The allegory of the Cave is the most famous example of Plato's opinion on matter

Those are neo-Scholastics correct?

I absolutely despise medieval Christian, Jewish and Islamic philosophy. I think it's utter sophistry and nonsense. Trying to reconcile the irrational faith based position of an undereducated sub-literate Abrahamic religion with the rational, empirico-logical tradition of the pagan philosophers. That was their whole project, and it ultimately failed. Since nominalism was birthed from medieval Scholasticism.

Yes they were neo-scholastics. I take what is good in their works and disregard the rest

Yes, it's a very common allegory I bring up.

Our understanding of God is similar to the allegory of the Sun. The same way the sun emanates the energy of life on this planet, so to does God, the spiritual sun, emanates energy to all the Omniverse.

Vedic philosophy and religion is the same ultimately as Greek. The culture is different, the understanding is the same. Zeus may have been their name for God, as we have many names as well for God. The referent is the same, name might be different. In our faith alone, God has nearly 1,500 names. Since he is infinite, it is truly impossible to name him with one concrete descriptor.

The God as depicted in Timaeus? — Valentinus

Yes.

The Phaedo refers to the idea of the body being a vehicle of the soul that does not die. Where in the writings does that make the "soul" a home in the "Forms"? Plotinus reasons in that way but I don't know where Plato does. — Valentinus

It's in his dialogue somewhere. He does say that. The soul originated in the realm of the Forms and returns there.

This follows the allegory of the Sun that I mentioned, since all emanate from God, then we all have the Divine Spark. As such, we all eventually return to Godhead whence we came.

That sounds like Sun worship. Aquinas, I believe, worshiped the sun, and some Popes called themselves sun kings (like Roman emperors) before King Louis XIV took that title formally. I know because I read history. Scholasticism must be seen without the Catholic Egyptian stuff. But you disregard science and prefer (bhakti) to pray to god or gods. That to me seems very irrational

It's in his dialogue somewhere. He does say that. The soul originated in the realm of the Forms and returns there. — Dharmi

I look forward to your reference to the text you recall.

No, it's not quite sun worship. We do have a god of the sun, Surya. But we have a "spiritual sun" which analogical to the sun.

In the microcosm, the sun gives all things the energy that sustains it.

In the macrocosm, the Absolute (Sriman Narayana) gives all things the energy to sustain them.

As above, so below.

"But you disregard science and prefer (bhakti) to pray to god or gods. That to me seems very irrational"

I don't disregard science. I accept what science says, I just don't think science is the only standard of epistemology.

I didn't actually read it in the dialogue, I heard it in a lecture on the dialogue. So I sadly cannot remember. I could reread all of the dialogues to find it for you, but I think I'll pass on that. I hope you understand.

Top down vs. down up? I like epistemic Hegelianism instead of yoga but perhaps it leads to where you are

No, this is a common notion in Hermetic philosophy. Macrocosm-microcosm. It's simply extrapolating the small to the large.

Tim Freke is a popular western philosopher who believes "down up". He thinks evolution will bring the existence of God into existence. A secular Teilhardian

All philosophy will eventually being about a strain

I would believe in pure Thomism if it wasnt so depressing and boring

The allegory of the Cave is the most famous example of Plato's opinion on matter — Gregory

Was that an opinion about "matter"? The allegory strikes me more about thinking in ways that are comfortable and pleasing to us as a "show" versus struggling with our own thoughts to get closer to what is real.

Idk. In college they said it meant that matter was like a shadow

Thomism is pure evil in my mind. Because it says God is Pure Act. This views leads straight to atheism. In order to protect God's simplicity, you either need to cut God off from the world (Classical theism) or you have to make the world equal with God (Pantheism). It is just pure atheism. I reject Thomism utterly.

The fire= reason
The sun= The Forms
The whole= God
The Shadows= non-reality

The relationship between "desert Platonism" and "austere Gnosticism" is interesting

Since this world "partakes" of the realm of Forms, the realm of Forms is "more real" than this world. It's not that this world is false per se, but that the realm of Forms is more real.

Do you know who Manly P. Hall is? He did a lecture on the relationship between Platonism, Hermeticism and Gnosticism.

Interesting

Thomism is just so dry and boring that I was forced basically to get into Hegel, although his works feel very forced in themselves. I'd bet you have hidden suspicion that your yoga philosophy is somehow unnatural, but Thomists have their share of problems too. My younger brother is one (an actual professor). I started reading the Summa Theologica when I was 13. It got depressing beyond all hell so I started up with sections from Hegel and havent looked back

Since this world "partakes" of the realm of Forms, the realm of Forms is "more real" than this world. It's not that this world is false per se, but that the realm of Forms is more real. — Dharmi

As presented as a matter of experience, some things were considered as being more or less a result of "participating" in forms and whatever logic governed them. The formless mud is just as real as the intellectual shape that turns it into something else.

Aquinas has a very beautiful style, but it's just that it lacks all excitement that you want to kill yourself after reading him

I know. Thomism and Hegelianism are extremely dry and boring. Our philosophy is very natural, ancient societies were filled with God-consciousness. This society is the exception, not the rule. Hegel is a very good philosopher, I think German Idealists among the rest of Modernist philosophers are probably the best. But ultimately the sublime philosophy is the philosophy contained in the Vedic Scriptures. Particularly, the Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita.

I was never a Roman Catholic, or a Thomist, so I never took to him and never will. I think Thomism is just crypto-atheism. Which is not necessarily bad, but Thomism is supposedly trying to create a theological system. If I'm reading Nietzsche or Marx, or Stirner that's fine, because I expect atheism from atheists, not from people who believe in God.

Marx is fun but being a Hegelian materialist is hard because your mind is overloaded with so many ideas you can't even write properly