as the Beautiful.  In reality this ultimacy is beyond name and form, beyond predication, beyond affirmation or negation.  I think of names like the Good and the One and the Beautiful as a kind of first manifestation from this ultimacy.  Strictly speaking you cannot say anything positive or negative about the ultimate; on the other hand, speaking about the ultimate has its virtues and purposes and is not inherently misleading.

2.  In my own journey I have tended to configure the Platonic ultimate as the Eternal (hence the name of this blog).  As the quote above suggests, it seems to me that Platonism has a subtle and deep understanding of eternity; it is one of the things that drew me to Platonism.  The ultimate is eternal as such, just as for the ultimate oneness is unity as such.  Things are things because they are descended from this Oneness, and things endure through time because of their participation in the Eternal.  And because they are metaphysically distant from the ultimate, their unity is deficient and unsustainable, and their capacity to endure is limited by time.

3.  From the perspective of eternity the ultimate is eternity as such.  In the first emanation (nous) things are eternal by participation; this is why, for example, numbers are eternal.  In the second emanation, the realm of soul, the metaphysical distance from the Eternal introduces time, through the presence of number.  It is here that we observe everlasting things, what the quote refers to as ‘endless time’.  The world soul and the cosmos as a whole are examples of this enduring through time.  And it is here that Plato speaks of ‘time as the moving image of eternity’ in the Timaeus.  The appearance of ephemerality emerges as the world soul differentiates into a individual consciousnesses that endure only for a measurable amount of time; they lack the nature of everlastingness.  This is the realm of deities, humans, and other living beings.  This is the realm of materiality, the lowest realm which is the farthest from the ultimate.

4.  By following the traces of eternity we can ascend, step by step, to that which is eternal by nature.  The first step is to contemplate impermanence; that all sensory things, and all mental constructions, are impermanent.  In some cases this is not difficult; for example, we have no problem accepting the impermanence of the sound of a bell.  In other cases there can be deep resistance to impermanence; for example, many people think that a nation or religion are permanent, and some think that their ephemeral opinions are permanent.  This is why serious study of impermanence is so helpful, because it leads us away from relying on the ephemeral domain of sensation; it is a process of distinguishing eternity from that which is ephemeral.  This is just the first step in the long journey to the eternal.  Plotinus is the great guide for this journey which takes us beyond the realms of sensation, beyond the realms of the everlasting, to a return to the truly Eternal.

5.  The presence of eternity is found within; it lies at the center of the soul.  It is like a ray of sunlight that can, if we pay attention, lead us back to the sun, the spiritual sun.  Though that which is eternal as such is metaphysically distant, it is spiritually close.  When we turn within, entering silence and stillness, we find this inner light and, with patience, the source of that inner light, which is the Good, the One, and the Eternal.

 

 

More on the Word 'Neoplatonism'

18 February 2023

More on the Word ‘Neoplatonism’

In mid-January of this year I posted “Why I Don’t Use the Word ‘Neoplatonism.”  It was my quick take on why I think the word ‘Neoplatonism’ inherently distorts the history of the Platonic tradition as well as the teachings of Plotinus and other late classical Platonists.  Recently, I was rereading Pure by Mark Anderson and came across a passage where Anderson makes the same point, but with different emphases.  Anderson is much more adamant than I was in my post and more strongly emphasizes the history behind the introduction of the word ‘Neoplatonism’ into the discourse of modernity.  Here it is:

“Of Longinus Plotinus said, ‘He is a scholar, but he is not at all a philosopher.’ [I believe this is from Porphyry’s Life of Plotinus.]  We might say the same of those intellectual historians who insist upon distinguishing Platonism from Neoplatonism.  Plotinus, the supposed founder of ‘Neoplatonism,’ knew nothing of this distinction; he considered himself a loyal Platonist.  He may have elaborated Plato’s central themes; no doubt he illuminated what was only dimly implicit in the master’s written works; but he consistently maintained that he derived his ideas from the tradition that descended from Plato.  He was taken at his word for nearly two thousand years.

“Then came historicism.

“In the nineteenth century, certain German scholars claiming to have detected previously unperceived fissures separating Plotinus’ ideas from pure Platonism, declared Plotinus the unwitting founder of a new school of thought, inspired by but diverging from Platonism sufficiently to merit the prefix ‘Neo.’  Thus died a tradition that had sustained the greatest of Western minds, from Plotinus himself to Michelangelo.  It was not a natural death.  Platonism as a unified, living, inspirational tradition was assassinated by pedantry, drowned in an inkwell. . .

“The inferences one draws from this event depend upon whether one aspires to be a scholar or a philosopher.  From the perspective of the intellectual historian, the segregating of Plato from Plotinus is fecund, endlessly productive of the most minute research projects.  The philosopher seeks a different sort of fecundity.

“The labor of identifying and categorizing the varieties of Platonism and Neoplatonism – in a word, taxonomy – satisfied the instincts of the scholar.  The unity of Platonism nourishes the spirits of those who love wisdom.  If you long for what counts today as historical accuracy, accept the scholar’s distinction between Platonism and Neoplatonism.  If you long for wisdom, live the unity of Platonism.”

(Mark Anderson, Pure: Modernity, Philosophy, and the One, Sophia Perennis, San Rafael, CA, 2009, pages 30 & 31.)

 

1.  I think the difference between the scholar and the philosopher that Anderson refers to is that the philosopher is, from the Platonist perspective, a mystic whereas the scholar is not.  (It’s possible to be a scholar and a mystic, just like it’s possible for someone to be a cook and a mystic; but being a mystic is not part of the essence of scholarship whereas, from the Platonist perspective, it is the essence of being a philosopher.) 

2.  I would like to know when ‘German scholars’ introduced the word ‘Neoplatonism’ and the specific paper where the introduction occurred and who the author was.  I’m like that; I’m the kind of reader who will track down footnotes.  So far, I haven’t come across the specifics of this shift in terminology.  I suspect the specifics would be illuminating.

3.  Anderson refers to the truth that Platonism was considered a single tradition for a very long time.  I made the same point in my mid-January post.  There is a disturbing hubris inherent in the term ‘Neoplatonism’; it implies that many centuries of scholars got it wrong, but that we moderns all of a sudden got it right.  I refer to this way of thinking as ‘chronocentrism’, a word I made up to name the view that modernity has of itself, namely that modernity is more wise, more insightful, and better informed, as well as ethically superior, to those ancients.

I first experienced the hubris of modernist chronocentrism when I was deeply involved in Western Buddhism.  For example, modernist Western Buddhists do not hesitate to refer to the idea of rebirth as a ‘superstition’ that the progressive, materialist, and scientific West does not need and has every right to eject from the Buddhadharma.  Every single tradition of Buddhism, from Abhidhamma to Zen, has accepted the truth of rebirth, but that means nothing to ‘Secular Buddhism’ (trademarked).  Chronocentrism is the way modernity disposes of sources of possible alternatives to its basic world view; and it has done so successfully.

What I find helpful is that Anderson points out that long before there was Western Buddhism, the Chronocentrism of modernity was used to reconfigure Platonism in a manner that divested Platonism of its mystical foundation, so that it would become acceptable to materialist  modernity.  So when Buddhism arrived in the West, the West was already experienced at how to handle ideas alien to its current modernist beliefs.

4.  Anderson mentions that the ‘scholar’ and the ‘philosopher’ are searching for different kinds of fecundity.  For the scholar the analysis of things into different types, what Anderson calls ‘taxonomy’, produces many essays, conferences, and understandings compatible with their materialist assumptions.  The fecundity of the philosopher is the fecundity of The One, the primal source that gives rise to all things.  By nourishing our experience of The One we align ourselves with creation as such, as well as the unity which allows things to be things as opposed to jumbled heaps of random assemblages.  But this kind of unity is only accessible through the contemplation of the mystic.

5.  Anderson makes the point that if you are attracted to Platonism out of a love of wisdom, because you are seeking wisdom, meaning transcendental wisdom, then you will perceive the Platonist tradition as a unity.  One way of looking at this is that a lover of wisdom will tend to see all the dialogues of Plato and all the Enneads of Plotinus, as a single book, focused on a single project; that project being mystical union with The Good and The One.  In contrast, the ‘scholar’ will find multiplicity in the form of divergences, contrasts, and incompatibilities.  How does that happen?

Think of a musical form like the classical symphony.  One way of listening to symphonies from that period is to hear the common formal foundations that each composer uses.  Another way of listening to these symphonies is to hear the divergences of one composer from another.  But in the context of the classical symphony, these divergences are not considered to be separate schools; that is to say Mozart is not a ‘Neo-symphonist’ to Haydn the symphonist.

In a similar way, the Platonic Sages are presenting the symphony of the eternal using their own orchestration to do so.  But the later Platonists, such as Plotinus, Maximus, Porphyry, et al, are presenting the same truth, and pointing to the same mystical ascent to the transcendental source of all things.  And that is why the Platonic tradition is a singular tradition with a single teaching, the teaching of the eternal in the midst of this ephemeral and gossamer world.

A Few Notes on Porphyry, Iamblichus, and Theurgy

16 February 2023

A Few Notes on Porphyry, Iamblichus, and Theurgy

1.  In the late classical period Platonism divided into two broad streams.  I refer to one of those streams as ‘contemplative’, meaning that it is focused primarily on the practice of contemplation and that contemplation is understood to be the means for the divine ascent to The One.  The other stream is referred to as that of ‘theurgy’, and regards ritual as the essential means for the divine ascent.  This is a fairly standard analysis of the way Platonism manifested from the late classical period to the present day.

2.  Part of this difference is seen in the way the two different interpretations related to vegetarianism and the killing of animals for the purposes of ritual sacrifice.  The contemplative tradition advocated for a vegetarian way of life for philosophers as well as refraining from animal sacrifice.  In contrast, the theurgic tradition advocated for ritual animal sacrifice in their theurgic rituals.

3.  The two representative figures for these two positions are Porphyry, who argued for vegetarianism and against animal sacrifice, and Iamblichus who argued for animal sacrifice as necessary.  Iamblichus was a student of Porphyry, but on this issue they parted ways.

4.  In English Porphyry’s book on the topic of a philosopher’s relationship to animals is translated as “On Abstinence from Killing Animals”.  It has two emphases.  The first is an advocacy for a vegetarian, or vegan, way of life for philosophers.  The second is Porphyry’s critique of animal sacrifice which is quite thorough.  Porphyry offers a kind of history as to how animal sacrifice emerged, arguing that it was not the original method of very ancient humanity.  In addition, Porphyry suggests alternative means of sacrifice, including herbs, kinds of wood or bark, incense, and plant substances, which are ceremonially burned instead of animals.  In the classical world in which Porphyry lived, animal sacrifice was pervasive; such sacrifice was standard for all Pagan ceremonies both large and small, as well as many oracular procedures and divinations.  By combining an advocacy for a vegetarian diet along with detailed recommendations on methods of sacrifice to the gods that do not include animal sacrifice, Porphyry provided the philosophers of that time with a complete guide for living a life free from killing animals.

5.  Porphyry’s view was not original.  There existed a very long tradition of refraining from killing animals in the classical philosophical communities going back to Pythagoras and the Orphics.  But what Porphyry did was to bring this heritage and its views into a thorough presentation, addressing the objections to such abstinence, and offering a unified vision of a philosophical life free from killing animals.  (Unfortunately, we do not have the whole book; perhaps additional chapters will be discovered in the future.)

6.  Iamblichus viewed this differently, particularly when it comes to ritual animal sacrifice in theurgy.  It seems that Iamblichus considered blood sacrifice to be necessary for a ritual sacrifice to be complete, because without this blood sacrifice the sacrifice would not reach, or connect with, or align with, the deity for whom the sacrifice was done. 

The point I want to make, without going into all the details of the dispute between Porphyry and Iamblichus, is that Theurgy is rooted in animal sacrifice; that is its origin and the belief in the efficacy of such sacrifice is its foundation.

7.  There has been a tendency, I think, to water down the meaning of theurgy.  For example, in a contemporary book on Platonism that has a favorable view of theurgy, the practice of theurgy is described as having various facets such as hymns, incense, set prayers, altars, bodily gestures, music, etc.  There is no mention of animal sacrifice.  When I read this kind of description it feels to me like a way of teaching ritual veneration or worship or honoring.  For example, all of these elements are included in ancestor veneration found in many cultures.  But I wouldn’t call ancestor veneration theurgy.  I don’t mind having a ritual element in Platonic practice; I’m rather fond of ritual myself.  But what I’m getting at is that not all ritual is theurgic.

I don’t think practitioners of Platonic theurgy today engage in animal sacrifice, but the shift in focus that classical theurgy rests upon in order to justify theurgic practice remains.

8.  Porphyry’s foundation advocating for abstaining from killing animals is purification through asceticism.  Theurgic views undermine Platonic asceticism and take Platonic practice in a different direction.  That direction is to be aligned with various deities rather than aligned with The One.

9.  This is an ancient dispute.  It won’t be resolved here on my blog.  But I think it is worth bringing up because many contemporary Platonists are rooted in interpretations of Platonism that have what I think of as an uncritical acceptance of the theurgic teachings of Iamblichus (along with his metaphysical cosmology) and the successors of Iamblichus.  Along with this there is a tendency to downplay the teachings of Porphyry; for example, a contemporary book that contains introductory teachings of classical Platonism, consisting of quotations from their writings, does not contain anything from Porphyry.

10.  Personally, the more I study Porphyry the more I admire his teachings.  Porphyry has a clarity and directness of style that I find attractive; he refrains from making topics unnecessarily complicated.  At the same time, he is able to address sophisticated philosophical issues such as the categories of Aristotle. 

Porphyry is also clear about the connection between Platonism and asceticism and he does not hesitate to speak of those connections.  He understands the foundational nature of the virtues and ascesis in the Platonic Way, as the Platonic Way. 

Porphyry had his human flaws.  He was prone to deep depression, as he reports in his Life of Plotinus.  And Porphyry allowed himself to become involved in political conflicts, particularly where it concerned the rise of Christianity which Porphyry adamantly opposed. 

However, he was, in my opinion, a deeply dedicated practitioner and his insights on why a philosopher should abstain from killing animals arise from years of ascetic and contemplative practice.  For this reason, I often take Porphyry as a good guide and resource for those hiking on the trail to The Good and The One.

Corrective Lens

Corrective Lens

Views

Constructs

Perspectives

Commentaries

Interpretations --

We do not see the world,

What we see is our own mind,

We see ev'rything through glasses

That distort all the things that we find;

As if rose was the color of grasses,

Like those who believe that nothing surpasses

Their desires that crumble like broken fences,

As if a solid mountain range contained passes,

As if truth was determined by vote of the masses,

Or those who believe that the only thing we can grasp is

That which can be measured and observed by the five senses

Unconcerned and unaware that all these things become ashes,

But all becomes clear when we think of this: ev'rything vanishes.

Sharing Some Thoughts Regarding Asceticism

9 February 2023

Sharing Some Thoughts Regarding Asceticism

1.  I sometimes mention in passing what I refer to as the ‘Ascetic Ideal’.  By Ascetic Ideal I mean the principle that underlies the specific practices of asceticism.  This ideal rejects the view that life should be centered on pursuing sensory stimulation, which is the view that dominates our society today.  The Ascetic Ideal means living a life that is instead centered on the transcendent, that which is beyond, and before, sensory experience and stimulation.  The Ascetic Ideal views sensory stimulation as a distraction from the pursuit of the transcendental.

2.  There are occasions in life when ordinary people engage in ascetic practice.  I am thinking of athletes who undertake a disciplined regimen that might exclude things like alcohol and rich food, as well as minimizing time spent in popular entertainments because time spent in such a way would interfere with their athletic training.

It is also fairly common for students in higher education, particularly when exams are approaching, to forego visiting bars as well as minimizing time spent with popular entertainment because students know the importance that studying for an exam will have for their futures.

I think of these episodes of asceticism as ‘transactional asceticism’; meaning that those who engage in it are paying a price for a possible future reward.  The difference between transactional asceticism and the ascetic ideal is that in transactional asceticism the reward for giving up some sensory pleasures is itself a sensory, or worldly, pleasure.  In contrast, the reward for following the ascetic ideal is transcendental and is ‘not of this world’.

In a materialist culture such as ours, it is comprehensible that someone would give up, for a limited time, ordinary activities in order to become a star athlete or to get a good grade in school so that they can become a doctor, banker, or businessman.  In contrast, in a materialist culture it is incomprehensible that someone would commit their life to the ascetic ideal for no material reward.  This is because we live in a culture that denies the existence of the transcendental.

3.  If the Platonist practitioner understands the Ascetic Ideal, the principle of living a life that is not based on sensory stimulation, then it is possible to apply that ideal in many areas of life; this is how specific ascetic injunctions are generated.  But if the practitioner begins with specific injunctions, it is often difficult to comprehend the ascetic ideal behind these specific injunctions. 

4.  In Platonism the classic ascetic injunctions are a vegetarian or vegan diet, refraining from alcohol and recreational drugs, and sexual restraint.  These three are body-based injunctions and purify the body so that it is capable of making the mystical ascent (just as an athlete trains the body to accomplish athletic prowess).  Food is often prepared in a way that stimulates the senses.  A vegetarian diet is likely to be more plain, and once the ascetic ideal is understood one naturally moves in the direction of a plainer, less stimulating, diet.  Alcohol and recreational drugs in themselves stimulate the senses in such a way that often gives rise to addiction and many other problems.  The ascetic ideal counters the inclination to indulge in these substances.  And sexual activity is, as everyone knows, perhaps the most stimulating of sensory activities.  The ascetic ideal calls into question pursuing sexual activity simply for the purpose of sensory pleasure.  For some, sexual restraint leads to celibacy.

5.  There are other asceses (ascetic practices) that are fairly well known.  One is to live a life of with few possessions.  Having lots of possessions stimulates the senses and often distracts the mind.  Another is to find spiritual friends, if possible, who are not opposed to the ascetic ideal and the way of life of the Platonic Sage. 

6.  There are many activities and areas of life and because of this traditional ascetic disciplines have tended become very detailed; I am thinking of the Buddhist Vinaya as an example.  The Buddhist Vinaya that governs the life of Buddhist monastics has hundreds of specific regulations, and many of these also have explanatory commentary.  I think there is virtue in this kind of detailed approach; but the Platonic tradition never generated that kind of document or extensive list of prohibitions.  I believe this is because Platonism is grounded in the understanding of how a principle generates specifics.  The Ascetic Ideal is like a Platonic Form that generates numerous specific practices depending on the circumstances.  A principle like the Ascetic Ideal resembles a song that sometimes leads to a solo performance, sometimes a full choir, sometimes done by a rock group, sometimes by a symphony.  The written music is the ‘ideal’ and then the music is ‘applied’ in various circumstances.  Similarly, the Ascetic Ideal is applied to varying circumstances yielding various results, but all rooted in the Ascetic Ideal.

7.  Another community that had a long list of prohibitions that has been influential on Western culture is the original Quaker community.  In the first about 150 years of the Quaker community, Quaker Meetings where governed by a ‘Book of Discipline’ whose regulations members were expected to adhere to.  The regulations were extensive, including prohibitions on alcohol, novels, regulations regarding clothing (plain dress), regulations of speech, prohibitions on activities related to war including participation in war, prohibitions on gambling, etc.  The idea was to live a life in accordance with their understanding of what God required, no matter how difficult that was.  So their ascetic practices where the result of the application of the principle of a transcendent God as they understood it.  This made Quakers of that period so different from ordinary people around them that they were often considered to be a separate ‘tribe’ or ‘people’.  Modern Quakers no longer adhere to these regulations, except in some dedicated individuals.

8.  The specific practices, or asceses, of the Ascetic Ideal are trainings and, in this way, resemble the training of an athlete (as previously mentioned).  For example, some people who want to become vegetarian may only be able to instantiate that practice to a degree; for example, the people whom they live with might object and refuse to accommodate the change.  Or living a life with minimal possessions might be achieved over many months, even years, as one finds occasions to divest oneself of various things.  There was a period in my life when every Monday I would look at my room and I would commit to finding one thing I could take to a donation store.  I never failed to find something (usually a book I hadn’t read in many years and would never reread).  Over time this reduced my possessions.

In other words, the practice of the Ascetic Ideal is a path, a practice, in a way applying the Ascetic Ideal is a skill, with which the Platonist Practitioner becomes more and more familiar, until it becomes an internalized way of life.

9.  But the Ascetic Ideal is both a path and a realization.  A moment of ascesis is a moment rooted in unity; meaning that as we become more naturally ascetic we more naturally manifest the unity and oneness of our lives because they are less scattered by sensory stimulation.  Many people I have spoken to mention how simplifying their life by reducing possessions felt like losing weight and brought them a sense of peace and calm; not a grand realization, but a sense of everyday focus.  This is one of the results of putting the Ascetic Ideal into practice; the oneness of The One begins to speak to us in small, yet meaningful, ways.

 

 

Fear of Formlessness

8 February 2023

Fear of Formlessness

“We therefore maintain that the universal and transcendent Cause of all things is neither without being nor without life, nor without reason or intelligence; nor is it a body, nor has it form or shape, quality, quantity or weight; nor has it any localized, visible or tangible existence; it is not sensible or perceptible . . . “

Dionysius the Areopagite, Complete Works: Mystical Theology, Chapter 4, translated by Colm Luibheid, Paulist Press, 1987, found online at esoteric.msu.edu)

 

1.  Recently I listened to a youtube video that was critical of the Eastern Orthodox practice of hesychasm.  As I understand it, hesychasm is a practice centered on the practice of the prayer of inner silence.  At some points in its history practitioners withdrew from the world to help facilitate this kind of prayer.  Hesychasm is often associated with asceticism.  It is also associated with the Jesus Prayer as a means of focusing the practitioners attention and overcoming desires.  It is a tradition that has lasted a long time.  The ultimate goal of hesychasm is called ‘theosis’ and is experienced as an uncreated light, which in an Orthodox context is understood to be the presence of God.

2.  The criticism of hesychasm by the youtuber, who is Eastern Orthodox, is that hesychasm leads its practitioners beyond image.  The speaker thought this was wrong and that the image level of practice had just as much importance as the experience of the imageless transcendental.  (As an aside, I’m fairly confident that practitioners of hesychasm remain securely rooted in the Eastern Orthodox tradition.  This makes me think that the speaker was critical of even the idea of the imageless, or formless.)

3.  For about five years, maybe more, I studied the Catholic Quietists of the 17^th century.  These included Molinos, Madame Guyon, Francois Malaval, Fenelon, and others.  At first this movement, which, in a way similar to the hesychasts, advocated for the prayer of interior silence, was very successful and found many eager to align themselves to the Quietist’s program.  Soon, however, there was a counterattack: Molinos was convicted of heresy and died in prison, Madame Guyon was imprisoned four times, Malaval was forced to recant his work, and Fenelon was exiled from Paris to Cambray.  Quietism itself was determined to be an official heresy of the Catholic Church and remains so to this day.

One of the reasons for this turn against Quietism is that by advocating interior silence, and the ascent to formlessness, it was felt that this undermined the place that sacraments, such as Holy Communion and the others, held in traditional theology.  Although all of the Quietists themselves were devout Catholics and regularly took Holy Communion, it was felt that their teaching undermined more form-based practices and traditions. 

4.  This also brought to mind the way some Platonist traditions, such as theurgy, advocate for the idea of aligning with a specific deity on the basis that these deities are ‘superessential’.  This contrasts with the idea of an ascent to The One which has no name, form, and transcends sensory designation, as well as any affirmation or negation. 

5.  There may be a common, if obscure, root to both the Catholic and Orthodox traditions of the practice of interior silence.  This post starts with a quote from Mystical Theology by Dionysius the Areopagite.  However, this Dionysius is obscure and historical evidence for who he was is lacking.  One group of scholars argues that the actual identity of Dionysius was Damascius, the last head of the Platonic Academy when it was shut down by Justinian in 529.  The idea is that Damascius, having been kicked out of the Academy and forced to wander, wrote Mystical Theology as a way of injecting into Christianity the idea of the mystical ascent to formlessness.  I’m not a scholar of Damascius and therefore not capable of commenting on this specific theory.  But whether this is true or not, I think it points to a larger causal context for the practice of interior silence and the ascent to formlessness.  And that is that this understanding of the nature of this mystical ascent, its goal and the nature of its conclusion is found in the Platonic tradition, in the dialogues of Plato and the Enneads of Plotinus.  Platonism was the pervasive spirituality of the late Classical period and I infer that even if it was not specifically Damascius who wrote Mystical Theology, it was the Platonic tradition which was the vessel that held both the method and truth of this understanding.

6.  The youtube criticism of hesychasm also reminded me of the way Jungian psychology is focused on the image as the goal of spiritual practice; in the Jungian tradition this consists primarily of dreams and archetypes. 

7.  I can understand why people have a fear of formlessness.  As one approaches The One and loses contact with material form/appearances, there can arise a sense of vertigo, a sense of falling that can be very uncomfortable.  Instinctively we reach out for something to grasp, some material appearance that has stability. 

There are also intellectual objections that arise because the idea of a nameless, utterly transcendent source undermines systems of thought that are based on a comprehensible, nameable, intellectual first principle; materialism is a good example of this.  An ascent into a formless source of all things would mean discarding such a principle, or, more accurately, displacing that principle as foundational.  This is difficult to do.

8.  I had a friend years ago who liked to say that “we are all addicted to form.”  He meant material form, or sensory appearances, not the forms of Platonic higher hypostases.  This was during my Buddhist period, but I think it applies in a Platonist context as well.  Forms, meaning sensory appearances, are ephemeral, but the hope is that we can find a sensory appearance that is stable.  But the realm of sensory/material form is inherently unstable.  Yet our hope remains that somewhere in the material realm we can find such stability.

9.  The method for overcoming this ‘addiction to appearances’ is to turn away from the realm of the senses and its unstable appearances.  This turning away is cultivated in interior silence.  This is asceticism for both material appearances and mental constructions.  This is not easy to do.  For most of us the path has a fluctuating feeling about it; at times we seem to be advancing and at times we experience setbacks.  But overall, through the practices of ascesis and contemplation, our experience of the light of The One becomes more secure and our sense of inner peace and tranquility begins to blossom.