The point of importance is that the Vedantic position is in perfect agreement with the Platonic, which is that things are "false" in the sense that an imitation, though it exists, is not "the real thing" of which it is an imitation; and with the Christian doctrine as formulated by St. Augustine in Conf. 7. 11 and 11.4: "I beheld these others beneath Thee, and saw that they neither altogether are, nor altogether are not "

Ananda Coomaraswamy

However, even vegetarianism in your hands, would make a capital article -- its connection with philosophy is very curious-- dating from the earliest Greek days, and taken by the Greeks from the East -- and so is its connection with modern socialism, atheism, nihilism, anarchy and other political creeds. It is strange that the most violent republicans I know are all vegetarians: Brussels sprouts seem to make people bloodthirsty, and those who live on lentils and artichokes are always calling for the gore of the aristocracy and for the severed heads of kings. Your vegetarianism has given you a wise apathy-- so at least you told me once -- but in the political sphere a diet of green beans seems dangerous."

Oscar Wilde

"True it is without falsehood, certain and most true, that which is above is from that which is below, and that which is below is from that which is above, for the performance of the miracles of the One Thing. And as all things are from One, by the mediation of One, so all things have their birth from this One Thing by adaptation. The Sun is its father, the Moon its mother, and the Wind carries it in its belly, its nurse is the Earth. This is the father of all perfection, or consummation of the whole world. Its power is integrating, if it be turned into earth.
Thou shalt separate the earth from the fire, the subtle from the gross, with cunning, and with sagacity. It ascends from the earth to heaven and descends again to earth, and receives the power of the superiors and of the inferiors. So thou hast the glory of the whole world; therefore let all obscurity flee before thee. This is the strong force of all forces, overcoming every subtle and penetrating every solid thing. So the world was created. Hence were all wonderful adaptations, of which this is the manner. Therefore am I called Hermes Trismegistus, having the three parts of the philosophy of the whole world. What I have to tell is completed, concerning the Operations of the Sun." - The Emerald Tablet https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-k_HHSCoao1M/XtuLY9xPgbI/AAAAAAAANIM/-G9fj-g-k4Q3RsdNpRxT_Yib61Xm3qNtwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/Tabula%2BSmaragdina%2B%2528The%2BEmerald%2BTablet%2Bof%2BHermes%2529%252C%2B1606%252C%2Bcolored%2Bengraving.jpg

"God is everywhere because he is nowhere, the intellect is everywhere because it is nowhere, the soul is everywhere because it is nowhere. But God is everywhere and nowhere in respect to all things that are after him. The intellect is indeed in God, but is everywhere and nowhere in respect to those things that are after it. The soul is in the intellect and God, but is everywhere and nowhere in respect to the body." - Pico Della Mirandola, 900 Thesis, Thesis 22.12 (Theses taken from Porphyry)

Prior to Plato, Hermes makes the same assertion; and subsequently to Plato, Dionysius the Areopagite does the same, showing that God cannot be described as an intelligible being, but is above both ‘being’ and ‘intelligible’. For this reason, since God infinitely transcends the intellect and the intelligible, no one can attain the divine substance by any action of the intelligence, but this substance can eventually be attained by devotion, I mean a propitious devotion, through the gracious work of the limitless Good that has been conveyed to us, conveyed, I say, into unity itself as the head of our mind, when the mind gathers itself wholly together from all directions into its own unity, which is the express image of divine simplicity.

…From all this it is quite clear that, in the view of our Plato, the divine cannot be discovered by us but is revealed to us from above; that the substance and nature of the divine cannot be understood by the mind or explained in words or writings. These things should therefore be discussed and described with the hope that we may give encouragement through our words and writings and prepare souls for things divine, rather than offer proof.

…When the mind has withdrawn itself to itself and away from all that is lower, and when it turns from itself to all that is higher, it immediately attains, at a single stroke, unity and steadfastness and simplicity, if I may express it thus. But what it attains, according to St Paul, it is unlawful for men to utter and, according to Plato, much more unlawful for men to write, lest what is holy be given to the dogs.

Yet although he trusts neither words nor writings with the explanation of matters divine, he considers it safer to entrust it to words than to writings, for writings become the property of all and sundry. However, he allows such words to be spoken to only the most carefully chosen people. But he judges that in all respects the worthiness of things divine requires us to communicate in words from mind to mind rather than by writing upon external materials.

For this reason, the Jews say that the mystical meaning of their Law was not communicated in writing by God Himself through Moses, but was rather entrusted to their souls. This is what they understood.

The followers of Pythagoras certainly observed this practice, and so did Plato. For even here he promises to send some things through Archedemus rather than in writing. But he declares that what he has written are the words of Socrates, whose real function was to purify.

…But in case someone is thinking that I have gone into a dream during this exposition, it is important to hear Proclus’ confirmation of these things: ‘For those who desire to attain the Highest Good, what is needed is not knowledge or the exercising of talent, but steadfastness, rest, and tranquillity. Indeed, it is divine faith which draws us and unites us ineffably to the Highest Good and to all that is divine. It is certainly not through knowledge or any action performed by our own wits that we should seek or aspire to the Highest Good, but we should offer and commit ourselves to the divine light and, with our senses stopped, we should come to rest in that unknown, hidden unity of all beings. For this kind of faith is more ancient than any teaching.’

…Hermes attributes all else to the sacred silence of the mind; for God, he believes, is known to the mind by His silence rather than by His words.

Discussion by Marsilio Ficino of the Second Letter, which Plato wrote to Dionysius, Tyrant of Syracuse

I could not agree more with Lewis. It seems so obvious that the chasm between the two traditions occurs mostly in the realm of superficial appearance. Yet there is a great battle still going on between the two fronts, which is even fought when both claim to know and seek the Tradition that transcends their petty disputes. Despite that they have for the last 2,000 years of their conflict used much of the same philosophy, theology, and even habits.

"Those who worship the demigods will take birth among the demigods; those who worship ghosts and spirits will take birth among such beings; those who worship ancestors go to the ancestors; and those who worship Me will live with Me." - Bhagavad Gita, 9.25

“Men of darkness are they who make a cult of the departed and of spirits,” - Bhagavad Gita 17:4

"For death is of destruction, and nothing in the Cosmos is destroyed. For if Cosmos is second God, a life <or living creature> that cannot die, it cannot be that any part of this immortal life should die. All things in Cosmos are part of Cosmos, and most of all is man, the rational animal.
For truly first of all, eternal and transcending birth, is God the universals' Maker. Second is he "after His image", cosmos, brought into being by Him, sustained and fed by him, made deathless, as by his own Sire, living for aye, as ever free from death". - Hermes Trismigestus, The Corpus Hermeticum.

"It would seem that our Lord finds our desires not too strong, but too weak. We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased."

~C.S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory

The courageous man is not only he who conquers his enemies, but also he who conquers his pleasures. Some men are masters of cities but slaves of women.

Democritus, Ethical Fragments 287

Om mahajwalaye vidhmahe agnidevaye dhimahi tanno agni prachodayat

Om, Let me meditate on the great flame, Oh, God of fire, grant me with higher intellect, Oh, let the radiant God of Fire illuminate my mind.


Agni Gayatri Mantra.

But God being all Mind, and all Logos, both speaks exactly what He thinks, and thinks exactly what He speaks. For His thought is Logos, and Logos is Mind, and Mind comprehending all things is the Father Himself.

Saint Irenaeus, Against Heresies - Book II, Chapter XXVIII

"Just by scraping a little bit off the surface, it becomes evident that the strongest 'trunks' of the sprouting of knighthood derived their 'sap' from orders and movements that had the odor of heresy to the Church, to the point of being persecuted by her. Even from a traditional point of view, the doctrines of the Albigeneses cannot be considered to be perfectly orthodox; however, we cannot fail to notice, especially in reference to Frederick II and to the Aragonenses, a certain connection between the Albigenses and a current of chivalry the defended the imperial ideal against the Roman Curia, and which during the Crusades ventured all the way to Jerusalem (not without a reason), which it conceived almost as the center if a higher spirituality than that which was incarnated in papal Rome.

The most characteristic case is that of the Knights Templar, ascetic warriors who gave up the pleasures of the world in order to pursue a discipline not practiced in the monasteries but on the battlefields, and who were animated by a faith consecrated more by blood and victory than by prayer. The Templars had their own secret initiation, the details of which, though they were portrayed by their accusers with blasphemous tinges, are very significant. Among other things, in a preliminary part of the ritual the candidates to the highest degree of Templar initiation were supposed to reject the symbol of the cross and to acknowledge that Christ's doctrine did not lead to salvation. The Templars were also accused of engaging secret dialogues with the 'infidels' and of celebrating wicked rites. These were just symbols, as it was declared repeatedly, though in vain, at the Templars' trial. In all probability, this was not the case of sacrilegious impiety but of acknowledgment of the inferior character of the exoteric tradition by devotional Christianity, an acknowledgment that was required in order for one to be elevated to higher forms of spirituality. Generally speaking, as somebody has correctly remarked, the very name 'Templars' bespeaks transcendence. 'Temple' is a more august, comprehensive, and inclusive term than 'church.' The temple dominates the church. Churches fall in ruins, but the temple stands as a symbol of the kinship of religions and of the perennial spirit to forming them."

- Julius Evola in Revolt Against the Modern World

"The Grail was another characteristic reference point of chivalry. The saga of the Grail closely reflects the hidden ambition of the Ghibelline knights; this saga too has hidden motifs that cannot be ascribed to the Church or to Christianity alone. Not only does the official Catholic tradition not acknowledge the Grail. but the essential elements of the saga are related to pre-Christian and even Nordic-Hyperborean traditions. In this context I can only remind the reader that in the most important versions of the legend, the Grail is portrayed as a stone (stone of light and 'luciferian' stone) rather than as a mythical chalice; that the adventures related to the Grail, almost without exception, have a more heroic and initiatory rather than a Christian and eucharistic character; that Wolfram von Eschenbach refers to the Knights of the Grail as 'Templeise'; and finally that the Templar insignia (a red cross on a white background) is found on the garment of some of the Grail knights and on the sail of the ship on which Perlesvaux (Parsifal) leaves, never to return. It is worth nothing that even in the most Christianized versions of the saga one still finds extra-ecclesial references. It is said that the Grail as a bright chalice (the presence of which produces a magical animation, a foreboding, and an anticipation of a nonhuman life), following the Last Supper and Jesus' death, was taken by angels into heaven from where it is not supposed to return until the emergence on earth of a stock of heroes capable of safeguarding it. The leader of this stock instituted an order of 'perfect' or 'heavenly knights,' dedicated to this purpose. the 'myth' and the highest ideal of medieval chivalry was to reach the Grail in its new earthly abode and to belong to such an order, which was often identified with King Arthur's knights of the Round Table. Considering that the Catholic Church has descended directly and without any interruptions from primitive Christianity, and considering the fact that the Christianized Grail disappeared until that time a knightly rather than priestly order was to be instituted—this obviously testifies to the emergence of a different tradition than the Catholic and apostolic one. There is more: in almost all the texts dealing with the Grail, the symbol of the 'temple' (still a very priestly one) is abandoned in favor of the symbol of the court or of a regal castle, as the mysterious, inaccessible, and well-protected place in which the Grail is kept. the central theme of the 'mystery' of the Grail, besides the test of mending a broken sword, consists in a regal restoration; there is the expectation of a knight who will restore the prestige of a decadent realm and who will avenge or heal a king who is either wounded, paralyzed, or in a catatonic state. Crisscrossing references connect these themes to both the imperial myth and to the very idea of a supreme, invisible, and 'polar' center of the world. It is obvious that in this cycle, which was important to the medieval chivalrous world, a particular tradition was at work.This tradition had little to do with that of the dominant religion, and although it occasionally adopted some elements from Christianity, maybe it did so the better to express, or conversely, to hide itself. The Grail is truly a myth of the 'regal religion' that confirms what has been said about the secret soul of chivalry."

- Julius Evola in Revolt Against the Modern World