- This topic has 2 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Plato and Mysticism Part One
Between knowledge and the Absolute there lies a boundary which completely cuts off the one from the other.If the Absolute were only to be brought on the whole nearer to us by this agency, without any change being wrought in it, like a bird caught by a limestick, it would certainly scorn a trick of that sort, if it were not in its very nature, and did it not wish to be, beside us from the start. For a trick is what knowledge in such a case would be, since by all its busy toil and trouble it gives itself the air of doing something quite different from bringing about a relation that is merely immediate, and so a waste of time to establish. – The Phenomenology of Spirit, Section 73, Introduction, G.W.F. Hegel
Man using a limestick to catch birdsThis quote from the philosophical masterpiece by Georg Willheim Friedrich Hegel, The Phenomenology of Spirit, best encapsulates the problem mystics, occultists and philosophers all have in common – how do you reach for and grasp reality as it is? He uses the analogy of a limestick which was used to catch birds in order to closely examine them (among other uses) but with ‘Truth’ with a capital T this just isn’t possible in the same way, apart from the bird trying to evade capture. Hegel is part of a tradition in philosophy that dates back to the Greeks and Ancient Persians and Egyptians. Due to the limits of the senses, something that all philosophers and occultists all accept, there must be another realm where all properties of this world exist in unity and whenever we ‘use the limestick’ to bring it into focus to examine it, we find we can’t transcend these limits, the properties are just too abstract, too well hidden by unseen forces, for our perception to even begin to comprehend them.
This is a passion of philosophers and occultists. There is something secret. The secret does and does not have to actually exist for us to begin looking for it. We try endlessly to uncover apocalyptically that is to say, to reveal the hidden from obscurity. Here arises a kind of paradox.
How will you inquire into a thing when you are wholly ignorant of what it is? Even if you happen to bump right into it, how will you know it is the thing you didn’t know? Man cannot search either for what he knows or for what he does not know. He cannot search for what he knows–since he knows it, there is no need to search–nor for what he does not know, for he does not know what to look for. – Meno, 80 d-e, Plato
This makes inquiry both unnecessary and impossible. Socrates, when praised for being the ‘wisest of men’ by the Oracle at Delphi, replied: ‘I know that I know nothing’, which is to say he knew something and is therefore only partially ignorant and this makes inquiry possible again.
What is the way to know more? How do we pursue the unobtainable and unknowable that may or may not exist, yet we are built to wonder about transcendental levels of reality, that is to say more than physical realms of existence and reality; the metaphysical. Plato’s answers to these questions have had a massive influence on mystical thought and political thought in our world to the point where he may well be inescapable – if we try to catch what is behind Plato’s ideas we would encounter the same problem.
What really brings Plato in-line with occultic and mystical thought is his theory of recollection which is also from the dialogue with Meno. It is this concept of learning as recall that adds another possibility – the concept of a pre-existent soul. It is important to not associate as of yet, St.Augustine’s notion of the Christian version of the soul, but we also can’t leave out the influence of Plato on Christianity either.
This view that truth is always proportional has been so deeply embedded into our understanding of ontology (the study of what there is) that we can look at an entire history of philosophy from Plato down to the 20th Century as being essentially the same metaphysics-wise.
The main limiting ‘medium’ is language. An interesting discussion is on Plato’s conveyance of what Socrates actually asserts, that Plato probably wanted better terms to describe his forms and so a confusion in translations may have occured. That being said, let’s look at the logos which means literally the word – spoken and thought, which immediately places a privilege on speech and thought over physical forms of language like writing. This wasn’t word in the grammatical sense, another related term was lexis which also means count, tell, say, speak. Another related term is logic which is the ‘language’ of philosophy. Strictly speaking, logic is the reasoning behind argument, which again causes us to immediately believe there is always an occult layer of knowledge.
The Divided Line, Similies of the Sun and the Cave
Plato was dualistic and believed there to be two types of substance.
Plato believed that the true substances are not physical bodies, which are ephemeral, but the eternal Forms of which bodies are imperfect copies. These Forms not only make the world possible, they also make it intelligible, because they perform the role of universals. More on this later in the thread, as it is this layout that makes Plato the most popular among occult thinkers.
I made another thread that describes in better detail what the central concepts of Plato are, if you visit this link: https://ontic-philosophy.com/Thread-Plato-101 you will be able to read about his Theory of Forms, Similie of the Sun, Similie of the Cave and the Divided Line there. If you are not familar with these concepts, please go and read that link and come back here after doing so.
As you saw later in that thread, I breifly mention some of the connections to the Gnostics, which I want to back-track a little. Before we begin, I want to stress for you pay attention to the layout of metaphysics across the many traditions that Plato is a central part of, we will examine really old tradtions of thought in ancient religion, the revival of Plato through Plotinus and the creation of Neo-Platonism, Medieval traditions and Kabballah and then we will look at some more modern forms of Platonism, from Theosophy and New Age discourses. It is very distinct in its layout and structure, once you know it, you will be able to spot it. I will finish by looking at some of the criticisms of Plato and his metaphysics and how mysticism is framed outside of a dualist view of substance and a view of substances altogether.
Zoroastrianism
Zoroastrianism was a religion that started out of Hinduism in Ancient Mesopotamia, now known as modern day Iran. It universalised the pantheon of Iranian Gods that date back to the second millenium B.C. (some sources claim that Zoroastrianism existed in some form during this period) making it the second oldest religion in the world.
Zoroastrianism had preists known as The Noble Ones or Aryans. The Aryans loved their language. Sanskrit means “well formed”, and the Aryans believed it to be the perfect linguistic embodiment of the nature of reality. Some Western scholars have even believed that Sanskrit was the original language of humanity. Since the Aryans were migratory, they left in the way of archeological evidence. Almost everything we know about them is based in what is now a collection of writings called the Vedas. This is the oldest and most sacred of Hindu scriptures. Originally and for thousand of years the Vedas existed only in oral tradition, preserved by special memorization techniques by Aryan priests.
The Vedas were never intended to be written. The oral word as contrasted with the written word is considered extremely powerful and potentially dangerous. Only the priests were competent enough to recite the Vedas effectively without causing a great danger. It is this ‘caste system’ that we see in Plato and his politics, although some aspects of Sparta were undoubtably part of what Plato envisaged for the future, namely:
[list]
[*]a certainty that is communicable only through a way of life
[*]a way of life that would be implimented with the fewest possible changes with maximum static perfection
[*]Goodness and reality were timeless
[*]the best state will be one thatbest copies tha heavenly model and only a ruler can best understand the eternal good.
[/list]
How did Zoroastrianism contaminate Plato’s thought?According to Charles William King who was a gemologist around the end of the 19th century in his book The Gnostics and their Remains – Ancient and Medieval the ancient Greek city of Ephesus was where the two cultures probably intertwined. The School of Ephesus was a mystical school in Ionia, now modern day Turkey. The Greeks and Persians were also constantly at war with each other, which always leads to a blending of cultures. As bodies clash with each other, they combine as much as they repell each other. More on this when we examine Alexander the Great.
Another apocalyptic text from the Zoroastrians is the Zend Avesta which literally means ‘text and comment’, it was collected from oral tradition dating back as far as 1200 B.C. – There is a Supreme Being called Zarvana Akarana which means ‘Boundless Time’, as no beginning can be assigned.
He (Zarvana Akarana) is so surrounded by his own glory, and so far exalted beyond all human comprehension, that he can only be the object of silent veneration. – The Gnostics and their Remains: Ancient and Medieval by Charles William King, P.40
The beginning of creation was made by means of emanations. The fisrt emanation of the Eternal One was Light. This clearly has a link to Plato and it preceeded Plato. The Zoroastrians were very other-worldly, much like their later counter-parts that we call The Gnostics. The influence of these metaphyics on Christianity should go without saying here too.
Ahuramazda which means ‘Being-Mind’ was the King of Light. Much like Plato’s Demiurge and Gnosticism’s Ialdabaoth, is the first born out of the infinite, or boundless time. The Demiurge in later Gnosticism would be associated with Ialdabaoth, but had more in common with the Zoroastrian spirit Angra Meinu/Ahriman, who was the destructive spirit that opposed Asha/Truth. Representations depict a serpent with a lion’s head for both, as Ahriman is one of the six divine sparks or Amshaspands of Ahuramazda, who created Asha, Ahriman is like an imperfect copy of Zarvana Akarana.
Gnostic Ialdabaoth and Zoroastrian Angra Meinu – both have a Lion’s head and the body of a serpentIn Zoroastrianism, Ahuramazda was formless, an uncreated spirit who had not yet been named. The calling of names is another avenue of Plato we have to explore in due course, but Zoroaster, the prophet of the religion, also known as Zarathustra, gave a name to something that is formless and without object. Ahuramazda is the equivalent to the Realm of the Forms, but is still transcendent even to that. It is the upholder and creator of the ‘thing’ we attempt to catch with the lime stick, but all we are able to grasp and cognise, or understand, are the emanations in the form of justice, goodness, in their separate forms in the material realm which is not wholly wise, unlike Ahuramazda. Ahuramazda upholds Asha.
Zarathustra
By means of his ‘Word’, Ormuzd (Ahuramazda) created the pure world of which he is the preserver and the judge. – The Gnostics and their Remains: Ancient and Medieval by Charles William King [ibid]
In the beginning was the Word, the Logos, which again puts a huge privilege on speech and thought over written texts. The cosmos is seen as a great book, in which Ahuramazda, as the Word itself, inscribes signs and clues and an endless play of overlapping resemblances for men to interpret. What appears to us in our Modern minds is an extraordinary subservience to authority, which is the consequence of a totally different epistemological framework. To the Aryans and Plato however, whether or not this is a language problem of limitations, this was the ontology.
It is important to remember the captivity of the Jews in Assyria, only two tribes – Judah and Levi – were sent back to Jerusalem by Cyrus and Babylon continued long to seat the most flourishing Rabbinical School, while Judea itself, down to the time of the Macedonian conquest (Alexander the Great), remained a province of the Persian Empire. Kabballah means to recieve, Jewish influence was vast in Persia.
Kabballah
As with Kabballah and according to the Zendavesta, all that exists has emanated from the source of the infinite light.
Ain, Ain Soph and Ain Soph Aur are very similar to Zarvana Akaran, boundless in time, even ‘nothing’, ‘uncreated’
Before all things existed the Primal Being, the ‘Ancient of Days’, the eternal King of Light. This King of Light is All; he is the real cause of all existence; he is the Infinite (En Soph); he alone is He, there is in Him no Thou; but he cannot be known, ‘he is a closed Eye.’ – Gnostics and their Remains, The Kabballah and the Talmud by Charles William King
This implies a kind of panentheism which means All is in God. Once again, we see a similar story as regards ’causes are greater than effects’ and the realm of forms was created by another being.
Once again, we see a kind of spoken word as being the basis for all reality in the way Kabballah compares the micro and macrocosms of the Universe. Yod He or Jehovah emanated the First Born of God, the Tikkun or ‘Universal Type’, which the Platonic Idea and the general container of all being, making this being similar to Ahuramazda.
The structure of the tree of life is most revealing of Plato’s divided line. There are Four Worlds to the tree of life, which is the same as Plato’s line. In the diagram above the worlds are divided by cross sections known as veils.
There are technically five worlds, the first being Adam Kadmon which means ‘Primary of primaries’. You could say this is some kind of template for how forms will manifest via emanations. Adam Kadmon is supreme above the Worlds, and generally only Four Worlds are referred to.
[list=1]
[*]Atziluth This is the world of emanation – the highest possible order of quidditas or thing-hood.The Republic, 510bThere are two subdivisions, in the lower of which the soul uses the figures given by the former division as images; the enquiry can only be hypothetical, and instead of going upwards to a principle descends to the other end; in the higher of the two, the soul passes out of hypotheses, and goes up to a principle which is above hypotheses, making no use of images as in the former case, but proceeding only in and through the ideas themselves[*]
This is so high up in the conceptive ladder that form is not yet possible in the way we can comprehend it. Let’s use a few keywords to grasp what we are delaing with here, let’s say that creative forces, all the forms and ideas themselves, all principles of Goodness and Justice are just swirling around in an embrace and the idea REST comes into being. Rest would logically lead and follow from motion.
[*]Briar This is the creative world. The special relationship between a Form and its essence is captured in two principles
1. Each essence is the essence of exactly one Form.
2. Each Form has (or is) exactly one essence;A Form, then, is what it is in its own right in that it Is its essence, and since the only thing it Is is its essence, each Form is monoeides, ‘of one essence’. In virtue of Being its essence, each Form Is something regardless of whether any particular does or even may participate in it.
Let’s carry on the keywords here, from the idea rest, we get the formative essence of resting which is ‘sit, lie down’.
[*]Yetzirah This is part of the creative world, this is well within Plato’s visible as opposed to intelligible world where we could say an actual plan, or blue print is drawn up for a chair, or bed, for example.
[*]Assiah Finally this is the world of Formation, where we actually see a chair that partakes in the form of rest and sitting. All chairs will share a universal particular.
[/list]
I hope that simple example shows the contrast well enough. I am going to conclude this thread here, probably better off a series of threads. There should be enough here to let intuition do the rest in regards to reading Plato with occult type mysticism.Here is a useful video about Zoroastrianism and its link to Platonism:
[video=youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3s1t0hrl4pE[/video]
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
