/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14937083]

>The One can not be involved in activities as it would compromise its unity
>The One creates the Second Principle by manifestsing an external activity as an internal activity
So which is the right one? Why does this moron keep contradicting himself several times throughout the book?

[Anonymous No.14937169]

>>14937083
Plotinus also contradicts himself when he says that one can only attain to the realm of the eternal Ideas and he warns against trying to go further but then elsewhere he also talks about complete union with the One such that there is no distinction or multiplicity left; and he also refers to the soul as hypernoetic or beyond mind which is supposed to only refer to the One. I believe it is because the Enneads span a long portion of his life and so they document his changing ideas and positions over the course of his life, i.e. it's not one coherent and completely internally-consistent metaphysical framework which is why most of the later Neoplatonists draw from it while also critiquing its holes.

[Anonymous No.14937185]

Bump

[Anonymous No.14937213]

>>14937169
Going "beyond the one" is already a contradiction since The One inglobes everything i can't wrap my head around how a mere soul could go further than the created universe.

[Anonymous No.14937303]

>>14937083
Read theory incel

[Anonymous No.14937318]

>>14937213
If you’re looking at or conceiving of the One as something separate from yourself, then where are YOU?

This is going beyond the One.

[Anonymous No.14937411]

It's because Being is Rest and Motion, Likeness and Unlikeness.
But the One is beyond Being, beyond Rest and Motion, beyond Likeness and Unlikeness.
It is solved in Plotinus use of Hypostasis.
Nous/Being and Soul is the One, but the One is not Nous nor Soul.
This is further purified in Damascius' Henads, the Ineffable One is all things yet not all things; all things are, yet there's only the One: the One is not, there's only the All—threefold Nothingeness, a threefold Allness, a threefold One.
Unity with the One is not to dissapear in oneness but to find your destiny your beauty in the hierarchy of being, this then is your fulfillmentm and you perfection is your overflowing into Mind, into Soul, into the Cosmos, into Body, into Matter, and return, recur, live to die. die to live.
Then transcend it all through the freedom of the Will of the Good, unto the next Divine Age.

[Anonymous No.14937438]

>>14937411
should have proofread that, reading this must have been how porphyry felt editing plotinus

[Anonymous No.14937522]

>>14937411
>Unity with the One is not to dissapear in oneness but to find your destiny your beauty in the hierarchy of being, this then is your fulfillmentm and you perfection is your overflowing into Mind, into Soul, into the Cosmos, into Body, into Matter, and return, recur, live to die. die to live.
This is you reading your own vision into Neoplatonism where the highest aim is to live and enjoy existence in the world of multiplicity when the actual Neoplatonists regarded attaining union with the One as the highest aim of man. Can you please stop misrepresenting your own views as being standard Neoplatonism?

[Anonymous No.14937587]

>>14937083
You know, it's not very useful to say that two things are in contradiction without actually explaining how. People who actually know what they're talking about will have little idea where the supposed contradiction is supposed to be. So, how about you elaborate, OP?

[Anonymous No.14937623]

>>14937587
creating and not being involved in activity are mutually exclusive

[Anonymous No.14937670]

>>14937522
Unity with the Good is merely the end of the journey of our ten thousand year emanation from Nous, but the ten thousand years are One, time is an phenomenon of embodiment we are already there we are already blessed we (our lower self) just don't remember. To say that the whole of eternity is an accident that we must amend is to trivialize the Will One; which is nothing but the One, the will for all to be. To say that union wit the Good is the only reason for us being here is to imply that the whole process was unnecessary and evil and that the One should have stayed Absolutely One and lifeless.
Plato, Republic: 519c to 520e
Enneads: 2.9.13
then the entirety of Enneads 6.7 (38) and 6:8 (39) .

[Anonymous No.14937761]

>>14937623
The One doesn't "create" in a conventional sense. It is an act of spontaneous origination that is not subject to causality. The One is like an architect in that, although the architect designs the house, he is not involved in its construction, and his designing of the house in no way necessitates that it should be built; and he is not constrained by any particular design. But even this explanation is insufficient, because guess what, human rational faculties cannot grasp that which defies all understanding and categorization.

[Anonymous No.14937810]

>>14937670
That's Plato's attitude in that section, but Plotinus took a notably more ascetic attitude, as is clearly demonstrated by his writings (equating matter with evil etc) and his life as described by Porphyry; despite all the coping denials of certain Neoplatonists to the contrary. Plato is also making a strawman argument there, to say that union with the Good is the reason for us being here does not automatically entail that the One should have stayed lifeless or that it would be lifeless if we had never descended into bodies, because the One's or God's actual experience as a living eternal entity can be one of eternal Bliss which is certainly not lifeless; and whatever the transient pleasures and amusements one encounters here are simply incomparable to that exalted state, to which it is possible for the soul to return to; the transient seems meaningful until the dawn of wisdom at which point one realizes that the Unlimited and Eternal is the highest end of the soul, not chasing desires and contemplating the Unlimited as something different from It in life after life.

[Anonymous No.14937832]

Why do people bother with this autistic shite. Just read Man and His Becoming according to Vedanta.

[Anonymous No.14937865]

>>14937810
>equating matter with evil
that's entirely allegorical, plotinus doesn't actually believe in "evil", only 'lesser good'; matter is the lowest good.

[Anonymous No.14937867]

>>14937761
>It is an act of spontaneous origination that is not subject to causality.
Just because something originates spontaneously doesn't mean that the thing from which it originates can magically create without being involved in that activity, originate is synonymous with creation, saying something is originated spontaneously only eliminates that creation being the production of deliberation, not the fact that it still constitutes an activity. It's still a contradiction with his claim that the One is uninvolved in activity.

[Anonymous No.14937899]

>>14937810
read corpus hermeticum book 5

[Anonymous No.14937916]

>>14937867
>>14937761
>>14937899

[Anonymous No.14937926]

>>14937867
>originate is synonymous with creation
This is just semantics. There's no English word that properly expresses the concept.

[Anonymous No.14938011]

>>14937926
The argument stands intact, the word 'originate' simply means to produce or to begin not the idea of being able to produce something else without acting. The failure to how explain how it's not a contradiction indicates that it is not an internally-consistent metaphysics.

[Anonymous No.14938056]

>>14938011
No, you just lack any sense of epistemological humility.

[Anonymous No.14938075]

>>14937411
>>14937438
>>14937670
>>14937865
you should become a christian platonist anon, that's the end game

[Anonymous No.14938084]

>>14938011
>something beyond knowledge is paradoxical, and can't truly be explained, is therefore not real
kys thomist

[Anonymous No.14938099]

>>14938075
there are too many holes; and I refuse Protestantism, it's peak arrogance

[Anonymous No.14938120]

>>14937867
>Just because something originates spontaneously doesn't mean that the thing from which it originates can magically create without being involved in that activity
read spinoza, brainlet

[Anonymous No.14938190]

>>14938084
I'm not a Thomist, if one is trying to posit a metaphysics which upon closer inspection defies logic and common sense than one should explicitly admit a principle which has a role in that metaphysics which explains why there is actually no contradiction like the role Maya has in Vedanta (equivalent teachings can be found in variants of Sufism and Tantra among other schools). The non-existence of any principle or teaching which coherently delimits and explains exactly why there is not really a contradiction simply indicates that the metaphysics being posited is flawed and/or incomplete, the better schools of metaphysics don't have these contradictions.
>>14938120
if he had a good argument explaining how it's not nonsense you would have posted it already

[Anonymous No.14938215]

>>14938099
who said anything about protestantism? just get into theurgic liturgy

[Anonymous No.14938247]

>>14938190
dude it's 2020 how do you still believe in causation

[Anonymous No.14938302]

The problem with Neoplatonism, and the reason why Gnosticism (and Christianity) is more interesting, is that in Neoplatonism there is no narrative, no conflict and hence no dynamism. Gnosticism depicts a grand narrative where the sparks of light are trapped in the world of darkness created by mystake by evil cosmic forces and must find their way back to the light world in a world ruled by evil archons and their proxies and Christianity (influenced by Zoroastrianism) depicts a grand cosmic conflict between the forces of good and evil, in which all souls are called to take sides in the final batte. Whereas Neoplatonism is like, oh, everything is good and perfect, the gods are all good, are all friendly and nice to each other. Evil doesn't exist. Everything is in love and harmony... Meh.

[Anonymous No.14938392]

>>14938247
I never said that I did

[Anonymous No.14938406]

>>14938302
>The problem with Neoplatonism, and the reason why Gnosticism (and Christianity) is more interesting, is that in Neoplatonism there is no narrative, no conflict and hence no dynamism.
the same could be said for reading religious literature in comparision to reading fiction or watching sports

[Anonymous No.14938429]

>>14938406
No because fiction and sports don't claim to be an account of or revelation about the world and the place of man in it.

[Anonymous No.14938447]

>>14938429
Yes fiction does lol

[Anonymous No.14938453]

>>14938406
>there is no narrative

What about the Neoplatonic appropriation of Homer and the Orphic myths?

[Anonymous No.14938526]

>>14938453
It retcons and allegorize the shit out of them, rendering them harmless. Even the titanomachy is interpreted as the intellectual gods vs the gods that preside over generation, but they actually cooperating, they are not really fighting! Oh no, we can't have fights in the kindergarten! It reminds me of that Stallone movie where he is frozen in time and wakes up in the future where everyone if s o y 'ed and effeminate. If Homer were frozen and woke up in the era of Plotinus and Proclus he would be Stallone.

[Anonymous No.14938826]

The Mind has all content and yet thinks and has ideas. The mind is the mind yet it dreams effortlessly. The east is so focused on meditation that it does not hold the mind as thinker as much as the west asserts.

[Anonymous No.14938926]

>>14938302
I think I'll take the grand narratives of the Indo-European gods and myths than Gnosticism or Christianity.

[Anonymous No.14938965]

>>14938302
Evil is a jewish concept, before christianity there was no equivalent of ultimate evil nor was it represented as a human-like being (i.e. satan or the devil), the ancients weren't simply hard wired to care about evil until christianity came along and brainwashed us into thinking life is a struggle again the evil forces of hell.

[Anonymous No.14938980]

>>14938302
Sounds pretty based actually. A proper separation between narrative and metaphysics just means one is open to adopt a secular worldview that does not force one into world denying slave morality while also not contradicting the spiritual path.

Neo-Platonism achieves what we all wish Buddhism could.

[Anonymous No.14939153]

>>14938215
eschatology
eternal impassable god going from creating to not creating
eternal impassable logos going from not in hypostatic union to being hypostatic union
god sending bears to kill bantering children
god freely and willingly creating satan knowing that he will be doomed eternally in tartarus, the same wit all other doomed angels and souls; a good god would only create the lives that would choose good (this has nothing to do with free-will).

[Anonymous No.14939156]

>>14938215
>>14938302
>the whole trinity are equals
>except two of them are caused by the Father
>they don't even participate in their own emanation from him
>in a way they aren't by themselves God but rather borrow/receive eternally the Father's power (they aren't the founts of their own power)
>"What the Father is, the Son and the Spirit are also." except the above, whoops
>but they're all God in the singular, yes
>and we made God an impersonal Godhead ignoring that what we call a god is the person, the who is the god, not their nature; many gods can be co-natured or co-caused, all the angels are co-natured but we don't go around saying all the angels are some singular infinitarian entity.
>did I mentioned that the father is ontologically prior the Son and Spirit?
[ontological priority has nothing to with "before" and "after"]
>but they somehow exist in each other, this can only be explained as the trinity being the eternal pure act of the potential of the godhead
>but the Father is super-essential yet he is defined by the nature of the Trinity
>he is the first principle of all things including the trinity itself
>did I mention that the Godhead subsists in the Father not the other way around, but the father isn't subsistence, since the divine substance is without subsistence :bro:
>did I say that the Father is ontologically prior his nature? :think:
>without subsistence :browdy:
>but yet the Logos is the subsistence of his two natures, but he doesn't partake in the generation of the Godhead, but he is their subsistence, logical.
>the Logos subsists in the Father, being the perfect image of the Father, his act; "The action of each is the action of all."
>but the father is also pure act (according to Aquinas, since the whole trinity is pure act)
>the Father's act is the eternal emanation of the Trinity, except himself
>the nature of god is the whatness of god except this and that and this and that and this, "what does the nature do?" uuh eem aahh
>the nature of God is actualized from out of the Father, for in Christian ontology the subject precedes the object Schopenhauer having a tantrum.
>the father is a sitting paradox, it's a big mystery you're not allowed to know :bro:
>the father isn't inherently unknowable he just doesn't want to be known (light behind the clouds, also the son and spirit knows the father completely, ergo: he isn't inherently ineffable, which means he's limited in someway for otherwise he wouldn't be knowable, I assume "self-limited" whatever that means).
>aka: in theory his uuh person should be fully explainable

[Anonymous No.14939246]

>>14938526
the titanomachy is a lower expression of the sundered One being partition of the Limited from the Unlimited, the titans are fighting the gods, they are just ignorant of the reality that they're merely mirroring an aspect of the Intelligible, that being antitheses of all opposites. Neoplatonism only adds the greater providence of all evil working towards good that is beyond our and their comprehension: whatever error we think we weave into destiny the Fates will compose into beauty and harmony. This is how music works, dissonance producing beauty; each opposite in their absolute selves in a vaccum of themselves (which is only found in the lower spheres) "hates" and fights their opposites, but all oppostes are returned to the original divine Harmony at the end of every cosmic Age/Aeon/Cycle. The conflict of opposites is an illusion in the Intelligible. This is also what Damascius solved in his Unified-One being equal and before and after the Limited-one and Unlimited-One, together being the three Henads. It's also in an Ineffable way the antitheses of himself that sunders Being into the lower spheres; this is symbolized by the sundering of Dionysus, in the eternal event from which all Souls are born (which also makes Jesus' passion a walk in the park).
Likewise the narrative of every Soul is to rebuild Dionysus through Virtue and commence his cosmic rebirth, and to not be virtuous is to sin since you're stalling the coming next Age.

[Anonymous No.14939366]

>>14939156
>>14939153
lmao the notion you have of it is not only wrong but a caricature; the father is not unknowable but is only knowable through the Son in the Spirit; they are hypostatically distinct but not essentially and yes their essence is not unknowable but supra-unknowable

>god freely and willingly creating satan
God does not create evil; God is The Good, and I suppose you are familiar with what it implies, right?

>eternal impassable god going from creating to not creating/eternal impassable logos going from not in hypostatic union to being hypostatic union
simple mystery of kenosis
emptying a superabundance does not empty it whatsoever.

''the deification of human nature is provided by the Incarnation of God, which makes man God to the same degree as God Himself became man. ...Let us become the image of the one whole God, bearing nothing earthly in ourselves, so that we may consort with God and become gods, receiving from God our existence as gods.''

the true christian achieves what platonists have always tried to transmit in perfection but always failed, and all of this is by reason of Christ's Incarnation

[Anonymous No.14939379]

>>14939366
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things. Isaiah 47:7

[Anonymous No.14939386]

>>14939379
*45:7

[Anonymous No.14939411]

>>14939366
by FREELY and WILLINGLY creating life that he knows will produce evil, he being the cause of that life is the cause of its evil, since the life didn't have to exist. He FREELY creates every soul knowing what its future will be.

[Anonymous No.14939429]

>>14939246
" At the same time however, it is no less possible to conceive, that the
perfect number of time will then accomplish a perfect year, when the
celerities of all the eight periods being terminated with reference to each
other, shall have a summit, as they are measured by the circle of that
which subsists according to the same and the similar."

After the demiurgic generation of the spheres, the period of the seven bodies, the animation of them, and the order which the father inserted in them, and also after the various motions of them, the temporal measures of their several periods, and the differences of their apocatastases; the discussion proceeds to the monad of the temporal multitude, and to the one number according to which all motion is measured, under which all other measures are comprehended, and according to which all the life of the world, the all-various evolution of bodies, and the whole of the psychical life, are defined, conformably to an all-perfect period. This period however, ought not to be surveyed doxasticallv, by adding myriads to myriads of years. For thus some are accustomed to speak of it, assuming the accurate apocatastasis of the Moon, and in a similar manner of the Sun, and then adding
the one to the other, and afterwards adding to these, the apocatastases of Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn ; and in the last place, the apocatastasis of the inerratic sphere, to the one common apocatastasis of the planets. After this manner therefore they speak, if the apocatastatic times compared with each other are primary. But if they are not primary, then assuming a common measure, they see according to what numbers this measures each of the given apocatastatic times, and by the number according to which it measures the less of the times they multiply the greater, but by the number according to which it measures the greater, they multiply the less; and thus they have from both multiplication the common time of the apocatastasis of both, and which also is measured by both.

[Anonymous No.14939454]

>>14939429
It is not proper however, to survey merely and alone after this manner, the whole mundane time, but to survey scientifically by intellect, and the discursive energies of reason, one number, one evolved power, and one perfective progression, extending to all the life of the world; and this proceeding to the end, returning to the beginning, and converging to itself; and on this account making the measured motion to be circular. For as the monad bounds the infinity of number, and antecedently comprehends the indefiniteness of the duad, thus also time measures the whole motion, and converts the end of it to the beginning. Hence also it is called a number, and perfect. For a month is a number, and likewise a year, but not a perfect number: for they are parts of other numbers. But the time of the period of the universe is perfect, because it is not a part of any period, but is a whole, in order that it may imitate eternity. For eternity is primarily a wholeness. It introduces however, to beings at once all its wholeness; but time with extension. For the temporal wholeness is an evolution of the wholeness which abides conglomerated in eternity. The whole mundane time therefore, measures the one life of the universe, according to which all the celerities are terminated of the celestial and sublunary circles. For in these also, there are periods, which have for the summit of their apocatastasis the lation of the circle of the same. For they are referred to this as to their principle, because it is the most simple of all. For the apocatastases are surveyed with reference to the points of it. Thus for instance, all of them make their apocatastasis about the equinoctial point, or about the summer tropic; or though the joint apocatastasis should not be considered to be according to the same point, but with reference to the same, when for instance, rising, or culminating, yet all of them will have with reference In it, a figure of such a kind. For now thepresent order is entirely a certain apocatastasis of all the heavenly bodies, yet the configuration is not seen about the same, but with reference to the same point. Once however, it was about the same, and according to one certain point; at which if it should again take place, the whole of time, will have an end. One certain apocatastasis likewise, seems to have been mentioned. Hence it is said, that Cancer is the horoscope of the world, and this year is called Cynic, or pertaining to the dog, because among the constellations, the splendid star of the Dog rises together with Cancer.

[Anonymous No.14939462]

>>14939379
>>14939411
evil can only exist in what is good; if there was no good there wouldn't be evil but not the opposite brainlet; evil leeches good, it lives off it, its own being, its force to cause evil is derived from what is good and if there was no possibility to even deviate from good nothing of it would be good or resemble the Good;

and yeah, he is the lord of ALL things, nothing exists apart from him because everything depends on that which confers existence.

[Anonymous No.14939475]

>>14939454
If therefore the planets should again meet in the same point of Cancer, this concurrence will be one period of the universe. If however, the apocatastasis takes place in Cancer about the equinoctial point, that also which is from the summer tropic, will be directed towards the summer tropic, and the number of the one will be equal to the number of the other, and the time of the one, to the time of the other. For each of them is one period, and is defined by quantity, on account of the order of the bodies that are moved. And thus much concerning the one time of the universe, which measures all corporeal motions; in the same manner as the world measures psychical, and eternity intellectual lives. It is likewise evident from what has been said, what this one time is, whence it derives its subsistence, and what benefit it affords to the universe. In addition however, to what has been said, it must be observed, that this perfect number differs from that mentioned in the Republic, which comprehends the period of every divinely generated nature; since it is of a more partial nature, and is apocatastatic of the eight periods alone. For or the other perfect number comprehends the peculiar motions of the fixed stars, and in short, of all the divine genera that are moved in the heavens, whether visibly or invisibly, and also of the celestial genera posterior to the Gods, and of the longer or shorter periods of sublunary natures, together with the periods of fertility and sterility. Hence likewise, it is the lord of the period of the human race.

[Anonymous No.14939485]

>>14937670
Anyone who seeks the Good has no excuse for not becoming Christian, unless they never heard of Christ.

[Anonymous No.14939486]

>>14939462
>evil has existence
oi vey, sounds like heresy

[Anonymous No.14939512]

>>14939486
not by itself; what is difficult about understanding it? i made it clear in the very first sentence of my post

[Anonymous No.14939525]

>>14939429
And what autism might this be?

[Anonymous No.14939531]

>>14939485
I'm agnostic of christ, and I believe words in my head or confessions, under no danger to state them, is not faith. Action is faith, true belief is virtue; and I believe Christ (if he reals) couldn't give less of a fuck whether someone who saves another life tells themselves that Christ is real or not but whether they save that life out of love or not.

[Anonymous No.14939540]

>>14939485
Except that Christianity is complete nonsense and no amount of Neo-Platonic copypaste will change that. Behind all the attempted fluff through the use of Neoplatonism hides Christianity.

[Anonymous No.14939548]

>>14939512
if god chooses to create a soul he knows will do evil, then god willingly causes evil by causing the person who does evil. If the act is evil, then perpetrator is evil, then the act of creating the perpetrator is itself evil.
It is orthodox and catholic doctrine that God freely creates every soul, therefore he could easily have created a soul he didn't foresee would do evil.

[Anonymous No.14939549]

>>14939153
Fuck it, I'm drunk. I'm into this. Tell me about calvin my lad.

[Anonymous No.14939552]

>>14939549
i know as little about Calvinism as Calvinists do

[Anonymous No.14939557]

>>14939462
This is why Christianity makes no sense. Sorry but no matter how hard you try, the square peg of Christianity with its personal God will never fit in the round hole of Neoplatonism.

Lose the Bible or lose Neoplatonism. Don't try and juggle both.

[Anonymous No.14939576]

>>14939557
the one is meta-personal, if anything it's the christian Father and Godhead that is impersonal by behind utterly outside the individual. One can only interact with the human side of Son and his Logoi.

[Anonymous No.14939600]

>>14939548
Either all souls should be saved (they aren't according to dogma) or the christian god is evil (as the bible claims he is), and if this is the case then the gnostics are right, but the gnostics are retarded for other reasons: ergo Christianity as taught by Orthodoxy/Catholicism is false. But the bible proves that either of these must the true churches, so therefore the bible is not (wholly) divine inspiration.

[Anonymous No.14939655]

>>14939600
>Either all souls should be saved (they aren't according to dogma)
God wants all souls to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4) and has given them the means to salvation by writing the law upon their hearts, so none are with excuse (Romans 2:15 and Hebrews 10:16.).
It's up to the individuals to work out their salvation, with fear and trembling. There is no excuse and no way to accuse God of injustice.

>>14939548
Each soul is morally responsible for his own deeds, your mama is not responsible for your evil, even if she had a part in your creation and knew you'd screw up in life. Knowing X doesn't make you responsible for X.

> therefore he could easily have created a soul he didn't foresee would do evil.
God is merciful and wants even the defective to know him. He turns sinners into saints.
Whatever transient evil exists will end up serving the eternal good. There is no excuse and no accusation left.

[Anonymous No.14939677]

>>14939540
Christianity has no use for neo-platonism and it's errors.

>>14939531
Faith is not just words in your head. Faith is a deep internal orientation towards something higher. Faith changes you and breeds action. When the creature correctly orients itself to it's Creator then it can live the life it was meant to live and pursue the Good sincerely and consistently.
Again, anyone who seeks the Good has no excuse for not becoming Christian, unless they never heard of Christ. There's no way around this, it doesn't mean you're damned, it just means you're being dishonest or deeply ignorant on some level.

[Anonymous No.14939682]

>>14939655
God knew what my acts would be my mum didn't. As I said this has nothing to do with free-will: before every Soul is made God chooses for it to exist, he chooses for the soul to live a life the be in hell for an eternity. And if the Soul's evil has some divine purpose in the plan, then why is it doomed for eternity for fulfilling some necessary good?
God freely choosing to create every soul in-spite of the unnecessary evil it will do combined with it being eternally doomed, is an evil paradox of Church doctrine. This god is not great.

[Anonymous No.14939713]

>>14939557
your calling it ''neoplatonism'' manifests how gullible you are for falling into protestant terminology of a legitimate tradition;
>it makes no sense
and that is why christianity ends up being superior because it is perfect and genuine apophasis. platonism (respectful and true philosophy) starts in certainty to end up in faith, christianity starts in faith to end up in certainty; the essence of christianity is the very mystery of Him, Who is elusively transcendent to our grasp.

>>14939548
>>14939600
are you even a platonist? because this is fundamentally exactly the same in platonism; the bond of causality is not in action but in essence, so to speak; if the One is The Good then why not all souls return directly to it but need to pass through different epsitrophes

[Anonymous No.14939757]

>>14939713
Because every eternal soul chooses to be in whatever state it is in. Nor is unity with the Good a state of being since the Good is beyond states of Being. You are with the Good whenever yourself is good and virtuous. All acts of creation is the Good, every good is the Good. To behold the divine light is to become the divine light, to becoming a shining light for others.

>“It is the duty of us, the founders, then,” said I, “to compel the best natures to attain the knowledge which we pronounced the greatest, and to win to the vision of the good, to scale that ascent, and when they have reached the heights and taken an adequate view, we must not allow what is now permitted.” “What is that?” “That they should linger there,” I said, “and refuse to go down again1 among those bondsmen and share their labors and honors, whether they are of less or of greater worth.” “Do you mean to say that we must do them this wrong, and compel them to live an inferior life when the better is in their power?” You have again forgotten,1 my friend,” said I, “that the law is not concerned with the special happiness of any class in the state, but is trying to produce this condition in the city as a whole, harmonizing and adapting the citizens to one another by persuasion and compulsion, and requiring them to impart to one another any benefit which they are severally able to bestow upon the community, and that it itself creates such men in the state, not that it may allow each to take what course pleases him, but with a view to using them for the binding together of the commonwealth.” “True,” he said, “I did forget it.” “Observe, then, Glaucon,” said I, “that we shall not be wronging, either, the philosophers who arise among us, but that we can justify our action when we constrain them to take charge of the other citizens and be their guardians.

[Anonymous No.14939773]

>>14939713
nor is the purpose of every life to solely return to the good, since that would make the emanation and whole of being as a whole pointless in itself

[Anonymous No.14939780]

>>14939682
Just because eternal torment is popular with a bunch of ignorant people does not mean it is real. The mess of all kinds of different souls is the thing causing disunity in human expressions of reality. People arguing and saying "x is the supreme truth and others are stupid" display their ignorance that God fills all as much as possible. So be set free and know that in you, you may know God better if you keep yourself opened up enough to receive of God all he wishes to give you.

[Anonymous No.14939783]

>>14939682
>he chooses for the soul to live a life the be in hell for an eternity.
God doesn't chose hell for anyone, he gives them the means of salvation, he wants all to be saved as was mentioned already. Anyone in hell goes there willingly and gladly because they intentionally disdain God and all that is good and they prefer their idols and sins above all else.

>God knew what my acts would be my mum didn't.
Knowing something doesn't make you responsible for it's actions specially when we're talking about free-willing creatures that choose between right and wrong.
Get a new argument, you might think blaming God for your deeds works, but it just doesn't.

>God freely choosing to create every soul in-spite of the unnecessary evil it will do combined with it being eternally doomed, is an evil paradox of Church doctrine.
God loves sinners not just saints and wants all to come to the truth. You're faulting him for being merciful and giving bad people a chance?
God is not an elitist, he is merciful to all, even the sick, not just the healthy, and wants all to be saved.

[Anonymous No.14939791]

>>14939780
i've not said torment anywhere, eternal damnation is church doctrine, what that damnation constitutes is unclear, probably not active torment but absence of god from hating him: but the state of hell is irrelevant, it is unpleasant and unwanted; and every soul that goes there didn't have to be made.

[Anonymous No.14939802]

>>14939757
>Because every eternal soul chooses to be in whatever state it is in. Nor is unity with the Good a state of being since the Good is beyond states of Being. You are with the Good whenever yourself is good and virtuous. All acts of creation is the Good, every good is the Good. To behold the divine light is to become the divine light, to becoming a shining light for others
are you even reading what you post? you are a joke
if the Good created what is not ''good and virtuous'' then The Good is not Good or what is not good and not virtuous is the same to what is, and thus the Good is neither good nor bad since theyre not different, according to the logic of your previous posts

[Anonymous No.14939804]

>>14939780
>God fills all as much as possible.
> So be set free and know that in you, you may know God better if you keep yourself opened up enough to receive of God all he wishes to give you.
>But fuck those guys who are exclusive!!! YOU GOTTA BE INCLUSIVE LIKE ME OR ELSE!
Lol.
If God fills all as much as possible you should realize that exclusivity is part of that "fullness". Without religions or philosophies being "exclusivist" they would all fall into syncretic heresies, false prophets, mumbo jumbo alterations and lose whatever kernel of truth they had.
Exclusivity is extremely important since the truth naturally divides between the false and the real, the good and the evil, and creates duality. Even Jesus said he came to divide and bring the sword.
Even you are being exclusivist by denying those who are exclusive in their faith.

[Anonymous No.14939813]

>>14939783
how fucking dense can you be?
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FREE WILL
i'm not talking about god choosing what we do but choosing for us to exist in any shape of form, knowing what WE will choose. If god hadn't chosen for X eternally damned person to exist, then X would never choose to be damned. The ultimate salvation for these souls is to never have existed, BECAUSE GOD FREELY CHOOSES TO CREATE EVERY SOUL, this means he created the damned INSTEAD of a saved sou, for every soul god creates with an evil future he could gave created a infinity of souls with a saved future.
>THIS
>IS
>EVIL
again: >>14939600
Either all souls should be saved for performing some greater good through minor evil or the christian god is evil.
Isaiah 45:7

[Anonymous No.14939815]

>>14939773
then if the Good bestows a télos of what is not the Good itself, of what is a lesser good then the Good is not the Good because it creates, conditions to what is not the Good but lesser and tainted good.

[Anonymous No.14939819]

>>14939802
the good does not create, every Being is self-created and eternal, there is no ex nihilo in platonism, nor does evil exist in platonism, and nor eternal damnation.
All of this is about ex nihilo creation of souls and eternal damnation.

[Anonymous No.14939822]

>>14939791
It doesn't matter because everyone that acts like they have a final condition in evil are deceived and Evil. the thing about evil is that it blinds from the truth because the truth is goodness. Eternal damnation only seems Eternal due to the Turning Away from the eternal. The lack of the truth is a lie. So Eternal damnation is just an age or a few. The divine will drown and overcome all.

[Anonymous No.14939833]

>>14939822
heresy
>>14939815
the good doesn't bestow telos, it is telos.
Lesser good = good, that it is lesser is in itself good since otherwise there would be no 'the Good' because all things are then already equal.

[Anonymous No.14939837]

>>14939813
not the same anon but you are the dense one, i have posted like 4 times about it and you still can't understand;
Being-Life-Intellect are good and human beings participate of it essentially, but if they participate of it and still make evil does it mean that Beng-Life-Intellect are inherently evil?
Man was created with his will in consonance with God's Will, it was not God who damned man, but man damned himself, and without turning to its natural, essential Source, it'll be condemned

[Anonymous No.14939850]

>>14937083

>Thinking ideas need to be reconcilable to be valuable just because they came from the same thinker

The ultimate, and I mean ultimate, pseud filter

[Anonymous No.14939853]

>>14939819
evil does not exist in christianity as well, only by participation in what is good (and this is the same case in platonism);
but again, following your logic, the Good comprehends and sustains everything, The Good also is the Source of all things, does it mean that whatever how I act I am acting in the good way? sucking dicks is as virtuous as practicing philosophy?

[Anonymous No.14939857]

>>14939804
Some see more or less clearly. Those who merely parrots dogmas don't see much at all even if their dogma can express some truth. knowing the truth starts to imply that you see truth everywhere, not just your little dogma that you got told is the truth. Different personality traits make people act different ways. This will be expressed in how they speak of Truth. In that you can already start to see the truth is done first from the soul/subject. Obviously there are better and worse expressions of the truth. Often You may both criticize and praise the same expression.

[Anonymous No.14939860]

>>14939837
again, ffs, this isn't a debate about free will.
The freedom to choose between good and evil is itself good, since otherwise we'd be slaves which would make Necessity evil.

[Anonymous No.14939867]

>>14939833
>nor is the purpose of every life to solely return to the good
>the good doesn't bestow telos, it is telos.
hm

>lesser good = good
carnal good = intellectual and spiritual good?

>good, that it is lesser is in itself good since otherwise there would be no 'the Good' because all things are then already equal.
and the most remote good is itself derived from the good right? A being with intellect and soul is good but another being with also intellect and soul doing evil things is completely evil and lack all trace of goodness?

[Anonymous No.14939869]

>>14939853
the good is not everything, that is monism.
The One is the Cause of everything and the Good is the telos of everything, it is not also each thing.
But yes, all acts as being act as whole will be transfigured into good that transcend the evil done, and the soul who did it will be in hades (a bad life) for a LIMITED amount of time, not forever.

[Anonymous No.14939889]

>>14939869
Eternal Damnation necessitates that the deed was absolutely evil. But in Platonism eternal damnation doesn't exist since all acts has good in them, and al souls have good deeds.

[Anonymous No.14939894]

>>14939869
It does seem that people do not consider the reality is discursive and becoming. They objectivize the truth and reality. They see one part and claim that it is the whole. They stumble over the rock of Truth.

[Anonymous No.14939900]

>>14939867
>>lesser good = good
This means nothing but that the lowest good is made perfect by being in its proper rank and performing its telos. Like Body should be ruled by soul, and irrational soul should be under rational soul, as Plato in Republic and Laws show. The lower virtues aren't lost when doing the hieratic virtues, rather to reach the highest all your being must be in order.

[Anonymous No.14939912]

>>14939869
>>14939900
ignoring all my points and your own contradictions

>LIMITED amount of time, not forever.
hell is a mystery and no one can understand it some christians support (and I am inclined to accept as well) apokatastasis, which wouldn't make hell eternal

[Anonymous No.14939935]

>>14939912
Maximus' apokatastasis isn't universal salvation.
And universal salvation was made heresy in one of the Ecumenical Councils, even though Peter says all will be saved. Again all of this is against Orthodoxy/Catholicism, one of which has to be true if Christ and the Bible is true.
"Christians" who believe in universal salvation are heretics, even if that is the actually true "secret doctrine" that the holy spirit hasn't disclosed for some reason. Acts 3:21 is against christian doctrine.

[Anonymous No.14939958]

>>14937670
That's a very nice painting anon, who made it?

[Anonymous No.14939976]

>>14939958
The Pioneer
Painting by Frederick McCubbin

[Anonymous No.14939983]

>>14939935
there is not annihilation of essence which is always good, but of what perverts it

[Anonymous No.14940036]

>>14939813
>>14939682
>>14939600
>Either all souls should be saved (they aren't according to dogma) or the christian god is evil (as the bible claims he is)
>THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FREE WILL
>i'm not talking about god choosing what we do but choosing for us to exist in any shape of form, knowing what WE will choose

What happens to mankind has no bearing on God himself, he doesn't become "better" if everyone is saved, nor does he become "evil" if everyone is damned. Man's actions are his own and the consequences that follow are judged righteously and even mercifully by God. So there is no room to complain or make excuses.

>If god hadn't chosen for X eternally damned person to exist, then X would never choose to be damned. The ultimate salvation for these souls is to never have existed
non existence is not salvation. everyone will be judged righteously and even mercifully, so there is nothing to complain about.

> And if the Soul's evil has some divine purpose in the plan, then why is it doomed for eternity for fulfilling some necessary good?
God is not utilitarian, you can't buy your way into heaven.

[Anonymous No.14940061]

>>14940036

[Anonymous No.14940077]

>>14940036
>a personal fully human god isn't held to his own rules
Woe to you Scribes and Pharisees, pretenders, who are like white tombs, which from the outside appear lovely, but from within are full of the bones of the dead and all corruption! So also you from the outside appear to the children of men as righteous, and from within are filled with evil and hypocrisy.

[Anonymous No.14940084]

>>14940077
>>a personal fully human god isn't held to his own rules
Where did God sin?

[Anonymous No.14940114]

>>14940084
by creating souls he had no reason to create knowing what evil they would become, a future he creates by choosing for it, out of an infinity of potential futures, to be.
This is without excuse. And it has nothing to do with allowing the soul to choose evil once it already exists.

[Anonymous No.14940140]

>>14940114
>out of an infinity of potential futures, to be.
yes, exactly; and this is where lies God's goodness.
you ignored all my posts about your behaving like an relativist, you don't even seem know what platonism is

[Anonymous No.14940145]

>>14940140
wtf does this have to do with platonism?

[Anonymous No.14940172]

>>14939525
Proclus ET Propositions 199-200.

[Anonymous No.14940176]

>>14940114
So now you're saying God is evil for judging evil people correctly? Try again, your argument is deficient.

>he chooses the future
Again you want to blame him for the choices of free-willing agents. Not gonna work. The future God creates is far beyond our comprehension or the transient evil deeds of some wicked people.

[Anonymous No.14940185]

>>14940145
because the concept evil is exactly the same in both platonism and christianity

[Anonymous No.14940188]

>>14939525
Proclus ET Propositions 199-200.

[Anonymous No.14940198]

>>14940185
evil is both privation in platonism and christianity but the view that platonism and christianity has of privation isn't the same, for example Ananke and the Faates doesn't damn me for eternity for one short life's errors.

[Anonymous No.14940214]

>>14940198
i didn't think platonists could be so earthly and be devoid of any mystical sensibility, you think and are stubborn like a modern materialist

[Anonymous No.14940217]

>>14940214
this problem wouldn't exist if souls pre-existed their incarnation into fallen nature

[Anonymous No.14940580]

This thread took a bad turn once all the Christian neoplatonists arrived. The neoplatonist anon provides neoplatonist understanding. The Christian neoplatonist wants more asses in the pews.

One attempts to share in wisdom. The other attempts subversion for the sake of his YHWH god.

[Anonymous No.14940594]

>>14939860
Christians attempts to get to heaven where they no longer have a choice to choose between Good and Evil, otherwise it wouldn't be Christian heaven. And by this logic heaven is slavery and makes Necessity evil.

As such the Christian religion should be rejected.

[Anonymous No.14940637]

>>14940594
In heaven we are already healed , so all our actions and choices are good like prior to the fall.

Anyone who sins is a slave to sin. That's the only slavery that really matters. When you stop sinning you are set free.

[Anonymous No.14941733]

>>14940637
Nice moving of goalposts. Go be a slave in heaven.

[Anonymous No.14942161]

>>14937916
The One is the witness

[Anonymous No.14942256]

>>14938302
There is no grand narrative. All distinctions and divisions of the phenomenal world also divide the nature of the One.