Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 17

27 March 2024

Brief Notes on Various Topics – 17

1.  I’ve been reading a biography of Plato, Plato of Athens, by Robin Waterfield.  Early in the book Waterfield discusses his sources, one of which are the letters of Plato.  Waterfield writes, “. . . the authenticity of any of Plato’s letters is one of the most hotly contested issues in Platonic scholarship.  It is one of those issues that is subject to scholarly fashion.  At the moment the scholarly consensus, while falling well short of unanimity, is that even the most plausible of them are forgeries, but in the middle of the twentieth century the consensus was the other way around, and there are signs today that the pendulum is swinging back again.”  (pages xxx and xxxi)

At various times in my life I dove into studying textual analysis and its procedures.  At first it seemed to have a lot to offer, and at times it does generate interesting possibilities worth examining.  But gradually I began to feel that the conclusions offered through text critical procedures are often a ‘scholarly fashion.’  Over the years I have become increasingly skeptical of the field.  I keep an open mind; like I said, now and then the field does seem to open up new possibilities.  But I think that is very rare.

2.  I’ve mentioned this before, but I think it’s worth repeating: the big challenge for those of us who think of Platonism as a spiritual tradition is to understand Platonism as complete, that is to say a complete spiritual system.  When I say ‘complete’ I mean to use that word in the same way I would say Jainism is complete or the Shinto tradition is complete.  I don’t mean to say that Platonism is sealed away from influences and sources.  I mean that the central teachings are coherent and that the best way to clarify difficulties is to go to sources within the tradition of Platonism itself.

I see three major intellectual obstacles to viewing Platonism in this way.  First is that academic philosophy is very far removed from the idea that philosophy is, or can be, a spiritual system.  And comparing Platonism to something like Jainism would not make sense to the academy (with some exceptions.)  The second is that modernity has the distinctive view that the transcendental does not exist.  Since Platonism is all about the transcendental there is an inevitable conflict between modernity and Platonism.  And third is to overcome the heritage that sees Platonism as profoundly incomplete, that it is lacking in some key insight or teaching that is then provided by those who have this view.  This third obstacle has two branches:  Christianity and Theurgy.  Both of them reworked Platonism in a way that displaces philosophy in favor of teachings that support their own unique understandings.  Contemporary spiritual Platonists need to step away from this heritage that assumes Platonist incompleteness or lack.

3.  We’ve had a lot of wind storms in the desert recently.  This world is a stormy place.  It is best to withdraw into interior silence and follow the light of the One to the source of True Peace.

4.  Studying Platonism is like having an elderly Uncle who is very knowledgeable and has a lot of life experience.  This Uncle is willing to share the insights he has gained from his life with you, and offer you guidance, insight, and wisdom.  After a while you begin to rely on him because his advice has proven effective so often. 

5.  I’ve been reconsidering the idea that Plotinian mysticism is a type of negative theology.  The idea that the Plotinian path is a negative path rests on the non-sensory nature of the Good and the One.  But just because the Good and the One are non-sensory realities does not mean that they are non-existent.  They are non-existent as sensory realities, yes, but the experiences people have of the transcendental are not void of presence; difficult though that presence is to communicate. 

 

 

Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 16

22 March 2024

Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 16

1.  “To some philosophy is primary, as to Porphyry and Plotinus and a great many other philosophers; to others hieratic practice, as to Iamblichus, Syrianus, Proclus, and the hieratic school generally.”

This is a quote from a commentary on Phaedo by Damascius, translated by L. G. Westerink (page 104).  Damascius was the last head of the Platonic Academy in Athens before it was closed by Justinian.  Damascius lived in the late 5^th and early 6^th centuries CE.

I take ‘hieratic’ to refer to theurgy.  Damascius is indicating that Platonism, at the time he was teaching, had split into two camps, depending on what they regarded as ‘primary.’  Porphyry, Plotinus, and a ‘great many other philosophers’ took philosophy to be primary.  I interpret this as meaning that this group practiced contemplation as the central practice of their tradition.  In contrast, Iamblichus, Syrianus, and Proclus considered theurgy, or the ‘hieratic practice,’ which refers to ritual sacrifice, including animal sacrifice, as primary.

This division remains today as a legacy of late Classical Platonism.  I am rooted in the contemplative tradition of Plotinus and Porphyry.  

2.  Porphyry wrote the longest, and most thorough, surviving work on the practice of vegetarianism/veganism in the Platonic tradition.  The translated title for the newest available translation is On Abstinence from Killing Animals; Gillian Clark is the translator.  It is an extended argument against either killing animals for food or killing them in other contexts such as ritual sacrifice, or in the context of theurgy.

Later, Porphyry wrote another work on the same topic called Letter to Anebo, which we no longer have except for quotations found in Iamblichus and Eusebius.  Iamblichus took issue with Porphyry and wrote a commentary attempting to refute Porphyry’s views contained in Letter to Anebo.  As far as we know, Porphyry did not respond to the critique by Iamblichus (called On the Mysteries). 

Thus the division between the contemplative, or philosophical, tradition of Platonism and the hieratic, or theurgic, tradition arose.  I am rooted in the tradition shaped by Porphyry’s views; meaning that I see vegetarianism and veganism as a central practice of the Platonic tradition.

3. One reason I admire Platonism is that Platonism recognizes and honors cause and effect.  Platonism is aware of the interior struggles of the soul with bodily desires and never minimizes just how difficult that struggle is. 

4.  It is possible to take ordinary activities and use them as an opportunity for purification.  For example, washing one’s hands, and bathing, are both opportunities for thinking about purification, for training the mind to use ordinary events as a means for purification.  The cleansing of the body becomes a symbol for the purification of the mind and with repetition helps incline our consciousness towards that goal.

5.  Mark Anderson wrote in his essay on Platonic purification, “Whenever you want to indulge, recall that you prefer to ascend.”  (Mark Anderson, Pure, page 104.)  I think this is a wonderful ‘pithy saying’ and I have found it helpful to internalize its message as I continue on the path to the Good and the One.

Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 15

20 March 2024

Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 15

1.  I have mentioned a few times my understanding of the various strands of Platonism present in the world today.  I think it might be helpful, or at least clarifying, if there was some kind of forum, or vehicle, for those speaking from these various views to discuss their understanding of Platonism and how they view other understandings.  Think of what it would be like if a Christian Platonist (someone like Peter Kreeft) and a contemporary Theurgist exchanged their views on Platonism.  Or what it would be like for a Contemplative Platonist to exchange views with an Academic Platonist. 

2.  In Platonism ‘First Things’ are ineffable.  Though they are ineffable, the tradition calls them the Good, the One, and the Beautiful.  In ideology First Things are political, which is to say divisive.  The First Things of Platonism lead to unity and eternal peace.  The First Things of ideology lead to strife and grasping for power.

3.  I mentioned that I think of non-harming as the foundational principle of Platonist ethics and virtues.  Here I want to add that non-harming aligns the practitioner with the One.  The One is also the Good.  The One and the Good are, by their very nature, incapable of harming living beings.  When a practitioner adopts the mental asana of non-harming, that practitioner steps closer to the Good and the One.

4.  Following the Platonist Path resembles swimming upstream.  We need to swim upstream because upstream is where one finds the source of the river.  But all the energy of the stream flows in a different, opposite, direction.  Sometimes this is tiring.  It’s OK, now and then, to swim to a shore for a brief rest, to gather our strength before proceeding further. 

5.  An interesting thing about music is that musical objects can co-exist with other musical objects.  This is true for all kinds of music, not just sophisticated or complex music.  Think of a popular song with its melody and bass line.  The two musical objects share the same sonic space, yet each object retains its integrity while simultaneously intermingling with the other object.  This resembles, or is a kind of analog, of the way noetic objects relate to each other, though in the noetic realm there is no time.  Still, in the noetic realm, noetic objects are completely present and transparent to each other.  This kind of relationship also happens in music in a way that our temporal minds can access. 

6.  I went out to watch the sunrise on the Equinox yesterday.  I do this regularly on the Equinoxes and Solstices, as a kind of contemplation.  The One is frequently compared to the Sun.  Some refer to the One as the Spiritual Sun.  There’s a description in one of the Enneads, I forget which one right now, where Plotinus describes the practice of contemplation as like waiting for the sun to rise.  Taking that as an instruction, I sometimes wait for the sun to rise, always keeping in mind that the sun is the material symbol of the Spiritual Sun, an emanation of that reality. 

I live in the desert so I can walk, often with a friend or two, out into the desert.  We turn to where the sun will appear.  There is a mountain range surrounding the valley which delays the physical appearance of the sun from what the data will tell you is the time of sunrise, by about ten to fifteen minutes. 

I enter into meditation while standing in the pre-dawn light and simply wait for the sun to rise.  Shortly after the sun has risen, and casts its full light over the valley, I thank the sun for its blessings, bow, and then return home.  I find this a very restful and easeful form of contemplation.  It nourishes my practice as I continue my journey to the Spiritual Sun; the Good, the One, and the Beautiful.

 

 

Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 14

18 March 2024

Brief Notes on Various Topics – 14

1.  I’m reading Ennead IV at the moment.  Ennead IV focuses on the soul.  I’ve said this before on this blog, but I think it is worth repeating; I’m always a bit surprised at the complexity and range of what falls under the idea of ‘soul’ in Platonist literature.  For example, Plotinus mentions how the soul participates in various activities and specifically mentions weaving as such an activity.  (According to A. H. Armstrong, this example was used first by Aristotle in Aristotle's De Anima or On the Soul.)  I doubt that those who believe in the soul today would make that kind of an observation; it implies that the soul is an active participant, not just an observer, of ordinary activities.

Regarding the specific example of weaving, I think part of the connection to soul is the rhythmic nature or weaving.  The World Soul (some translators call this the All Soul) is the source of cyclic material existence.  Cyclic existence is rhythmic existence.  Looked at in this way the rhythmic nature of weaving, and other rhythmic activities, is the way the individual soul mimics the creative activity of the World Soul.

2.  I wonder if it would be helpful to introduce a concept along the lines of ‘Observant Platonist?’  I think of this idea as referring to a Platonist who takes the ethical disciplines the reader finds in the Dialogues, the Enneads, and elsewhere, as defining of what it means to be a Platonist.  This would contrast with the kind of Platonist who defines Platonism as an interlocking cluster of ideas and views, but does not have anything to say about the role of ethical precepts in the practice of Platonism.  This kind of distinction already exists in ordinary ways of describing someone’s religious commitments.  ‘Observant’ is applied to Jews who are on the rigorous side of observing their heritage of religious practices; the same could be said of Catholics who are similarly inclined.  The concept can easily be extended to religions in general.  Perhaps it could find a place in Platonist practice?

I suspect that resistance to this way of classifying Platonists would be seen most strongly among contemporary Platonists who think of themselves as secular and have constructed a secular version of Platonism.

3.  In thinking about Platonist ethical discipline, I am leaning towards seeing non-harming as the foundation of that discipline, the overriding principle.  The other specific disciplines, such as vegetarian/vegan diet, refraining from alcohol and drugs, sexual restraint, and so forth, are applications of the principle of non-harming to specific areas of human life.

4.  Having a good rebirth is not the goal of Platonism.  Leaving rebirth behind by taking up residence in the Noetic is; and beyond the Noetic, merging with the Eternal, the Good, the One and the Beautiful.

5.  I have a mystical view when it comes to evaluating those who have lived a reclusive life.  In today’s world such a life is often critiqued as being self-indulgent and that it would be better to be socially ‘engaged’ as an expression of love, compassion, and concern for others.  But there is another way of looking at the life of a hermit or recluse; and that is that such a life benefits all living beings. 

This way of looking at a reclusive life emerges from what I call the ‘ascetic ideal.’  It is a natural consequence of the ascetic ideal even though it is not, in most cases, the conscious purpose of a hermit. 

 

 

The Embodied Soul and the Noetic Soul

15 March 2024

The Embodied Soul and the Noetic Soul

“In the intelligible world is true being; Intellect is the best part of it; but souls are There too; for it is because they have come Thence that they are here too.  That world has souls without bodies, but this world has the souls which have come to be in bodies and are divided by bodies.  There the whole of Intellect is all together and not separated or divided, and all souls are together in the world which is eternity, not in spatial separation.  Intellect, then, is always inseparable and indivisible, but soul is inseparable and indivisible There, but it is in its nature to be divided.  For its division is departing from Intellect and coming to be in a body.  It is therefore properly said to be ‘divisible in the sphere of bodies’ because it departs and is divided in this way.  Then how is it also ‘indivisible’?  Because the whole of it did not depart, but there is something of it which did not come [down here – translator’s addition] which is not naturally divisible.  So then ‘from the indivisible and that which is divisible in the sphere of bodies’ is equivalent to saying that soul is composed of the part which is above and that which is attached to that higher world but has flowed out as far as these parts, like a line from a centre.  But when it has come here in this part, see how in this way it preserves in this very part the nature of the whole.  For even here it is not only divisible, but also indivisible; for that of it which is divided is indivisibly divided.  For it gives itself to the whole body and is not divided in that it gives itself whole to the whole and is divided in that it is present in every part.”

(Plotinus, Ennead IV.2, On the Essence of the Soul II, translated by A. H. Armstrong, Loeb Classical Library, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1984, pages 21-23, ISBN: 9780674994881)

“In the Intellectual Cosmos dwells Authentic Essence, with the Intellectual-Principle (Divine Mind) as the noblest of its content, but containing also souls, since every soul in this lower sphere has come thence: that is the world of unembodied souls while to our world belong those that have entered body and undergone bodily division.

“There the Intellectual-Principal is a concentrated all – nothing of it distinguished or divided – and in that Cosmos of unity all souls are concentrated also, with no spatial discrimination.

“But there is a difference:

“The Intellectual-Principle is for ever repugnant to distinction and to partition.  Soul, there without distinction and partition, has yet a nature lending itself to divisional existence: its division is secession, entry into body.

“In view of this seceding and the ensuing partition we may legitimately speak of it as ‘divided among bodies’.

“But if so, how can it still be described as indivisible?

“In that the secession is not of the Soul entire; something of it holds its ground, that in it which recoils from separate existence.

“’Formed from the undivided essence and the essence divided among bodies’; this description of Soul must therefore mean that it has phases above and below, that it is attached to the Supreme and yet reaches down to this sphere, like a radius from a centre.

“Thus it is that, entering this realm, it possesses still the vision inherent to that superior phase in virtue of which it unchangingly maintains its integral nature.  Even here it is not exclusively the partible soul: it is still the impartible as well: what in it knows partition is parted without partibility; undivided as giving itself to the entire body, a whole to a whole, it is divided as being effective in every part.”

(Plotinus, Ennead IV.1, On the Essence of the Soul (1), translated by Stephen MacKenna, Larson Publications, Burdett, New York, 1992, page 292, ISBN: 9780943914558)

1.  The Armstrong translation considers this very short Ennead to be IV.2, while the MacKenna translation considers it to be IV.1.  The Armstrong translation informs us that there are different textual traditions regarding the exact placement of this Ennead.  It is suggested that Ficino may have switched the two Enneads, IV.1 and IV.2; but regardless of how this came about, it is textual variants that has given rise to the alternative placements. 

2.  This Ennead focuses on how the soul manifests in the different levels, or hypostases.  The specific issue is how the soul can simultaneously manifest in a way that is divided in the material world, while at the same time being unified in the Noetic realm, here referred to as the realm of Intellect.

In the Noetic Realm, aka the Realm of Intellect, aka the Realm of Mind, the soul is undivided and has no material body.  In the material realm the soul appears to be divided among differentiated bodies.  How is this to be explained?

3.  Plotinus uses the metaphor of a circle from whose center lines are extended; the center of the circle is the Noetic soul, each line is a differentiated and embodied soul. 

Another metaphor that might be helpful is how moonlight appears in countless bodies of water ranging from a drop of rain to one of the Great Lakes.  The moonlight remains a constant reality ‘There,’ in the lunar domain or sphere, while the light of the moon is a scattered presence in all bodies of water.  The light in the bodies of water is itself not a body, but simply the presence of light.

A third metaphor would be the presence of sunlight that is inferred in all earthly manifestations, even at night when the sun itself cannot be seen.

4.  It was the view of Plotinus that the embodied soul, from the world soul to the human soul, is not completely separated from the Noetic soul, or the soul that resides in the realm of Intellect/Mind.  There is always something of the soul that remains in the realm of the Noetic.  It is this part of the soul that allows for, and facilitates, the turning of the embodied soul from fixation on material stimulation.  If the embodied soul were not connected to the soul in the Noetic, the embodied soul would have no way of knowing that reality There, that transcendental reality from which the embodied soul is derived.

5.  Later Platonists argued against this view that Plotinus held regarding the partial descent of the soul into materiality. Instead, they argued that the soul fully descended into materiality and was totally cut off from the Noetic, and, further, from the reality of the First Principle; the Good, the One, and the Beautiful.

What interests me here is that Plotinus takes the time to write about the eternal reality of the undescended soul and how it fits in with the metaphysical cosmology of Platonism at a time that precedes those whom we know argued for a fully descended soul, such as Proclus, who came centuries later.  I think that implies that the idea of an fully descended soul was likely an idea put forth by at least some Platonists, or perhaps put forth by other philosophical traditions; but Plotinus, as is his usual procedure, does not tell us whom he is disagreeing with or what tradition he might be taking issue with.

6.  Personally, I find the view of Plotinus, the view that the soul is only partially descended into materiality, to make more sense.  I say this because I think this view that Plotinus articulates clarifies why the practices of purification, and ascetic commitments, work, as well as why they are necessary for the ascent to the Noetic, and from there to the One. 

 

  

Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 13

14 March 2024

Brief Notes on Various Topics – 13

1.  Sometimes the writing of Plotinus is so lush with insights and wisdom that I find it difficult to select a short passage upon which to make a post for this blog.  That is what happened to me with Ennead III.8, On Nature and Contemplation.  It started out a little slow for me; meaning I had some trouble following Plotinus’s line(s) of reasoning.  But as the Ennead progressed, I felt like a fog lifted in my mind and by the time I got to Section 6, and from there to the end, it was like listening to a perfectly crafted piece of music where every note feels like it is placed exactly where it is needed.

The Ennead is a sublime unfolding of the meaning of contemplation and how contemplation works at all levels of reality, and how contemplation interacts with these levels.  It is a kind of revelation of how existence unfolds and is sustained and how the ultimate source from which contemplation derives, the Good and the One, is also the source of our own contemplation. 

It is the most idealist of the Enneads; everything is originally mind and the mind in contemplation.  Well, not exactly, because of the ineffability of the One, it would be wrong to say that the One is mind.  But I think it is more helpful to refer to the One as Mind, in a transcendental sense, than to think of the One as great in a material sense.

In any case, this is why I continue to read and reread Plotinus.

2.  Life presents us with many problems, many ups and downs.  The journey of life is like being on a rudderless ship in a storm-tossed sea.  But the Dialogues of Plato, and the Enneads of Plotinus are like a small island that remains secure from the battering of waves, wind, and time.  It is possible to reach that island even though it is a long way away.  These works are like finding the rudder you need floating in the stormy ocean.  Once attached, the ship of life can be steered towards its true end which is found at the harbor of the Good, the One, and the Beautiful at the Island of Eternity.

3.  When reading a Platonist with whom I disagree about some analysis it is important for me to keep my balance and not be swept away by negative energy or fall into critique just for the sake of critique.  At times I do find myself headed in that direction.  What brings me back to a state of equanimity and balance is recalling that as Platonists we have more in common with each other than we do with other metaphysical positions such as materialism which dominate the culture at this time.  Disputes among Platonists are like family disagreements that do not last long.

4.  Platonism is about the changeless, the eternal.  But we live in a dimension of constant change and differentiation, what I like to call a world of becoming and begoning.  For this reason, our understanding of Platonism changes, and how we communicate the nature of that which is changeless changes. 

5.  It is night in mid-March now.  The moonless sky is thick with stars.  It is cool at this time of year in the desert.  Even though the sun and its light and its energy cannot be seen, it is pouring down upon all of us constantly; a limitless grace.  In a few hours the sun will rise at dawn.

 

 

Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 12

11 March 2024

Brief Notes on Various Topics – 12

1.  I saw a video ad for a forum where the participants, all of whom were scholars of Platonism, or as they referred to it, ‘Neoplatonism,’ that was focused on discussing the nature of the ultimate.  The primary focus seems to have been on whether the ultimate can be understood as a person as opposed to the ultimate transcending personhood.

My view is that in Platonism the ultimate, the Good and the One, transcends personality.  I mean that individual personhood, and individual features of the ego, are left behind, one by one, in the divine ascent.  I think the idea that the ultimate is a person is an obstacle to the divine ascent because of our deep attachment to our individuality and personhood.

In the Late Classical period Christianity accepted Platonism, but injected into Platonism the personhood of Jesus.  The theurgists did the same, but instead of injecting a single personality they injected many personalities in keeping with their Polytheistic leanings.  This transformation of Platonism by Christianity and by the Theurgists by shifting focus to individual person(s), no matter how exalted, impacts Platonism in a multitude of ways.  I see the main impact as making Classical Platonism appear to be insufficient or incomplete; as if Platonism before Christianity and Theurgy was in need of some essential missing piece.  But if you view the ultimate as beyond individuality and personhood, then the injection of individual personalities, or a single personality, feels like a diminishment of Platonism, a way of creating additional, unnecessary, barriers to the Good and the One.

2.  I recently listened to a contemporary European philosopher who spoke about his topic from the perspective of, and from the methods of, analytic philosophy.  It was kind of depressing.  Overall, he had interesting things to say, but it was shoved through the analytic grinder; the result was the stilted, humorless, and customary, but unnecessary, over-analysis of terms.  And there was the unexamined materialism, reductionism, and scientism I’ve come to expect from analytic philosophers.  I wouldn’t say I learned nothing from the talk.  But I wonder if someone unfamiliar with this kind of analysis could get anything out of it.

There has been an extensive critique of analytic philosophy for decades now.  But Western Philosophy still seems to be stuck in some of its methodologies.

3.  I think the basic attitude that someone following the Platonic Path should have towards politics is that of Quietism.

4.  My Zen teacher liked to use an expression; ‘hard training.’  This referred to things like numerous prostrations and going on 100-day solo retreats governed by a rigorous schedule.  I can see applying ‘hard training’ to a Platonic context.  For example, a 100-day retreat in silence, that involved prescribed periods of contemplation, reading of Platonic classics, and included only minimalist vegan meals and being cut off from online media.  Such a total immersion in Platonism could bring many benefits. 

But, I don’t recommend someone do a 100-day retreat if they do not have a good guide (my teacher was the guide for retreats done by his students).  And if you lack experience with meditation or contemplation, it is not advisable to do such an intensive retreat; it’s like trying to run a marathon when you have not done any running, or trainings, prior to that.  A good runner would check with a coach or a more experienced friend.  Similarly, for a spiritual retreat, one should check with a spiritual guide or a good spiritual friend.

The contrast to ‘hard training’ is daily practice.  Daily practice resembles nourishing a plant every day, or practicing your guitar every day even if it is just for ½ hour.  The results may not be noticeable at first, but after a period of time, particularly when you look back at yourself and how you were at the beginning, the transformation is clear.  I have come to prefer this daily practice approach to the ‘hard training’ approach; perhaps that is just because of my advanced age at this time in my life.  But I have come to see the daily practice approach as more natural and, in the long term, I think it generates a more secure, a more stable, transformation.

5.  It is a desert afternoon in Spring.  Desert flowers don’t last long. 

 

  

Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 11

9 March 2024

Brief Notes on Various Topics – 11

1.  I don’t think of Platonism as a solution to the problems of the world.  I mean that I don’t think that Platonism can transform the world into some kind of paradise.  My feeling is that the problems of material existence are intractable.  This is one of the primary reasons that I don’t consider Platonism to be an ideology.  But Platonism does show us how to transcend this realm of intractable, which is to say unending, difficulties.  That is its great blessing.

2.  There has not been, as far as I know, in the history of Platonism, a Rule, or Vinaya, for a dedicated Platonist Ascetic.  The material for such a disciplined life can be found in the Dialogues, scattered amongst a number of them.  It would be possible, I think, to come up with a Platonist Ascetic Discipline by gleaning such teachings and organizing them topically. 

There is some precedent for this; I am thinking of the early Quaker books of Discipline.  Most of these disciplines were gleaned from biblical, or other Christian sources, or deduced from core teachings of the Quaker understanding of the Christian tradition.  I think something similar could be done for the Platonic tradition.

3.  Over the centuries Platonists have explained how Platonic Forms work in various ways.  One is to view the Forms as exemplars that material things seek to, in some sense, live up to or replicate.  Another is that the Forms are like a blueprint that the material world ‘follows’ to construct material instantiations of Forms; the entity doing the constructing would be the Demiurge.  Still another way of talking about the Forms is that the Forms are necessary and sufficient causes for the material things that they are connected to.  These days I tend to see Platonic Forms in the third sense; that is to say I view them in terms of causation rather than as exemplars that are replicated, or reflected, in material existence; nor do I think of them as blueprints for the Demiurge.  Sometimes when talking to someone about the Forms, I still use the exemplar approach because it is very widely used in philosophical literature, including Platonic literature, and because it seems to make intuitive sense to people.  And I will at times, though less often, use the blueprint way of talking about the Forms on occasion; always adding that it is ‘just’ an analogy and should not be taken too literally.  But more and more I tend to present the Forms in terms of causation. 

The greatest difficulty in talking about the Forms, or Ideas, is that in Platonism, Noetic realities, such as the Forms, are more real than the material manifestation.  I think that is one reason why the exemplar approach is popular; because one can then talk about how material derivations of an exemplar are ‘bad copies’ of the exemplar.  That isn’t always clear when you use a causation approach so you have to take time to explain that aspect of the theory of Forms.

4.  Fairly often I notice people talking about a contemporary ‘crisis of meaning.’  There is a pervasive, and I believe growing, sense of nihilism that I think is directly linked to materialism and reductionism.  Platonism undermines the nihilist foundations of modernity and offers people a sense of meaning by guiding people to the transcendent source of the Good, the One, the Beautiful, and the Eternal.  Even a brief experience of this timeless transcendental reality, the only thing that is actually and fully real, infuses those who have that experience with a sense of meaning, purpose, and, for want of a better word, holiness.

5.  There is a folk saying, that I believe comes from China, but I first heard in Korea, that says, “It is easier for a dog to become enlightened than a human being.”  Keep in mind that East Asian culture has a very low opinion of dogs.

This saying contrasts with the idea of a ‘precious human birth’ that is taught in various Buddhist traditions; I first ran into it when reading some Tibetan Buddhist literature.  The preciousness of a human birth is based on the idea that human beings are particularly well suited for spiritual practice.

The question is, is it true that human beings are particularly well suited for awakening to the transcendental?, or are other types of existence such as animals, plants, or deities, better off in this regard?  I don’t have an answer, though I sometimes think that at least some plants may have an opportunity in their lifetime to develop patience, acceptance, and equanimity, as well as related virtues. 

But given the fact that I am born a human, and given the fact that a human birth offers the possibility for transcendence, it is best to take advantage of knowing that and strive to purify oneself of negativities, cultivate wisdom, practice contemplation, and return to the Good and the One.

 

 

Plotinus on Eternity

8 March 2024

Plotinus on Eternity

I named this blog ‘The Presence of Eternity.’  In the works of Plotinus the most lengthy discussion of the nature of eternity occurs in Ennead III.7, On Eternity and Time.  It is a complex analysis covering a number of topics.  Here is sections 5 and part of section 6 from that Ennead:

“But now, whenever, concentrating the attention of my soul on something, I am able to say this about it, or rather to see it as a thing of such a kind that nothing at all about it has ever come into being – for if it has, it is not always existing, or not always existing as a whole – is it, therefore, already eternal, if there is not also in it a nature of such a kind as to give an assurance about it that it will stay as it is and never become different, so that, if you look attentively at it again, you will find it as it was?”

Comment:  Eternity is perceived by the soul, not by the senses.  The senses perceive the changing material world.  Therefore, eternity can only be accessed through contemplation.  The soul can perceive, or recognize, or engage with, eternity because the soul is the presence of eternity in the ephemeral individual.

“What then, if one does not depart at all from one’s contemplation of it but stays in its company, wondering at its nature, and able to do so by a natural power which never fails?  Surely one would be (would one not?), oneself on the move towards eternity and never falling away from it at all, that one might be like it and eternal, contemplating eternity and the eternal by the eternal in oneself.”

Comment:  This is one of the most inspiring passages of the Enneads for me.  The ‘natural power which never fails’ is the presence of eternity within us, which is the soul.  I think that is what Plotinus means by “contemplating eternity and the eternal by the eternal in oneself.”

“If, then, what is in this state is eternal and always existing, that which does not fall away in any respect into another nature, which has life which it possesses already as a whole, which has not received any addition and is not now receiving any and will not receive any, then that which is in this state would be eternal, and everlastingness would be the corresponding condition of the substrate, existing from it and in it, and eternity the substrate with the corresponding condition appearing in it.”

Comment:  I understand ‘substrate’ in this sentence to refer to a necessary precondition for the appearance of something.  If in our contemplation we engage with the eternal we can do so because the necessary substrate of everlastingness of the world soul, and the eternity of the soul allow for this to happen.

“Hence eternity is a majestic thing, and thought declares it identical with the god; it declares it identical with this god [whom we have been describing – translator’s addition].  And eternity could be well described as a god proclaiming and manifesting himself as he is, that is, as being which is unshakeable and self-identical, and [always – translator’s addition] as it is, and firmly grounded in life.”

Comment:  I think Plotinus is unpacking how human beings react to the overwhelming majesty of the eternal in this sentence.  I think this is indicated by the phrase, “thought declares it identical with the god.”  Eternity itself is beyond our understanding, beyond our capacity for framing in concepts.  But in order to speak of it we will use terms like “majestic” and speak in terms of archetypes like “the god.”  From there we can think of god as ‘proclaiming and manifesting himself’ in our lives. 

Eternity is “firmly grounded in life” because no life would be possible without the eternal; all appearances require the presence of eternity, but eternity does not require any specific appearance in order to exist, or to be.

“But if we say that it is made up of many parts, there is no need to be surprised, for each of the beings There is many through its unending power, since endlessness, too, is not having any possibility of failing, and eternity is endless in the strict and proper sense, because it never expends anything of itself.”

Comment:  Here Plotinus is referring to how eternity manifests in the Noetic.  The Good and the One are pure unity; there is no manyness to be found in it.  In the Noetic differentiation first appears; the Noetic is sometimes referred to as the ‘one-many.’  What I think Plotinus is describing is how the eternal differentiates in the noetic; the eternal does so through its ‘unending power.’ 

I think of ‘eternity’ as another name for the One.  The One is the source of unity is the cosmos as a whole; both noetic and material realities.  The Eternal is the source of duration in the cosmos as a whole.  Without the Unity of the One nothing would exist.  And without the duration of the Eternal nothing would exist.  The unity of the One is the source of the existence of things in space.  The unity of the Eternal is the source of the existence of things in time.

In its purest sense, the Eternal resides in the fully transcendental and has no name.  In the realm of the noetic the eternal manifests as the never-not-existing realities that transcend material existence.  In material existence, the eternal manifests first as the everlastingness of the world soul, and then as the presence of the eternal in individual living beings.

“And if someone were in this way to speak of eternity as a life which is here and now endless because it is total and expends nothing of itself, since it has no past or future – for if it had, it would not now be a total life – he would be near to defining it . . .”

Comment:  Eternity is endless life, life that is transcendental.  Eternity is beyond time with no past or future.  Eternity is a vast field which nourishes the appearance of all existing things and to which all existing things return.

“Now since the nature which is of this kind, altogether beautiful and everlasting in this way, is around the One and comes from it and is directed toward it, in no way going out from it but always abiding around it and in it, and living according to it; and since this was stated by Plato, as I think finely and with deep meaning and not to no purpose, in these words of his ‘as eternity remains in one,’ the intention of which is not merely that eternity brings itself into unity with relation to itself, but that it is the life, always the same, of real being around the One; this, then, is what we are seeking; and abiding like this is being eternity.”

Comment:  This unpacks the relationship between Eternity and the One.  Eternity is around the One, come from the One, is directed toward the one, but Eternity does not leave, or ‘go out from’ the One.  Eternity lives in accordance with the One.  It is Eternity that grants life to Noetic Being, Life, and Mind.

Becoming aware of the presence of Eternity is becoming aware of the Good, the One, and the Beautiful.  Follow the light of the soul to its source and there is the Presence of Eternity, the Presence of Beauty, the Presence of Unity, the Presence and source of all that is Good. 

(Plotinus, Ennead III.7.5 & 6, On Eternity and Time, translated by A. H. Armstrong, Loeb Classical Library, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1967, pages 311-313, ISBN: 9780674994874)