Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 61

25 August 2025

Brief Notes on Various Topics – 61

1.  One aspect of ethical restraints, or commitments, in various spiritual traditions that has intrigued me is the place of vegetarianism within their systems of vows, or commitments, or purifications.  What I am getting at is that even in those traditions where vegetarianism occupies an important place, in the sense that members of the tradition are expected to adhere to vegetarianism, this practice seems to be an application of a more fundamental, or foundational, principle or vow or precept.

For example, the five foundational precepts of the Jain tradition, as well as the Classical Yoga tradition, do not contain a specific vow to restrain from eating, or killing, animals.  Instead, the first, and therefore most prominent, vow is non-harming (Ahimsa).  Vegetarianism is understood to be the application of non-harming to this particular aspect of human life; that is to say, what kind of food is acceptable to eat.

For example, in Edwin F. Bryant’s translation and commentary on The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, Bryant writes, “. . . one can be very clear about the fact that eating meat, nourishing one’s body at the expense of the flesh of other living beings, is completely taboo for aspiring yogis.  One should avoid harming even trees, says Hariharananda.” (Page 243)

The same is true for the Jain tradition which imposes on its followers a vegetarian diet that also restricts eating certain root vegetables because someone pulling such vegetables from the soil might harm living beings dwelling there.  The vow that makes this a requirement of the tradition, following a vegetarian diet, is non-harming (Ahimsa).

I think the same applies to Platonism; I mean by this that a vegetarian diet is required by the tradition as a whole, even though there is no specific structure of vows in the Platonic tradition as one finds in Jainism (vratas) or Classical Yoga (yamas).  My reason for viewing vegetarianism within Platonism in this way is first the mythos presented regarding the life of Plato which includes that idea that Plato was raised in a vegetarian family (which may or may not be historically true).  This indicates, I think, the view that vegetarianism is a sign of spiritual inclination and maturity as well as the idea that vegetarianism is a view inherited from the past. 

Second, the ancient antecedents of Platonism (what are called ‘ancient teachings’ in Phaedo) are vegetarian traditions; I am thinking specifically of the teachings of Pythagoras and the Orphics and that Platonism is in many ways aligned with these teachings. 

Third, this view of vegetarianism, which regards vegetarianism as an essential practice, is thoughtfully presented by Porphyry in his treatise On Abstinence from Killing Animals.  The treatise opens as follows:

“I heard from visitors, Firmus, that you had condemned fleshless food and reverted to consuming flesh.  At first I did not believe it, judging by your temperance and by the respect we had shown for those men, at once ancient and godfearing, who pointed out the way.  Then others, following on the first, gave the same information and confirmed the report.  It seems crude, and remote from rational persuasion, to scold you because you have not, as the saying is, ‘found the better by flight from the bad’, or, as Empedocles put it, lamented your former life and turned to a better.  Instead, I thought it a proper return for our friendship with each other, and suitable for those who order their lives in accordance with truth, to reveal through reason the refutation of your errors, and to declare from what and to what you have descended.”

(Porphyry, On Abstinence from Killing Animals, translated by Gillian Clark, Bloomsbury Academic, New York, 2000, page 31, ISBN: 9781780938899)

I read this as Porphyry saying that Firmus has fallen away from the way of Philosophy by ‘descending’ and returning, or reverting, to eating animal flesh.  I think this shows that for Porphyry, and the tradition that Porphyry inherited, being a vegetarian was essential for being a Philosopher; just as Bryant notes that being a vegetarian was essential for being a Yogi.

I believe that the centrality of vegetarianism in Platonism is, as in Jainism and Classical Yoga, an application of the principle of non-harming.  Porphyry will elaborate on this in the rest of his treatise.

2.  Every morning the sun rises and brings light to the world.  And every time I reconnect with the Platonic tradition, through reading, through contemplation, and so forth, I reconnect with the light of eternity.

3.  One aspect I had difficulty with in the Platonic tradition was the view that evil is a deprivation of, or metaphysical distance from, the Good.  My tendency was to think of evil as an active presence and force.  Many spiritual traditions view evil that way and it seemed to make sense to me.

Lately, though I have become more comfortable with the idea of evil as an absence of the Good rather than the presence of some kind of entity.  Metaphorical thinking is helpful in this context; cold is the deprivation of heat, darkness is the absence of light, starvation is the absence of food, and so forth.  Looked at through the lens of these kinds of comparisons evil as the absence of the Good makes sense.

But for me what really shifted my understanding was to comprehend ugliness as the absence of the beautiful. 

4.  Continuing with the Sentences of Porphyry; here is Sentence 7:

The soul is bound to the body by a conversion to the corporeal passions; and again liberated by becoming impassive to the body.  (Thomas Taylor)

The soul is bound down to the body by adverting to the passions arising from it, and it is loosed again by impassivity to it.  (Thomas Davidson)

The soul binds herself to the body by a conversion toward the affections experienced by the body.  She detaches herself from the body by “apathy” [turning away from the body’s affections – translator’s emendation].  (Kenneth Guthrie)

The soul is attached to the body through giving in to the passions that arise from it, and is freed from it through the renunciation of these passions.  (Isaak Samarskyi)

4.1  A few notes on English usage: When Taylor uses ‘conversion’ he means a turning to the passions, becoming attached to the passions.  I don’t think Taylor is using ‘conversion’ in a religious sense. 

When Davidson uses the word ‘adverting’ he means something like ‘paying attention to’.  I think what Davidson means is that the soul becomes attentive to and fixated on the passions; this contrasts with ‘impassivity’ which is a kind of indifference to the passions.

4.2  This is a refreshingly straightforward sentence. 

4.3  What this sentence is referring to is the cultivation of apatheia as one of the means whereby a spiritual practitioner frees himself from bondage to the senses.  The Greek word ‘apatheia’ means spiritual freedom and equanimity.  The freedom here is freedom from the constant need to stimulate the bodily senses.

We can all see how easy it is for human beings to be imprisoned by the need to stimulate the senses.  Attachments to food, alcohol, to excitement, and so forth, often lead to negative consequences for individuals who find it impossible to free themselves from these attachments.  The cultivation of ‘apatheia’ is the antidote to this kind of attachment.

4.4  It is because we think that material reality is the only reality that we find attachment to sensory stimulation so seductive.  This casts a spell that keeps us from accessing our ensorcelled soul, not even knowing that there is such a thing as soul.

4.5  But it is possible to break the spell.  I think that breaking the spell cast by the senses happens when we recognize that the senses do not actually bring any relief from the difficulties of the material realm.  Out of this realization apatheia can arise.  And it is possible to cultivate apatheia, once we realize that apatheia opens the gate to more stable and more nourishing realities.

4.6  I know that the Greek word ‘apatheia’ differs in meaning from the English world ‘apathy’, but I would like to suggest that there is some overlap in meaning.  If by apathy we mean indifference, then I think we can acknowledge how indifference towards sensory stimulation is a way of finding the more subtle teachings of apatheia.

5.  The body falls away.  The mind falls away.  The Gods fall away.  Eternity does not fall away.

6.  Long ago I was studying how different Dharma traditions understand karma.  It’s complicated, and the following may be oversimplified, but roughly speaking, I see traditional Hinduism, meaning Vedic Hinduism, as understanding karma as ritual efficacy.  I mean by ‘ritual efficacy’ that by performing certain rituals correctly, using the correct materials, using the correct timing, using correct gestures and verbal formula, and so forth, one’s spiritual goal will be reached.  Usually that goal was depicted as getting to some kind of celestial realm, or heaven.

The Jain tradition equates karma with matter, which is understood as clinging to, or covering, the soul.  Asceses are understood to burn away matter from the immaterial soul, resulting in spiritual liberation.

For Buddhists, I think that karma is primarily the result of intention; that is to say, that if an activity or action was done for good reasons, such as compassion or out of love, then the result will be a good rebirth.

In Platonist traditions I think in the contemplative tradition karma is understood to be determined by wisdom.  Wisdom in this context means distinguishing between what is ephemeral from what is eternal, and then acting on that wisdom.

In a theurgic context, we return to the view of Vedic Hinduism; I mean that theurgy is centered on ritual efficacy.  If a theurgic ritual is done correctly the result is good karma and possibly a celestial rebirth as an (ephemeral) God (see Aristotle’s Metaphysics Book 3).

7.  There has been some rain, not very much, here in the desert the last few days.  It is predicted this will continue for a few more days.  Even a little bit of rain is precious in the desert and an occasion for appreciation.

Reading and studying and contemplating the writings of Platonism, primarily the Dialogues and the Enneads, resembles being nourished by a gentle rain.  It is a rain of wisdom nourishing the garden of the soul which has become parched due to neglect.  Even a few drops of wisdom from these sources can transform a parched garden into a garden of blossoming wisdom.