1 gluttony

8/17/2019 1 Gluttony

1/12

1 Gluttony (γαστρυμαργια, gastrimargia)2 Fornication (πορνεια, porneia)3 Avarice ( φιλαργυρια, philarguria)

4 Anger (θυμος, thumos)5 Sadness (λυπη ρκαιρος, lupe akairos) ἄ

6 Akedia ( κηδια, akedia) ἀ

7 Vainglory (κενοδοξια, kenodoxia)8 Pride ( περηφανια, hyperephania) ὑ

https://patristicsandphilosophy.wordpress.com/tag/eight-evil-thoughts/Qaq

Eight great fears ( Wyl. ‘jigs p a chen po brgyad ) — the eight great fears a reconsidered to have a n outer aspect and a n inner aspect—the mental delementsthey represent. While the outer fears, or dangers, threaten our life or property, theinner ones e ndanger us sp iritually b y o bstructing or turning us a way from the pathto enlightenment . They a re the fears o f:

1 drowning or water (Wyl. chu )2 thieves (Wyl. mi rgod )3 lions (Wyl. seng ge )4 snakes (Wyl. klu )5 re (Wyl. me )6 spirits or esh-eating demons (Wyl. sha za )7 captivity or imprisonment (Wyl. chad pa )8 elephants (Wyl. glang po )9

Their respective inner counterparts a re:

1 craving or attachment2 wrong or false views3 pride4 envy or jealousy5 hatred or anger

https://patristicsandphilosophy.wordpress.com/tag/eight-evil-thoughts/http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Wyl.http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Enlightenmenthttp://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Attachmenthttp://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Pridehttp://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Jealousyhttp://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Wyl.http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Enlightenmenthttp://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Attachmenthttp://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Pridehttp://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Jealousyhttp://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Angerhttps://patristicsandphilosophy.wordpress.com/tag/eight-evil-thoughts/


2/12

6 doubt7 avarice8 delusion or ignorance9

Another way to think o f them is t o consider the ood of attachment, the thieves o fwrong views, the lion of pride, the snakes o f jealousy, the re of anger, thecarnivorous d emon of doubt, the chains o f miserliness or greed, and the elephantof ignorance.

There was a monastery in the east inhabited solely by S aindhava Sravakas{monks o f the S ammatiya sc hool). At one time there, each evening e very bhiksuwho went for a walk in the g rounds ou tside the m onastery died. Thus themonastery's co ngregation dwindled. One evening a certain novice went to the

walking [26] area, and a black, ugly p isiica demon ap-peared, baring its f angs,and grabbed him by the head. Thinking 'They say that according to theMahayanists, there is so meone who p rotects f rom the eight fears, called Tara. Itake Refuge in Her,' he called on the name of Tara. A black g oddess b randishinga sw ord a ppeared there, and threatened the demon. The demon begged thenovice's p ardon and gave him an iron pot he extracted from under the ground, fullof pearls. From then on, the harm to the monastery st opped.

"Shariputra, suppose that in a certain town in a certain country there was a veryrich m an. He was f ar along in yea rs an d h is wealth was b eyond measure. He h admany elds, houses an d menservants. His own house w as b ig a nd rambling, butit had only one gate. A great many pe ople—a h undred, two hundred, perhaps a smany as ve h undred—lived in the house. The halls an d rooms were o ld a nddecaying, the walls c rumbling, the pillars r otten at their base, and the beams a ndrafters c rooked and aslant. At that time a re suddenly b roke out on all sides,spreading through the rooms o f the house. The sons o f the rich man, ten, twentyperhaps thirty, were inside the house. When the rich m an saw the huge amesleaping up on e very si de, he was g reatly a larmed and fearful and thought tohimself, I can escape to safety through the aming gate, but my so ns a re insidethe burning house enjoying themselves a nd playing games, unaware, unknowing,without alarm or fear. The re is cl osing in on them, suffering and pain threatenthem, yet their minds h ave no sense of loathing or peril and they d o not think o ftrying to escape!

http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Ignorancehttp://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Doubthttp://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Ignorance


3/12

"Shariputra, this r ich man thought to himself, I have strength in my b ody a ndarms. I can wrap them in a robe o r place them on a bench and carry them out ofthe house. And then a gain he thought, this h ouse has o nly one g ate, and

moreover it is na rrow and s mall. My so ns a re ve ry you ng, they h ave nounderstanding, and they love their games, being so engrossed in them that theyare likely to be burned in the re. I must explain to them why I am fearful andalarmed. The house is a lready in ames and I must get them out quickly a nd notlet them be burned up in the re! Having thought in this w ay, he followed his p lanand called to all his so ns, saying, 'You must come out at once!" But though thefather was m oved by pity a nd g ave good words o f instruction, the sons w ereabsorbed in their games and unwilling to heed them. They had no alarm, nofright, and in the end no mind to leave the house. Moreover, they did not

understand what the re was, what the house was, what the danger was. Theymerely raced about this w ay a nd that in play a nd looked at their father withoutheeding him."At that time the rich man had this t hought: the house is a lready in ames f romthis h uge re. If I and my so ns d o not get out at once, we are certain to beburned. I must now invent some expedient means t hat will make it possible forthe children to escape harm. The father understood his so ns and knew whatvarious t oys a nd curious o bjects e ach child customarily liked and what woulddelight them. And so he said to them, 'The kind of playthings yo u like are rare and

hard to nd. If you do not take them when you can, you will surely regret it later.For example, things l ike these goat-carts, deer-carts a nd ox-carts. They areoutside the gate now where yo u ca n p lay with them. So you m ust come o ut of thisburning house at once. Then whatever ones yo u want, I will give them all to you!'"At that time, when the sons h eard their father telling them about these rareplaythings, because such things w ere just what they had wanted, each feltemboldened in heart and, pushing and shoving one another, they a ll came wildlydashing o ut of the burning house. [4]

The father subsequently p resents e ach of his so ns w ith a large bejeweledcarriage d rawn by a p ure white ox. When the Buddha a sks S hariputra whetherthe father was g uilty o f falsehood, he answers."No, World-Honored One. This r ich man simply made it possible for his so ns t oescape the peril of re and preserve their lives. He did not commit a falsehood.Why d o I say this? Because if they were able to preserve their lives, then they

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upaya#cite_note-4https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upaya#cite_note-4


4/12

had already o btained a plaything of sorts. And how much more s o when, throughan e xpedient means, they a re rescued from that burning house!" [5]

The theme if fallen angels se ems t o mesh with astoic p henomenology, probablyby Alexandrian Jews m ixing up Plato and Torah.

The Stoics f ound the aw in human beings ce terd around the production ofimages, thoughts a nd emotions f rom the phantasia, from the imagination. Theyinsistd that the real identity in a person was f ound in the act of consent ordiscretion towaord this p henomenea, this se at of jugment in the mind was ca lledthe hegemonikon, that is w here ones t rue identiy lies, as E picurus s ays " you areyour hegemonikon".

This is a general contradiction to freud in the way that frued suggested that theanxieties t hat emerge in dreams w ere aftually su ppresed desires, implying thatthat suppressed desire was a n ulterior self, one that cannot be suffecienysuppresed and will produce only more anxiety if not given consent.

These images p roduce varieties o f fear and desire and conate with other imagesto construe narratives t hat might be compelling by v irtue of novelty o r rtherconate with unresolved memories, exacting spite, eclipsing the ego, etc, butthese images are all representations, they are not identical with self or events.They a re versions, stoics ca ll them Jugments.

When we encounter myths o f god p roducing emanation of god that then lookback into god and percieve yet another image/emanation of god which itself looksback a nd envisions a d innitum--- we see how god d eteriorates from copy tocopy to copy.

This i s w hat is i mplied in Origens a ngelic r ebellion. The rebellion in heaven isessentially the rise of divine phenomenology.

What occurs a s a salvic a ct is L ogos, the actual prsence of essential god amongthe emanations. Christ is t he impossible phenomenon of an act of refectionwithout producing an object of reection. Similarly, humans r eect upon god byway o f the indwelling spirit. No false idols e tc.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upaya#cite_note-5https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upaya#cite_note-5


5/12

This i mpossibility o f god reecting christ in us t o himself with no spacial, nogeometric quality i s the mystery of the trinity.

There is a lways the anagogic in the mme t of prayer, the fall, the incarnation, theapocatastasis, all are immediate. For that is t he meaning of the trinity, immediacy.

What is l ove? Is i t that intensity o f enjoyment being with another, just to look a tthem, to have the. Look a t you, to not want to see anyone else, to know your lovewants o nly to see you, to know that pleasure and also to know that you are givinghat pleasure, to sense that prensence of time and want it to never end, to laughto gether to experince the complete accord with ones o wn body rspond in that

desire, and to want to excite that same accord of body a nd mind in the loved one,to know that you can elicit love and to love doing it and never be doing anythingbut recieving that from that one, and to give it to that one and want to do nothingelse.

It is n ot only t o be in love, it is to be loved by the one you love, that rare chancewhen nether lover loves a ny o ther, the circle is d anced.

Is i t possible to know that, yes.

Dies i t last? No.

Why?

The answer doesnt matter but it is t he saddest thought in the world.

Because to sense why is t o understand that the corruption of that love isproduced from within that very love.

Perhaps b ecause to love another is t o be another, no amount of time orlovemaking will truly make yo u two become o ne. And that mixture ofdissatisfaction along with the shame of remaining an other breeds t he space forbetrayal.


6/12

Lastly, leaving only the antithesis: being alone.

Things o f Origen1 Teleological universalism2 Homousia of the trinity

The word homooudia is m ore telling yhsn "csndubstantisliyy" of latin usage. Theterm "osious" was c oined by Aristotle, it implies a generative feature, somethingessential to change. There are p henomenae that are symptomstic o f change b utare not causal. This i nvolves w hst is s ubject and ehst is g enitive.

We have to think a bout poein and paschein.

3 Origen exhorts h is p upils t o bring the intellectual treasures of the Greeks to theservice of Christian philosophy, and thus i mitate the Jews w ho employed thegolden ve ssels o f the Egyptians t o adorn the Holy o f Holies .

Pre-ecustsnce of sngels sn d their presence in crestion

Akedia is a compound word. The rst part is t he prex a - (’α-), which means “not”and is u sed exactly l ike the prex “un-” in English. The second part is t he abstractnoun kedia (κηδια), which itself is d erived from the more concrete noun kedos(κηδος). Kedos m eans “care for others,” especially the kind of care that you showwhen som eone d ies. To have kedo s for the dead means that you care so m uchfor the dead person that you wash the body, attend the funeral, and see theremains o f the person respectfully b uried, even though the person you loved isnow dead and gone and will do nothing more for you in this l ife. Kedia, therefore,is t he action of showing kedos. The noun kedia is u sed twice in the Septuagint,the ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament. In both passages t he word isused in reference to funerals ( II Maccabees 4 :49 and 5:10 ). The word is n otused at all in the New Testament. A verb meaning “to bury the dead” is u sed inan alternate text of one passage, referring to the body o f Saint John the Baptist

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_of_Holieshttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_of_Holies


7/12

(Mark 6 :29 ), but not in the text of the New Testament that most of us r ead. Buteven though the word itself is n ot used in this c ontext, it was d isplayed in theactions of some p eople when the Lord d ied. Saint Joseph o f Arimathea d isplayedkedia when he provided the tomb for the Lord. The myrrh-bearing women

displayed kedia when they went to that tomb, the action that led them to be therst to know that the Lord had risen from the dead.

Generically, any appetite that one follows, whether an appetite for food, for sex,for drug, for music, for conversation, has e ternity lying behind it and nothing willsatisfy that. The substitute will only cover it with its characteristic expressive

sensation of time. The original appetite has from time immemorial been foundbest directed beyond death, past sensations, diverting away from selfsatisfactions o f body and mind toward what we call "God". In fact this is t hedening of God, for it doesn't matter if there is a god. There is o nly t his e ternaldirection of our drives t hat best suits t hem, the satisfaction without satisfaction,formerly known a s via negativa .

"I am lying on your grave and I will lie there forever."

What is d ispair's a voidance? Being alone, with no friend, no lover, no god andsensing time p ass l ike a bleeding wound.

For thise things are innite in value. God, love friendship and timelessness. To bemortal, nite and to know it.

The question that arises i s a bout the nature of knowing those things. Can thatknowledge become subjective e nough to become objective. Through deliberateeffort can these ideas a cquire more value to one s ubjectively, enough to b ecomeobjective reality?


8/12

These things co mbine into one point: what ever i may be, or not be, there isexistence. The experience i have of existence at this m oment is n ot unique t o me.Yet it is m iraculously a vailable to me at this m oment. That availability i s t he sameavailability of all.

Stay, moment stay. Moment of nothing other.

What if opinions w ere alive?

Had objectives, desires, antipathies?

What if they c ould reproduce, by fusion, by infection?

What if everything you saw, table, actress, tamale... Was i nfected with opinion,many op inions, of many degrees an d a ssociated with many other opinions?

Of course, by opinions i dont mean comments, stories t old, but immediatestimulation. That is t o say, stimulations t hat seem to be immediate but in fact arethe mediated reaction itself.

What if you were imbedded in a world all but imperceptible to you apart from theopinions t hey brought to your mind?

What if culture has e volved in such a way that the interrelation of opinions w assystematic, mutually s upportive. All reliant on the drives o n which they a re driven.Likes, dislikes, all with progressive intensities of affections.

What if one began to feel that culture, and all those who participate in it, feed onyou like a virus n eeding a host?

What if every opinion was a live and wanted to be inside you?


9/12

Like the sexual predator that has a n appitite for bodies t hen when sated isindifferent (or even re0ulsed) we might think o f the dark a ngels a nd who cannotmaintain a sense of other apart from appitites, (this o f course being god that hasone limit: it cannot create itself, only a copy) the dark a ngel conges o f religion as

a respite, a remove from bodies.

Many misunderstand ascetisism as merely that, look a t peter brown forclarication. It seems t hat evagrius is s tatigic i n positioning the adcetic p racticeas a way o f exposi g and demonstrating the dark k a ngels r elationship to bodies,ie appitites--- bodies that have effect on on another as the stoic idea says, aredistinguished from bodies t hat desire or crave that effect on another: to embracebodily function, to identify w ith body q ua body.

We might think that the fall was i mmediate, it was t he rst thought of the createdbeing, as s eparated from God, it was a nxiety o f initial being from nowhere, andthis i s a look into a mirror of being toward nowhere, which is t o say d eath.

And if there is no process without cause, no "paregklisis" n o self will without theempowerment of god then there no other possibility t han to see the fall as a fallwithin Gods ow n being.

As su ch, a Messiah is n ot the salvation of humanity a ny more than the salvationof God. For God to o penly pe rform separation a nd s ubmission to d eath.

"Why has t hou forsaken me" is t he evidence of the heart of subjection, theconscious s ense that one will be truly c ut off. Yet it is a cry to God. We mightthink o f this a s t he cry o f Angels w ho come into being, as se parate from God:"why h as t hou forsaken me?" The self hate of being.

But returning to the language of Origenism, the fall is n ot a thought of separation,it is a n action, a movement.

What was t his ki nesis, clineman?


10/12

Is t here a distinction in saying that there is a disturbance of being (why?) that isqualitatively d ifferent from a disturbance of will? This l oss of care correspondswell to akedia. The idea of forgetfulness comes t o mind here as w ell, forgettingone's pur pose, hence the adage: "Remember why you w ere b orn".

In this r espect we can understand when Plotinus sa ys empty "p aregklisis kenias"he reminds u s t hat the movement is i nconsequential, it is a ctually o nly p ercievedas dynam ic.

If "why has t hou forsaken me" a proposition only o f difference, the. The outerthou is mistaken as a power (will/determinant) different from the inner.

The deep irony is t hat the perception of an outer source equals t he presumption

of being moved by an outer source, when there is p erhaps i n actuality o nly o nedynamic--this m isconception of external expectation would be the naming of theouter source as a movement, the inner source as w ill.

This anxiety is a familiar one: waiting for inspiration or merely the impetus of a"feeling" for being. We resort to the enthusiasm sourced in stimulants, euphoricsensations, that is t o say s ensation itself -- ultimately, paschein.

The order of creatures "according to the distance of their fall" is then a

subjectivity to need. Again the irony: the illusion that one needs the feeling ofinspiration, the support and attention of others, et c. might lead to the antitheticalresponse that one needs only o neself, not needing. Yet again there remains a ninner spatiality to familiarize, there is an inner sustained need to be had, to sufferin specic, a disciplined suffering. Not to suffer from all directions, only to sufferin one place, the paschein of logos .

The place to begin putting ones s uffering in order is t o deliberatly learn a practiceof the body d epriving it of saitiety-- which is c learly n ot the same thing asmasochism or dualistic h atred of the body. One can understand hiw to maintainphysical health, by way of logos, whike deliberatly isolation the quality ofpaschein as t he guide to physical needs. Isolation of paschein is t he objectivehere, not the discipline of the body, or health of the bidy for that matter. One cancertainly l earn a disciplined line of paschein through physical cruelty, but it is n otat all neccessary. It is n ot cruel to stay w ith want, year ing or desire. It is a mood


11/12

of heightened sensitivity. Ultimatly the goal is to be sensitive to inner life whileindifferent to outer satisfactions.

Hunger of the body is a nger in the s oul

To speak of the immaterial, etherial qualities is for Origenists and Platonists is tospeak o f the non rational, literally inconceivable. There are bodies o f what wewould call immaterial nature: rational bodies, bodies o f inuence and causality.These still fall into our category o f mass, they are made of ner stuff, elementalmaterial such as re and air but they a re still bodies a nd relatively immortal, theirgeneration, endurance and c orruptions a re o f much longer duration, some lastuntil the end if time itself.

So for Evagrius t he perception of the truly a bstract, spiritual natures t hat aredevoid of any b ody, materiality, mass or what is c alled "uncreated" is t o speak o fGod p er se. So d uring times o f contemplation or prayer one e xperiences n onobjective intentionality, the union of perception and presence, the light that iswithout source, emanation or shadow, the light of mind, only t hen are we talkingabout actual non-material, non-physical, "emptiness" or "void". One c annotassume that such experiences a re indeed presences o f god, but in their degreeof non-objective experience we have the nature of that acquaintance, anexperience on the order of the knowledge of god, a gnosis. By d ispensing withany ob jective kn owing, we know how to know the absence o f God, which is theproper place of God, regardless if God is t here or not. In fact if God is t here, Hecertainly is not, nor She, nor It.

Pride takes o ver where vainglory leaves o ff, leading the monk to think that he hasacquired the virtues a nd progressed to the highest contemplation, not with theassistance and grace of God, but by his o wn efforts: he is su ddenly taken withthe blasphemous no tion that he has no need of God.108


12/12

108 Other blasphemous t houghts m ight include a denial of Christ or therelegation of the Trinity to the created order (Monks 134); or one might questionthe judgement and providence of God or the possibility o f attaining virtue (Si9o-

Prov. 19: 5); considering the ody t o be an evil creation (KG A,. 60); denying freewill and thus a lso the justice of God (Antirrhetikos 8 . 16, Fj38); or considering thedemons t o be gods ( Antirrhetikost,. 47̂542).

Origenist metaphysicsElementsDene bodyPredisposed being and nous

"The feelings t hat hurt most, the emotions t hat sting most, are those that areabsurd; the longing for impossible things, precisely b ecause they a re impossible;nostalgia for what never was; the desire for what could have been; regret over notbeing someone else; dissatisfaction with the world’s e xistence. All these half-tones o f the soul’s c onsciousness create in us a painful landscape, an eternalsunset of what we are."— Fernando Pessoa, Book of Disquiet

1 gluttony

Documents