Esoteric Philosophy: part two

An occult investigation of the doctrines of Plato, Aristotle and the Neoplatonists

Introduction

Philosophy has been called "the Queen of Arts and the daughter of Heaven." But this is only true if the Philosophy in question is based upon true knowledge which leads to Wisdom. As we discussed in the first part of this investigation the principal object of Philosophy should be the search for Truth in all its purity, without any errors. But how many philosophers can be said to have fully succeeded in that quest? Of those that came nearest, Plato is perhaps the greatest, though even he committed errors, as we learnt in part one. Moreover, as an initiate of the Mysteries, he was not permitted to reveal all, and what he did reveal, as we mentioned in our previous afterword, was often couched in the most obscure and arcane language, the better to conceal the truth from the unworthy and unready. The Neoplatonists who succeeded him came to a good many wrong conclusions too. If you have not read part one, please do so before proceeding further or you will not reap the full benefits of this series of articles.

In the first of our afterwords we briefly examined what little is known of the life of Plato. In this article we review his principal writings and philosophy, whilst in our final afterword we consider his ideas further in connection with the esoteric School he founded, ending with a summary of the theory of Hylozoism which we mentioned in part one.

Aristotle

No survey of Greek philosophy can be regarded as complete without including Aristotle, but to consider his ideas in depth is impossible in a short article. Nor is this necessary as none of them were an improvement upon those of his teacher, Plato. Nor did he reveal any esoteric truths that had not been stated previously by the pre-Socratic philosophers we discussed in part one.

Aristotle was born at Stagira, a Greek colony in Thrace in 384 B.C. Deprived of his parents at the early age of 17, he travelled to Athens where he became a pupil of Plato, and remained so for twenty years until the Sage's death in 347 B.C. Plato often had cause to upbraid Aristotle for his impatience and unbridled tongue. A severer reproach was Aristotle's unscrupulousness towards his teacher and his philosophy. He did not flinch from borrowing from Plato when it suited his purposes and criticising him when it did not. Perhaps his worst fault was his habit of treating his master's metaphorical language as though it were meant to be taken literally. A criticism one might level at many modern occult students, as we mentioned in the afterword on the Art of study in our final Astral Conversation!

Following Plato's death, Aristotle immersed himself in empirical studies and shifted from Platonism to empiricism—a philosophical theory which holds that knowledge comes primarily from sensory experience. In this he anticipated the modern philosophers we shall consider in part three. A good idea of his woeful ignorance of the esoteric doctrines of his master can be found in his treatise on the soul—Peri Psyche—in which he posited three kinds of 'soul': the vegetative, belonging to plants; the sensitive belonging to animals; and the rational, belonging to human beings. He further said that the human soul incorporates the powers of the other kinds. Here we have the lower self plus instinct and nothing more. Nor did he seem to know the origin and destiny of man which we discuss in our article on evolution.

Aristotle died in Chalcis in Euboea in 322 B.C. There is no question that he was an Adept in the material sciences, especially rhetoric, logic, physics, geology, astronomy, biology and psychology. As such we may regard him as the first truly material scientist whose contribution to all the modern sciences is immense. Furthermore, we are indebted to Aristotle for many of the details of the lives and teachings of the philosophers who came before him. However, it cannot be denied that he bears considerable responsibility for paving the way for the scientific materialism to which the whole world is now in thrall, to the detriment of all that is Divine in Man.

The Neoplatonists

The Neoplatonists did not call themselves by this name. They considered themselves to be faithful transmitters and interpreters of Plato's philosophical and scientific ideas, not improvers or alterers of them which the prefix 'neo' or new implies. It was only during the 19th Century that historians and philosophers, who thought they knew Plato better than his direct successors, decided that the teachings of this group of philosophers differed sufficiently from the Sage's original ideas to require the prefix 'neo'. This school of thought was inaugurated in the third century A.D. in Alexandria by the followers of Ammonius Saccas. From Rome and Alexandria, Neoplatonism passed to Athens.

Ammonius Saccas (175-242 A.D.)

Ammonius was born to devout Christian parents but rejecting the exclusive narrowness of his parents religion and claiming that he was "god-taught", took a far more expanded view of philosophy than any one religion could offer. Ammonius was said to have been a charismatic teacher who wrote no books and, with the aid of his pupils, kept his teachings secret after the manner of the Pythagoreans. Accordingly, we have no direct evidence of his philosophical beliefs. He was a mysterious figure, who attempted to combine Platonism with Indian and Egyptian philosophy and theology. Ammonius is reputed to be the first philosopher to employ the word theosophia, meaning "divine wisdom." He is known mainly through the writings of his pupil, Plotinus, whom he taught for eleven years. Ammonius believed that knowledge consisted of three grades, ascending from mere opinion derived from sense perception, to science gained through dialectic, to illumination gained from direct spiritual intuition. This is essentially the same as Plato's three grades of knowledge outlined in the Republic. H. P. Blavatsky suggests that Ammonius' endorsement of solitary prayer or meditation to achieve enlightenment is found in Plato's belief that direct realisation of the Form of the Good occurred when one remained "silent in the presence of the divine ones."

Plotinus (205-270 A.D.)

Plotinus is said to have been born in Egypt about 205 A.D., and died in 270 A.D. This has led to speculation that he may have been a Hellenised Egyptian. He cordially distrusted the materialistic doctrines of Aristotle, holding firmly to the view that sensory experience and external phenomena were mere reflections of higher and truer realities. This distrust extended to his own body, and it is reported by Porphyry that he refused to have his portrait painted because he did not wish to perpetuate an illusion; wise man! For similar reasons, Plotinus never discussed his ancestry, childhood, or his place or date of birth. On the other hand, he said he was "ashamed that his soul was in a body," which is not so wise, for we are placed in a material body to learn the lessons that only material existence can teach us.

Plotinus travelled to Alexandria to study philosophy at the age of 27, but found little to satisfy his hunger until he heard Ammonius lecture, whereupon he is said to have told a friend: "this is the man I have been seeking!" Plotinus taught that there is a supreme, totally transcendent "One", containing no division, multiplicity, or distinction; beyond being and non-being. In this he but echoed the teachings of the pre-Socratic philosophers and Plato that we discussed in the first part of this investigation. He further taught "Henosis", or Oneness—union with the Source of All. This too reprises the Vedantic idea of Nirvana. In speaking of Henosis, Plotinus taught a spiritual discipline analogous to that of the Greek Mysteries: "Purify your soul (Higher Self in our terminology) from all undue hope and fear about earthly things; mortify the body, deny self—affections as well as appetites—and the inner eye will begin to exercise its clear and solemn vision." But here Plotinus erred. If we wish to develop spiritual, as opposed to psychic powers, we need to wisely control the appetites of the body and desires of the lower self as we discuss in our article on Inner Peace, not deny or suppress them altogether.

Unlike his teacher, Ammonius, Plotinus distinguished four kinds of knowledge: sensory knowledge, which is an obscure representation of truth; reason cognition, which gives us knowledge of the essences of things; intellectual cognition, which gives us knowledge of ourselves; and ecstasy, which consists in a supernatural intuition of God, in which our natural knowledge ceases in the divine unconsciousness. If by 'reason cognition' and 'intellectual cognition' Plotinus meant the use of the intellectual powers in man he committed a further error, for intellect is but the development of our animal intelligence and instinct and incapable of comprehending the essence of anything. This requires intuition which does not lead to divine 'unconsciousness' as Plotinus thought, but to Cosmic Consciousness.

Here we have a mix-up of mental principles which runs through much of Plotinus' philosophy which was preserved in a number of hastily written, ill-connected tractates. His essay on the Immortality of the Soul explains few things clearly and contains many more errors such as his belief that the soul is incorruptible. This is true of the Divine Soul, but not of its negative counterpart which we call the Higher Self. This may not only be corrupted, but entirely lost, and its principle atoms scattered in Space, as we may read in Symphonie Fantastique by J Michaud PhD. In short, Plotinus makes a great many guesses about the laws and principles of Occult Science, some of which are correct, but does not know. After his death, and in obedience to his directions, Porphyry (234-305 A.D.), the most celebrated of his disciples, arranged and edited Plotinus' tractates in six Enneads.

Porphyry (ca. 234-305 A.D.)

Porphyry was born in Tyre, now in modern Lebanon. In 262 A.D. he travelled to Rome, attracted by the reputation of Plotinus. He is best known for his philosophical polemic Against the Christians, which consisted of fifteen books. Some thirty Christian apologists responded to his challenge. Almost everything we know about Porphyry's arguments is found in these refutations, largely because the emperor Theodosius II ordered every copy burned in 435 A.D., and again in 448 A.D.! His aim was not to disprove or deny the essential truths of Christianity but rather the ways in which they were expressed and communicated. In other words, he applauded the spirit of Christianity that 'giveth life', but railed against the 'letter that killeth', and in this he was right as John Temple discusses in his article on the hidden wisdom in the Bible.

Porphyry also wrote widely on astrology, religion, and musical theory. He produced a History of Philosophy which included a biography of the life of his teacher, Plotinus. Perhaps his most valuable contribution to esoteric philosophy was his Letter to Anebo, in which he sought to learn the Egyptian Mysteries from an Egyptian priest. This formed part of Iamblichus' celebrated work On the Mysteries, which is prefaced by Porphyry's letter and is itself described as the Reply of Abammon, the Teacher, to the Letter of Porphyry to Anebo and Solutions of Questions therein contained. We mention this important book in our review of Hermetic literature, in which we say: "The language used by the correspondents makes it clear that Porphyry is soliciting occult knowledge from one whom he comes to regard as his superior. We have since published an in-depth investigation of the correspondence between Porphyry and Abammon"

This demonstrates that he, like Plotinus, knew little of the inner secrets of the teachings of the Egyptian Mystery Schools, which were already largely lost in his times. Porphyry begins by taking his teacher to task, criticising what he believes to be the religious dogmas and practices of the Egyptians and Chaldeans. In his replies, Anebo displays the patience, goodwill and humility which are the hallmark of the true Teacher, never once losing his temper, nor stooping to ridicule his pupil's often fanciful speculations and theological misconceptions. We will refer to this important book again in our discussion of the next Neoplatonist in this timeline, Iamblichus.

Iamblichus (245-325 A.D.)

Iamblichus was born in Chalsis, in Syria, of Arabian origin. From the fragments of his life which have come down to us, we find that he was a man of great culture and learning, and renowned for his charity and self-denial. His mind was deeply impregnated with Pythagorean doctrines, and in his famous biography of Pythagoras from which we quoted in our article on Initiates and Initiation, he communicated the philosophical, ethical and scientific teachings of the Sage of Samos. He was also a student of the Egyptian Mysteries and expressed his determination to teach what remained of them in his times to his pupils. To accomplish this purpose he founded a School of Magic among the Neoplatonists. At first this School was distinct from those established by Plotinus and Porphyry, both of whom considered the knowledge of practical Magic as dangerous to the majority of men. But in the passage of time Porphyry came to adopt Iamblichus' point of view and gave him both encouragement and support.

If we would understand the purpose of Iamblichus' School, we must first learn the real meaning of the word Magic, as it was understood by the ancients and as we discuss it in our occult studies course. Plato said: "Magic consists of, and is acquired by the worship of the gods." This is correct, for it is only the truly god-like man or woman who is capable of comprehending the sublime secrets of Divine Magic. Iamblichus had two objects in view. Firstly, he wished to uncover the hidden side of Nature to warn men of the perils that lurk in the indiscriminate cultivation of psychic, as opposed to spiritual powers, and to show how such dangers might be avoided. This was a most laudable aim, shared and pursued over 1,500 years later by H. P. Blavatsky, when she attempted to expose the impostures and perils of Spiritualism in the 19th century as we may read in The Golden Star.

In Blavatsky's case it did as much harm as good, promoting an unhealthy interest in the psychic at the expense of the spiritual, which has persisted to this day. We don't know what results accrued from Iamblichus' attempts, as almost nothing is known about his school of Magic. What we can say is that the true Arcana of Magic cannot be understood by the average person, or even the average occultist. We see this all too clearly today when 'sigils', 'servitors' and the summoning of so-called 'spirits' have taken the place of the Divine Magic of Hermes with often dire consequences for those who involve themselves in such dangerous practises in the hope of gaining so-called 'magical' powers.

Iamblichus' second object was to give men who had not been initiated into the Mysteries the means by which they could effect the union of the Higher Self with the Divine Soul—a recapitulation of the doctrine of Henosis taught by Plotinus we referred to earlier. This aim is also fraught with peril. Without the preliminary moral and mental purification which was the first part of the Mysteries in both Greece and Egypt, such a union is utterly impossible. One might as well mix oil and muddy water in the hope of uniting them. Porphyry was well aware of this, and objected that bad effects might accrue to those who attempted to practice Magic without a thorough preliminary cleansing of the lower self. For, as he said: "To unite one's soul to the Universal Soul requires a perfectly pure mind. Through self-contemplation, perfect chastity and purity of body, we may approach nearer to it, and receive in that state true knowledge and wonderful insight." All this is true, however unpalatable it may be to those who fondly imagine that a rotten apple will sweeten the barrel.

Consequently, when Iamblichus expressed his determination to make these things known to his pupils, Porphyry addressed a letter to an Egyptian Initiate known as Anebo, asking him to explain certain points in the Egyptian system with which he was unfamiliar. This letter, which we mentioned earlier, is part of the book known as De Mysteriis Aegyptorum, or On the Mysteries of the Egyptians, Chaldeans and Assyrians, which we will now consider in more detail.

Before the Egyptian priest Abammon—which name means 'the heart of Amen', or the Sun—replies to Porphyry's questions he tells him the many different sources from which his knowledge has been gained. These include the Chaldean Oracles, the wisdom of the Assyrian and Babylonian Sages, and what remained of the real teachings of Hermes in the 3rd century. Porphyry, being a Neoplatonist, starts with universal principles, asking Abammon to define what the Egyptian Sages consider the First Cause to be. Is it Mind, or above Mind? Is it the ONE, or does it subsist with others? Is it embodied or unembodied? Is it the same as the Creator of the Universe (the Demiurge), or prior to that? Abammon answers that only the ONE truly GOOD, which is beyond all being and non-being, which can be worshipped in silence alone is the Source of all that exists, the Divine Cause from which all that is and is not has arisen. This, as you will remember, is exactly what the pre-Socratic philosophers and Plato taught, and pure Occult Science.

Porphyry next asks about the ancient Egyptian teachings on evolution. Abammon's answer shows how far in advance of modern science were the ancient Egyptian scientists. "It is not in the order of nature," he says, "for superior things to be generated from those that are inferior." Then, turning to the constitution of man, the Egyptian priest advises Porphyry that he must begin with the first Principle if he would understand himself. "This divine irradiation," he says, "shines upon all from the outside, just as the sun illuminates every object with its rays." He compares this Principle to the light of the Sun, and this too is quite correct, though the 'light' in question is not our material light, but the invisible Light which is concealed in darkness, as the Bible tells us: "And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not" (John 1:5).

The Divine Soul, Abammon explains, is an immortal entity, unbegotten and imperishable, indivisible and incorporeal. Therefore it could not have come into existence at birth, nor will it perish at death. Furthermore, "being indivisible, being essentially incorporeal, and having nothing in common with the body, it can be affected by nothing, nor has it any concern with change or condition." He then enters into a lengthy description of the soul, which he says is two-fold, the lower part being concerned with bodily existence, while the higher part is separable from everything corporeal. Here we have the True, Divine Soul referred to in our occult studies course article and that part of it which descends into a body which we call the Higher Self, though this division may also be a concealed reference to the two minds in man—the Higher and the lower. It is only as the Higher Self is awakened that man can bring about the union of the Higher Self with the Divine Soul. Abammon then describes the faculty in man which makes this union possible. "There is a faculty in man which is immeasurably superior to those which are grafted or engendered in us. By it we can attain to union with superior intelligences, finding ourselves raised above the scenes of this earthly life, and partaking of higher existence and superhuman powers of the inhabitants of the celestial spheres."

What is this faculty? If you haven't guessed we will tell you. It is Intuition—the attunement of the Higher Self with the Divine or True Soul. Dormant in the majority of men, it can be awakened, and will grow in proportion to its use. The use of intuition arouses the spiritual senses. These can penetrate into the very core of matter and see any object as it really is, and not merely as a physical appearance. By this faculty we find ourselves liberated from the dominion of the lower self and bodily appetites, and we become, as it were, the arbiters of our own fate or destiny. For when our mind is elevated toward essences higher than itself, it can separate itself from the negative conditions which hold it in bondage in earthly life. It exchanges its ordinary existence for another one. It renounces the conventional habits which belong to the external order of things, to give itself up to and mix itself with another higher order of things which reign in the highest spiritual realms. As we said earlier, in 2023 we published Egyptian Epistle, an occult investigation of the correspondence between the philosopher Porphyry and the Egyptian priest Abammon which explores their exchange in much greater depth.

Proclus (412-485 A.D.)

Proclus' pupil Marinus of Neapolis tells us that when the philosopher fell seriously ill and was given up for lost, a beautiful child appeared over his bed and, proclaiming himself to be Telesphorus, the messenger of Asclepius and spirit of recovery, he touched Proclus' head and cured him within moments. Except for two occasions, Proclus did not fall ill again in his life, so perhaps this delightful story is true! He began his education in Xanthus in Lycia, a town dedicated to Apollo, now in modern Turkey, and moved from there to Alexandria to pursue the study of rhetoric in order to become a lawyer, as was his father. However, during a journey to Byzantium he discovered philosophy was his true vocation.

At the age of 18 Proclus moved to Athens, attracted by the fame of the Platonic School there. There he also came into contact with the older traditions of wisdom such as the theology of the Orphics and the Chaldean Oracles. When the Neoplatonist philosopher Syrianus became the head of the Academy Proclus became his enthusiastic pupil. On many occasions Proclus praises the philosophical achievements of his teacher and never criticizes him. Because of this, it is almost impossible to distinguish between Proclus' original contribution and what he adopted from Syrianus.

After Syrianus' death in 437 A.D. Proclus succeeded as head of the Athenian school, and he kept this position for almost fifty years until his death in 485. His busy day started with a prayer to the sun at sunrise, followed by lectures, reading seminars, discussions with students, and literary work of his own. Besides his philosophical activities, Marinus also says Proclus was an accomplished Magician. This was not without its difficulties since such practises could only be pursued in the private sphere of the Schools grounds. Though Proclus was held in high esteem as a philosopher and had some Christian pupils, he had to be careful to avoid antagonising the Athenian authorities who frowned on such 'paganism' and so concealed his activities. Despite his caution, Marinus tells us that he had to go into exile for a time to avoid prosecution. How familiar all this sounds! It is the age-old story of the well-intentioned teacher who, either through ignorance or denial of the necessity for secrecy in occultism, makes himself a perfectly visible target for the arrows of the unready and so reaps the reward of his foolishness. This was a grave error on Proclus' part, just as it was in the case of Iamblichus mentioned earlier. By now the decline which began with the death of Plato was well established, and as we shall see in part three, no further advances were made in philosophy, for the truly great teachers of the Eternal Verities were no more.

Yet among Proclus' aphorisms, we find the following: "Beyond all bodies is the soul's essence; beyond all souls, the intellectual principle; and beyond all intellective substances, the One. There is the One; the intellectual principle is the unmoved mover; the soul is self-moving; and the body is moved by another." This is a true and good teaching. He further taught that only that which is self-moving can be self-subsistent, for it alone is incorruptible, being the cause of its own continuity. This is the same as the ever-moving 'Great Breath' described and elucidated in The Secret Doctrine. For Proclus, knowledge cannot be achieved except by recognizing the metaphysical principles upon which it rests, and those metaphysical principles have ethical correlates. If all things strive towards the Good, knowledge goes hand in hand with right conduct or the cultivation of the virtues, which are, in truth, levels of reality and therefore powers. Evil is always incidental to the pursuit of some good, a limitation of the process. No occultist would disagree with these fine and true sentiments, and this reconciles us to a large extent with Proclus' failure to keep his activities secret.

Hypatia teaching in the Museum
Still from the film Agora, 2009, starring Rachel Weisz as the philosopher

The demise of Neoplatonism

Neoplatonism can be said to have ended with the foul murder of Hypatia in 415 A.D., though as we have seen, enlightened philosophers such as Proclus and his disciples kept the dying flame alight into the 5th century. Hypatia (370-415 A.D.) was the daughter of Theon of Alexandria, a celebrated philosopher and mathematician. She showed a deep interest in philosophy and mathematics from a very early age. Her father instructed her in these subjects with care and diligence, and she soon became one of his most brilliant pupils. While Hypatia was living in Athens she came in contact with the teachings of Plotinus, Porphyry and Iamblichus, and identified herself with Neoplatonism. Later, when she moved to Alexandria, she began to hold lectures and classes in the famous Museum, where her eloquence and profound wisdom, her youth and extraordinary beauty soon attracted huge crowds of students and admirers. She was admitted into the intimate circles of the great Alexandrian families, and numbered among her friends two of the most powerful men of the day: Orestes, the Prefect of Alexandria, and Synesius, the Bishop of Cyrene.

Hypatia brought Egypt nearer to an understanding of its ancient Mysteries than it had been for thousands of years. Her knowledge of Theurgy restored the practical value of the Mysteries and completed the work commenced by Iamblichus over a hundred years before. Following in the footsteps of Plotinus and Porphyry, she demonstrated the possibility of the union of the individual Self with the Universal Self, or union of the Higher Self and Divine Soul in our terminology. In this she continued the work of Ammonius Saccas, by demonstrating the fundamental unity of all religions and the identity of their source. Needless to add, this did not go down well with the fanatical Christian theologians of Alexandria who were besieged on all sides by the hated 'pagans' who sought to expose their impostures and undermine the precarious foundations of burgeoning Christian dogma. When Hypatia explored the metaphysical allegories of the Mystery Schools of Greece and Egypt from which Christianity had borrowed its dogmas, and openly analysed them in public meetings, she used a weapon which the Christians could only meet with violence. If her School had been allowed to continue the whole fraud perpetrated by the Church would have been laid bare. The clear light of Neoplatonism was shining much too brightly upon the fragile tapestry of Christianity, stitched together from the remnants of paganism and the Ancient Wisdom, to permit it to continue.

The prime mover in the battle between the dying embers of Neoplatonism and the rising power of the Christian Church was Cyril, the newly appointed Bishop of Alexandria. This most fanatical and ignorant of priests began his rule by punishing all those who had supported Timothy, his defeated rival within the Christian community at Alexandria. In 414, Cyril closed all the synagogues in Alexandria, confiscated all the property belonging to the Jews, and expelled them all from the city. Orestes, the Roman prefect of Alexandria, who was also a close friend of Hypatia and a recent convert to Christianity, was outraged by Cyril's actions and sent a scathing report to the emperor. But before any reply could be received from Constantinople, the conflict escalated and a riot broke out in which a group of monks under Cyril's authority, nearly killed Orestes. As punishment, Orestes had Ammonius, the monk who started the riot, publicly tortured to death. Cyril tried to proclaim Ammonius a martyr, but the Christians in Alexandria were disgusted since Ammonius had been killed for inciting a riot and attempting to murder the governor, not for his faith. Thereupon, prominent Alexandrian Christians intervened and forced Orestes and Cyril to come to an uneasy truce. During the negotiations, Orestes frequently consulted Hypatia for advice because she was well-liked by both pagans and Christians alike and respected as a wise counsellor who had not taken any part in the preceding conflict.

In March of the fateful year of 415 a crowd of Cyril's ruffianly monks gathered in front of the Museum, where Hypatia was just finishing one of her classes. Her chariot drew up to the door, and Hypatia appeared. A dark wave of black-robed fanatics, with bloody murder in their hearts and curses spewing from their twisted lips, rushed out from their hiding place, and surging around Hypatia's chariot, forced her to alight. They stripped her naked and dragged her into a nearby Church. Shaking herself free from her tormentors, she rose for one moment to her full height, snow-white against the dark horde of merciless monks surrounding her. Her lips opened to speak, but no word came forth. For in that moment their leader struck her down, and the dark mass closed over her quivering flesh. They dragged her body into the street and tore it to pieces before making a bonfire of what remained. Christians! What a truly hellish crew!

But what of the instigator of her foul murder, the 'holy' Christian Bishop Cyril? Despite universal condemnation and a thorough investigation, Cyril escaped punishment by bribing one of the Emperor's officials, and by the early 420s, completely dominated the Alexandrian council. How familiar all this sounds today, when religious fundamentalism is once more on the rise and the innocent suffer at the hands of fanatics. So perished the wise and lovely Hypatia, and with her death the great Neoplatonic School came to an end. Some of the philosophers removed to Athens, but their School was closed by order of the Emperor Justinian. With their departure the little light that remained of the bright Flambeau of Truth guttered in the gathering darkness of the Christian era, to be replaced by dogma, superstition and bloody conflict. Exactly fifteen hundred years later, in 1914, the First World War deluged the Christian nations in a baptism of blood and horror.

In our final article we consider what comes under the heading of 'Modern Philosophy' and some of its main exponents. We also examine the attempts of some modern scientists to reconcile their spiritual beliefs with the doctrines and theories of material science. In our final afterword we conclude our brief review of the life and teachings of Plato and examine the ancient philosophical concept of Hylozoism. If you have not read part one and two, or wish to refresh your memory about the subjects discussed, please follow the underlined links above.

Search our website

The life and teachings of Plato

In the second of our afterwords we continue our examination of the life and teachings of Plato.

It has been assumed erroneously that Plato was entirely free from any element of Eastern Philosophy in his writings, and that every modern scholar, without being a mystic and an occultist themselves, can pretend to be a judge of Ancient Esotericism. That Plato was undeniably an ardent admirer and follower of Pythagoras no one will deny. It is equally undeniable, as stated by Professor M. J. Matter, of the Royal Academy of Strasbourg, that: "It is in Pythagoras and Plato that we find, in Greece, the first elements of Oriental Gnosticism."

Plato had on the one hand inherited the doctrines of Pythagoras, and on the other hand drawn his wisdom from the same sources as the Samian Philosopher. The doctrines of Pythagoras are partly Brahmanical, and partly Egyptian; for this great Philosopher studied in both India and Egypt. Plato makes the same profession in his Epistles in which he says he has taken his teachings "from ancient and sacred doctrines." Furthermore, the ideas of both Pythagoras and Plato coincide too well with the philosophies of India and Egypt to admit any doubt of their origin by anyone who has any real acquaintance with these systems.

The early Fathers of the Christian Church were thoroughly instructed in Platonic Philosophy and comprehended its essential unity with that of India and ancient Egypt, and this is the reason the elements of these two systems predominate so strikingly in the Gospels and the Jewish Scriptures. Philosophy, Science, Religion, Art and Ethics were interwoven subjects for Plato. They arose from the Ancient Teachings of India, via Chaldea, Egypt and Greece, whence they passed to the Arabian scientists and philosophers. It was they who introduced the teachings of Alchemy and Magic into Europe during the 'Dark Ages'—which were not really as 'dark' as some people imagine. This in turn resulted in the European Schools of Magic, Alchemy and Philosophy of the Middle Ages.

Plato claimed no originality for his ideas. He was, in every sense, the world's interpreter. Like H. P. Blavatsky, he gave a new unity to ancient and scattered truths. His work was the string which tied together the nosegay of precious blossoms which had been culled from the gardens of the world's best thinkers. Without Plato, the Socratic method of education would be unknown. Without Plato, the abstruse numerical system of Pythagoras would have remained unintelligible to the average mind. Without Plato, the philosophical and psychological systems of Patanjali, Kapila and Vyasa, the laws of Manu and the Buddhist doctrine of emanation, would have remained hidden from the Western world. Plato was the link between the East and the West. As Emerson says, "The excellence of Europe and Asia is in his brain. Metaphysics and natural philosophy expressed the genius of Europe; he substructs the religion of Asia as the base."

As we discussed in our previous afterword, Plato was an Initiate of the Mysteries, which obliged him to veil many of his more abstruse teachings in symbolical language. His great veneration for the Mysteries and the responsibility he felt toward them made him guard their inmost secrets with jealous care. Once, when he was accused of making a vague communication, he answered, "I purposely spoke enigmatically, that in case the tablet should have happened with any accident, a person without some previous knowledge of the subject might not be able to understand its contents." He communicated his most profound teachings orally and only to his initiated disciples, who in turn passed them down from generation to generation of similarly pledged disciples.

Plato presented his philosophy in the form of dramatic dialogue. He spreads the charm of an exhaustless fancy over the subtle controversies of his characters, filling them with humour, exuberant imagery, delicate sarcasm and friendly banter. Throughout his lines, however, runs the unbroken thread of a deep and penetrating philosophy. Starting with universal principles and descending therefrom into particulars, he developed a system of thought which embraced the evolution of worlds and species, the correlation and conservation of forces, the development and transmutation of physical forms, and the indestructibility of both spirit and matter.

Plato knew that the Higher Self in man is concerned with causes rather than effects. It is the presence of this Higher Self which makes a man ask the immediate cause of a certain effect, then for the cause of that, until he finally arrives at that Cause which lies behind all others. Although postulating the existence of this Causeless Cause, Plato wisely refrained from any description of its nature, for how can a mere man, however wise, describe the indescribable and unknowable? But this does not prevent us, as seekers after Truth, recognising in Plato's "Unchangeable Existence" the "One" and "All" of Hermes, which at stated intervals becomes the cause of Becoming and Manifestation.

Barely mentioning this Absolute Negation, Plato started by considering its two aspects, which constitute the basis of conditioned existence. He described the universal substratum of primordial substance as the "Unlimited," considering it as that indefinable "Something" from which all forms of matter emanate and into which they will eventually return. "That in which all things appear, grow up and disappear is Space," he said, at the same time making it clear that Space is animated by eternal, ceaseless Motion. He did not conceive this Motion, however, as a blind, unreasoning force, but identified it with Deity, tracing the word Theos back to a verb meaning "to move."

Plato taught that the visible universe is but the concrete image of an ideal abstraction, built on the model of the first Divine Idea. We find him distinctly stating that everything was evolved out of the eternal and invisible WILL, which contains within itself the Idea of the world to be created, the Idea being produced out of itself. As we learnt in part one of this investigation, he declared that behind all existences and secondary causes, behind all laws, ideas and principles, there is Intelligence. This is the Universal Mind in its Cosmic aspect, reflecting itself as the Higher Self in man.

The immortality of the soul forms the central theme of Plato's philosophy. In his Phaedo he unfolds all the arguments in favour of this premise, and refutes all objections. He shows that the soul is neither dependent upon the body for its existence nor affected by its dissolution. With irrefutable logic he demonstrates the necessity for reincarnation, and shows that knowledge itself is nothing more than memory. The doctrine of cause and effect runs like a golden thread throughout his writings. Although admitting that man is seemingly the victim of circumstances, he proves that in reality man is their master, for what we attune with in thought and deed, we become. This is not the doctrine of Karma, as it popularly MISunderstood by Theosophists, occultists and mystics alike, but attunement, as we point out in our occult studies course.

Occult students are sometimes confused by the different terms Plato used in describing the various aspects of the soul. What we call the Divine Soul, Plato describes as the rational spiritual soul, defining it as the "motion that is able to move itself." When he says that "soul is the most ancient of all things," he is referring to the unity of Soul and Higher Self, before the Higher Self's descent into matter, and after its final liberation from reincarnation on earth. When he speaks of the nous in man, he is describing the Higher Self—the reincarnating Individuality or Ego.

Sometimes Plato divides the soul into two parts, at other times into three. His twofold division of soul refers to the two selves or minds we discuss in the first part of our occult studies course, the Higher Self being divine and immortal, the lower self material and perishable. The occult students among our readers will understand this statement, for they know that their earthly personality perishes after the death of the body while the incorruptible Higher Self becomes more purified with each incarnation. When Plato divides the soul into three parts he mostly (but not always) refers to the trinity of Soul, Higher Self and lower self or body.

Following the method used in the Mysteries, Plato's pupils began their discipline by purifying the lower self, that is learning to control their thoughts and desires and attain a balance between the material and spiritual as we discuss in our article on Inner Peace through applied Wisdom. This process strengthens the lower mind, which then gravitates toward the Higher Self, itself indissolubly connected with its "Father in Heaven", the Divine Soul. Plato promised his pupils that this form of discipline would eventually free them from the bonds of the senses and the passions of the lower self. But he also warned them that if this discipline were neglected and the Higher Self were allowed to sink deeper and deeper into matter by gravitating toward the lower self and body, the time would come when the Higher Self itself would be lost.

Plato's philosophy is ethical above all else, based upon the idea of man's free will and power of choice. He claims that it is this power of choice which determines a man's parentage, his hereditary tendencies, his physical constitution and his early education, since all of these things are merely the effects of choices made in former lives. These choices also determine the man's stage of evolution, show the position he should occupy in the well-ordered state, and indicate the particular virtue necessary for his immediate development. The whole problem of evolution, according to Plato, is one of ethics. As the ultimate aim of every man is to free himself from the tyranny of his lower nature, and as this can only be accomplished through the efforts of the individual, each man is the arbiter of his own destiny. For each of us has the free will to develop those virtues which are most necessary for our evolution.

The natural inequalities among men, due to their past choices, divides them, in Plato's view, into three classes. The first class lives in its sensations. The particular virtue to be developed by this class of people is temperance, or moderation. The second class is entangled in its passional nature. These people are the slaves of their pains and pleasures, their hopes and fears. They must develop courage and fortitude, virtues which will enable them to meet all the vicissitudes of life with equanimity and patience. The third and highest class is made up of those men who have gained control over their lower nature and who live naturally in the Higher mind. These men should aspire to wisdom, or spiritual knowledge.

It will be obvious that one could divide humanity into 30 or 300 classes and not cover all the possible and probable differences between them, but Plato's division into three has the merit of both simplicity and truth, as you will know if you study your fellow human beings. It is possible that Plato learned this fundamental truth in Egypt, or India, both civilisations that developed caste systems based on similar divisions, though in the case of India, the original reasons for this were lost, with the terrible results we see today where the higher castes prey upon and abuse the lower, despite the best (or worst) efforts of the government to eradicate the caste system.

Nonetheless, the principle is a good one, for as we have pointed out in several of our articles, and Plato clearly knew, the much-vaunted modern concept of 'equality' is a dangerous delusion with no basis in universal law. Men and women are profoundly unequal in every way: physically, emotionally, mentally and spiritually because each is at a different stage in their evolution, as Plato knew and taught.

After analysing the three divisions of the soul and the three classes of individuals who correspond to them, Plato then turns his attention to the State, which is merely a collection of individuals. We say the same in our article on How Peace leads to war. Plato believed that the ideal state should be divided up into three classes of citizens, each class having its own particular duty to be performed and its special virtue to be developed. When each class concentrates upon its own duty and virtue, there will result a well-balanced and harmonious state in which all will work, not for themselves alone, but for the common good of the whole.

The lowest class in Plato's ideal state is composed of those men whose interests are focused in their sensations. These are the labourers and artisans, whose immediate task it is to acquire skill in action upon the physical plane. The second class is composed of those who, having dominant passional natures, are constantly at war in themselves. Plato would make these men the warriors of the nation, thus giving them the opportunity to develop the courage and fortitude necessary at their stage of evolution. The ruling class is made up of those who have learned how to govern themselves, and are therefore fitted to govern others. As he says in the Republic, "unless philosophers become rulers or rulers become true and thorough students of philosophy, there will be no end to the troubles of states and of humanity."

There will no doubt be some among our readers who find these ideas both 'elitist' and abhorrent. We have no wish to change their minds, though we would point out to them that there is nothing demeaning or inferior in being a labourer. Nor is the ideal philosopher envisioned by Plato superior to those who work in the fields, on a building site, or cleaning drains. All are equally necessary in a well-ordered society and each performs a vital function. Is a blood cell 'inferior' to the heart whose function depends upon it? Is a drone in a beehive inferior to the Queen without which it would perish for lack of nourishment? Let us look to the laws of Nature for our inspiration as to how a state should be organised and governed and not to the laws of men, which are often unjust, ill-conceived and ineffectual.

Plato's ideal state was modelled after the form of government which prevailed in the Golden Age, when the young and growing nations of the earth were governed by wise King-Initiates. In this, men but followed the Divine Order and Laws of the Universe under a greater King, the Father of All. Now they follow their own mistaken fancies, prompted by the lowest desires and passions of their animal selves. You decide which is the better, fairer and wiser system!

In the final part of this investigation we conclude our discussion of the teachings of Plato.

occult mysteries