Socrates’ “swan song” in Plato’s Phaedo. Socrates' “secret doctrine” about death and eternity

Socrates’ “swan song” about death and eternity

The Phaedo is an exceptional dialogue. Plato describes in it Socrates’ final moments and his last statements just before execution, and for that reason they can be considered Socrates’ philosophical creed.1 It is not historical Socrates, though, but the one known from Plato’s dialogues, including the Phaedo. As Giovanni Reale points out, in the Phaedo Plato puts into the mouth of Socrates doctrines that are not Socratic at all, but which are his main and fundamental discoveries: the theory of the immortality of the soul and the theory of the Forms. (Reale 2000, 126).2

Phaedo provides a ready answer to the question of why, from a dramatic point of view, Plato should have chosen to speak through Phaedo of Elis rather than one of the other Socratics who were supposed to have been present with him in Socrates’ cell. Phaedo (of Elis), we are told, had been a prisoner of war, and made to work as a prostitute. The analogy with the soul as Socrates describes it in the Phaedo is not hard to see: for it too, during life, is imprisoned, trapped in polluting service to carnality. And just as the soul is eventually purified and released from attachment to corporeality through the practice of philosophy, so Phaedo was liberated from his enslavement at the instigation of Socrates; became, indeed, a philosopher himself, and the founder of his own school at Elis.” (Boys-Stones 2004, 2). Boys-Stones thinks that in Plato’s Phaedo there are Phaedo’s of Elis (Socrates’ disciple’s) psychological beliefs presented instead of Plato’s. Boys-Stones bases his thesis on the fact that the concept of soul introduced in Plato’s Phaedo is different from the “standard” way of presenting soul, found in Plato’s other dialogues, such as the Phae-drus , Symposium , Timaeus , or Republic . According to Boys-Stones, the difference consists in the approach towards desires – in standard Platonian psychology they are a part of the soul (as its irrational part), whereas in the Phaedo they are a function of the body: “On a straightforward reading of the Phaedo , desires are presented as functions of the body, and nothing else; desires can be resisted, but not, during life, eliminated. There is no scope for ‘harmonising’ them with reason or subduing them by it, because there is, more generally, no possibility for uprooting them from the body. And this suggests a further divergence from the ‘standard’ Platonic model. For according to the standard model, in which desires are properly part of the psyche, one’s natural character can be worked on and improved: desire can come under the influence of reason and be trained to a better state. But as far as the Phaedo is concerned (at least on a straightforward reading of it), one’s natural character is ineliminably inscribed in one’s body.” (Boys-Stones (2004) 7). Boys-Stones adds that “Of course reason can resist: desire does not determine behaviour. But reason cannot eradicate or (within broad limits, perhaps) restrain inclination. In these terms, a person has control of their behaviour, but not their character or ‘nature’. And I put it in these terms because it seems that this might have been exactly what Phaedo of Elis thought.” (Boys-Stones 2004, 7).

² Reale 2000, 126. Dilman writes that “the Phaedo is a philosophical dialogue between Socrates and his friends on the day before his death. Socrates' friends are distressed at Socrates' approaching execution and at the prospect of their having to part forever and they wonder at Socrates' calm and equanimity in the face of his imminent death. They ask him for the secret of his calm and the source of the faith which sustains him. Socrates tells them of his faith in the immortality of the soul and he expounds its contents in the face of philosophical questions and objections which he invites from his friends. Socrates

Socrates in the Phaedo compares his own words to a swan song and reminds his listeners of the swans’ prophetic gift he was also endowed with by his master, Apollo (Plato, Phaedo , 84 e – 85 b).³ The swans are Apollo’s prophetic birds and have foreknowledge of the blessings of the Hades. According to Socrates, when they feel that they are to die, they sing for joy that they are to go to the god whose servants they are. Socrates says of himself that he is a fellow-servant of the swans, consecrated to same god, and he has received a gift of prophecy from his master no less than they.

To put it poetically, in his final hour Socrates sings like a swan a song about eternity. He probably refers to what he said at the beginning of his conversation with friends when he told them his strange dream haunting him repeatedly in his previous life in various forms yet always including the same enigmatic words: “Socrates, make music and practise it” (μουσικὴν ποίει καὶ ἐργάζου) (Plato, Phaedo , 60 E), which he used to take as an incentive to pursue philosophy as – according to him – philosophy is the highest form of music (φιλοσοφίας μὲν οὔσης μεγίστης μουσικῆς), and that was what he was making (Plato, Phaedo , 61 A).⁴

Something mysterious can be sensed in the atmosphere pervading Socrates’s conversation with friends5, almost from the very onset of it when Socrates, ac- costed by Cebes who asked him on behalf of a poet and philosopher Evenus about poems Socrates wrote in prison (he never wrote anything before as, according to his statement from the Phaedrus, philosophical wisdom is written down in the soul, not on paper (Plato, Phaedrus, 276 A)6, starts talking about philosophy (what role it plays in a philosopher’s life and how it can guide him, also in the moment of death), the soul, death and what death means for the soul. He seemingly responds to the question briefly in a form of a joke, but in fact he shows what is important to him and mentions his “mission” he talked about in his defence speech (Plato, Apologia, 30 A–B).7 Socrates, if it can be phrased that way, instantly jumps in at the deep end and unashamedly touches upon the biggest mysteries of human life and philosophy. He asks Cebes to say to Evenus something about his way of versifying Aesop’s fables, but mainly to tell him to enter, as quickly as he can, the path Socrates himself was made to follow by order of Athens, and which – as ought to be added – he had been going along all his life (Plato, Phaedo, 61 B).

Socrates does not have any doubts that Evenus will understand him, “if he is wise” (ἂν σωφρονῇ), and will come after him as quickly as he can (Plato, Phaedo, 61 B). Although Socrates did not explain what the phrase “if he is wise” (ἂν σωφρονῇ) means, it can be surmised that he expects Evenus to look at philosophy and death in a way similar to his own. And soon he will say that those who pursue philoso- phy aright are practicing dying (οἱ ὀρθῶς φιλοσοφοῦντες ἀποθνῄσκειν μελετῶσι), and death is less terrible to them than to others (Plato, Phaedo, 67 E).8

In his speech Socrates turns upside-down Greeks’ whole common way of thinking about life and death (it can be considered yet another element of Socrates’ oddity). After all, Greeks were convinced that death put an end to life. Later on human existence was transformed into a bland and devoid of any existential benefits “being” in a form of a phantom with neither blood nor any feelings. None of the Greeks treated it as something good or awaited it with eagerness. Socrates, however, unambiguously portrays death as something good that each true philosopher should embrace without hesitation. Moreover, Socrates is convinced that Evenus will follow him, and so will everyone who cultivates worthily the philosophy, but however he will not do violence to himself (οὐ μέντοι ἴσως βιάσεται αὑτόν), for that is forbidden (Plato, Phaedo , 61 C). And that seems obvious to him. He is absolutely sure that each philosopher should think that way. His answer to Simmias’ doubts about Evenus being ready to take Socrates’ advice is: “isn't Evenus a philosopher?” (οὐ φιλόσοφος Εὔηνος;) (Plato, Phaedo, 61 C). In the latter part of his speech, he will point out to the real advantages of life after death.

In addition, Socrates casually mentions the issue of suicide, which was considered fairly acceptable in Greece, also among philosophers.⁹ However, he does not bother much with giving a rational explanation of his opinion on the topic. He refers to some “secret doctrine” (ὁ ἐν ἀπορρήτοις λεγόμενος λόγος) which seems to resolve both the issue of suicide and the status of the soul with its regard to the body, and this seems to be Socrates’ main point, while the problem of suicide resolves by itself as a consequence of his stand on the status and metaphysical condition of the soul. According to this “secret doctrine”, we men are in some kind of prison (ἔν τινι φρουρᾷ ἐσμεν οἱ ἄνθρωποι), and that one ought not to release oneself from it or run away (οὐ δεῖ δὴ ἑαυτὸν ἐκ ταύτης λύειν οὐδ᾽ ἀποδιδράσκειν) (Plato, Phaedo, 62 B).¹⁰

The “secret doctrine” about the human soul

Bringing up the phrase “secret doctrine” adds to the surrounding mysteriousness and, at the same time, reveals what mentality Socrates functions in, as it was emphasized above that he broke out of the common way of thinking about the human soul and death, and – as shall be repeated – stepped out of line as far as Greeks’ religious tradition (represented by Homer, Hesiod, Sophocles) is concerned. Socrates (as a character from Plato’s dialogues) mainly struggles to figure out the strange and otherwise challenging to solve the paradox of death as good desired by him. Socrates does not mention whose teaching (“secret doctrine”) it is, but it is not difficult to guess.¹¹ In the Cratylus he attributes it outright to Orphic poets and adds that according to them, the soul does penance in the body for its sins (Plato, Cratylus , 400 C).¹²

Socrates’ later words concerning life and death create even more mysterious atmosphere. Socrates, while revealing Orphics’ “secret doctrine” (he does not refer to them directly, yet it can be assumed that his interlocutors can guess whose doctrine it is), discloses what he thinks about his fate after death. Socrates hopes to join the group of good men when he dies, although he is not sure. He is sure, however, that he is going to the gods, who are good masters. And he believes that there is something in store for those who have died, something far better for the good men than for the bad: εἶναί τι τοῖς τετελευτηκόσι καί, …, πολὺ ἄμεινον τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς ἢ τοῖς κακοῖς (Plato, Phaedo, 63 B–C).13

According to Socrates, it is a philosopher, in particular, who should have hope that something good awaits him after his death (Plato, Phaedo , 64 A).¹⁴ And he immediately explains why: because all those who pursue philosophy aright, are practicing nothing but dying and being dead (οὐδὲν ἄλλο αὐτοὶ ἐπιτηδεύουσιν ἢ ἀποθνῄσκειν τε καὶ τεθνάναι) (Plato, Phaedo , 64 A).¹⁵

Socrates clarifies a bit further how these rather odd and mysterious words about death should be understood, saying that death is nothing else but the separation of the soul from the body: ἆρα μὴ μὴ ἄλλο τι ἢ τὴν τῆς ψυχῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ σώματος ἀπαλλαγήν (Plato, Phaedo , 64 C).¹⁶ And this is what the philosopher does. He separates the soul, as far as possible, from communion with the body (Plato, Phaedo , 65 A).¹⁷ The point will turn out to consist in learning the Truth that can only be learnt after death (Plato, Phaedo , 65 D – 67 B). Therefore, because of this Truth, death itself is a goal of secondary importance.¹⁸

The philosopher that Socrates has in mind here is somebody like himself, thus a person who is not interested in the issues of this world, and even less in the so-called “life career”. Actually, such a philosopher has only one objective – learning the Truth, the one in capital “T”, that will explain all mysteries of the world and human existence. He does not take interest in patchy truths attended by such scholars and thinkers as Anaxagoras who search for reasons behind certain phenomena in the material world (Plato, Phaedo , 97 B – 99 D). Socrates latches onto “final” truths, the ones which refer to the sphere of the absolute and supernatural-ity. In this way he wishes to grasp human existence and its true meaning. Aware of the fact that detailed sciences, such as those offered by natural philosophers, i.e. Anaxagoras, do not have much to say on the matter, he turns to “secret doctrines”, hidden in Orphic myths.

Later on, Socrates further reinforces the mystic feelings and gets even deeper into the tonality resembling Orphic spirituality. What he says about the soul and philosophy fits the Orphic spirituality thanks to the solemn, even “mystic” atmosphere accompanying his words, particularly because he somewhat generates it himself. One can even feel as if participating in some secret mysteries and becoming gradually initiated into the deepest secrets of the human soul, but predominantly, the secret of death itself. It is not very clear at the beginning, since Socrates speaks of cognition and the cognitive role of the mind and the body, but soon it turns out that this body imprisoning the soul makes it difficult for the soul to learn the truth pursued by philosophers. Asked by Simmias when does the soul attain to the truth, he answers that the soul reasons best when it separates itself as far as possible from the body and bodily sense-perceptions that trouble it, and avoiding as far as it can all contact with the body, turns its attention toward the real beings (forms) (Plato, Phaedo , 65 C–D).

The soul sees with eyes, yet not in their senses-related meaning, it is a different kind of eyes since what they see goes beyond senses. And what is it that the soul watches? Beauty, goodness and the whole world of ideal measurements unnoticea-ble for bodily senses. The question remains, though, whether they can be cognized by brain, that is in logical thought processes. After all, as will soon turn out, if the truth is cognizable at all, this can only be achieved after death, while it remains unknown whether the human logical mind will survive death; unless there is a different kind of reasoning discussed here, some kind of spiritual cognition which functions a bit like an examination or vision applied also in worldly mystic states apparently described by Plato in the Phaedrus (Cf. Plato, Phaedrus, 250 B – D; 247 C – 248 C) and in the Symposium (Plato, Symposium, 210 E – 211 E). Socrates does not seem to hold any doubts that the mind is able to learn any truths, or that at least it can get as close to them as possible, after it is freed from the body and purified of all bodily and sensory influences (Plato, Phaedo, 65 D–66 A).19

At that point Socrates focuses only on harms done by the body to the soul in cognitive sphere, yet a variety of other aspects will soon be mentioned, mostly moral ones which turn us into the slaves of our bodies (Plato, Phaedo, 66 B–C).

According to Socrates, if someone is going to know anything purely (καθαρῶς), he must be rid of the body, and must view the realities (τὰ πράγματα) with the soul alone (αὐτῇ τῇ ψυχῇ). Thus, the wisdom which is desired by the philosopher may only be attained after his death, but non while he lives (Plato, Phaedo , 66 D–E).

On this basis, convinced of the purity of his own soul, Socrates hopes to finally find after death what he has been looking for all his life (Ibid., 67 B–C). Something that will be a guarantee of happiness among gods.²⁰ As we can learn from Plato’s Phaedrus , the philosopher might have already witnessed that Truth (See: Plato, Phaedrus 247 E – 250 C).²¹

Among the categories discussed by Socrates, the dominating one is “the purity of the soul” associated with the separation and becoming independent from the body and the whole sensuality, and, at the same time, from the material world and everything incorporated in it. Socrates goes deeper and deeper into Orphic spirituality.22 The purification of the soul is the same as awaking its natural disposition, that is moral and spiritual sensitivity enabling the soul to comprehend (in its proper thus spiritual way) supernatural values (which can be encapsulated in the notions of Beauty, Truth and Goodness). “The purity of the soul” guarantees a philosopher that after his death (physical, that is after the soul’s separation from the body) he will find the Truth he has been pursuing throughout his life, and to which he is sensitive in a way (Plato, Phaedo, 66 D – 67 E).

The idea of purifications is known mainly from mysteries, particularly from the Orphic ones, as well as from the old Greek tradition, and, contrary to appearances, both of these sources refer to a similar phenomenon, that is coming in contact with the divinity as this is the essence of these purifications, while all the rest, for example emotional repercussions, is solely a consequence of this contact. In Orphic mysteries purification was executed in a twofold way: firstly, through leading decent life, the so-called “Orphic life” (Cf. Plato, Leges, 782 D) (this term served as a basis for another one – “philosophical life”, which gained a similar meaning), secondly, through the mystery of initiation. “Orphic life” was synonymous to quite ascetic but mostly morally noble life (including the ban on killing living creatures). In Orphic mythology a human being is a divine creature imprisoned in the human body as a consequence of a mystic drama which took place in the world of gods. The story of it is told in the myth about Dionysus Zagreus and the Titans. This myth explains the status and nature of the man. According to it, the man is a divine creature, an heir to Dionysus’ divinity. The divine status belongs solely to the human soul held captive in the human body.23 That was supposed to explain the characteristic for Orphics need for becoming purified of all corporality and their mysterious longing for eternity. Initiations were the path to eternity and happiness. They had nothing in common with gaining secret knowledge. Their essence lay in the spiritual experience of divinity – the divinity of one’s soul as a part of Dionysus himself, as well as Dionysus’ divinity.24 In Orphic mysteries death was perceived as the ultimate initiation in divinity, the final reunion with Dionysus (the final return to Dionysus). It seems that Plato in the Phaedo is under the strong influence of Orphic spirituality.25

Orphic initiations were the most elevated form of “consecration” in which an initiate touched the divinity. Initiations and consecrations alike are mentioned by Plato also in the Phaedo and other dialogues.26 For him, they are always associated with accessing some form of sacredness or divinity, and values considered divine, such as Beauty and Truth, and there is always a strong moral and spiritual undertone to them.

As written by Alberto Bernabé (in his article on Aristotle and his attitude towards Greek mysteries), “In his philosophical system, Plato assigned an important role to what he considered mystery or initiatory experiences, focusing on the relevance of the Bacchic possession and other religious practices such as purification, these always transferred to his own philosophical system” (Bernabé 2016, 27).27

Philosophical Initiations

Philosophical initiations introduce a philosopher into the world of supernatural values, and, at the same time, they constitute the culminant stage of moral and spiritual development, and bear clear signs of mystic experience. It is most noticeable particularly in the Symposium and the Phaedrus .²⁸ Similar threads can be found in the Phaedo (Plato, Phaedo , 69 C – D).²⁹ Socrates here recalls the words of the men who established the mysteries. They said that whoever arrives in Hades uninitiated and unsanctified (ἀμύητος καὶ ἀτέλεστος) will lie in the slough (ἐν βορβόρῳ κείσεται), while he who arrives there purified and sanctified (κεκαθαρμένος τε καὶ τετελεσμένος) will dwell with gods (μετὰ θεῶν οἰκήσει). Others related to initiations say that there are many who bear the wand (ναρθηκοφόροι), but there are few who have truly experienced the divinity (βάκχοι). According to Socrates, these latter are none other than true philosophers (πεφιλοσοφηκότες ὀρθῶς) who have practice philosophy aright.

As can be seen, for Plato the crucial factor determining man’s moral condition is wisdom in its philosophical and moral sense, since it is all about the condition of the soul purified of sensuality. What purifies the soul is the truth (Plato, Phaedo , 69 B).³⁰

For the philosopher, Truth and wisdom akin are a life goal, even after death, as only then it can be attained. However, if a philosopher wishes to reach it, even after death, he needs to prepare for it also morally, since Truth belongs to the realm of supernaturality, to the world of gods, and it is not right to enter such a place without prior moral purification (Plato, Phaedo , 82 B – C; 107 C-D).³¹

The abovementioned motif of initiations is present in many dialogues, including the Phaedrus and the Symposium in which there is a clearly mystic undertone to it. In the latter dialogue, Socrates speaks of the mysteries of Eros he was initiated in by Diotima, a mysterious woman from Mantinea, most probably a prophetess (Plato, Symposium , 209 E–211 B).³² Among other things, Diotima told him about some both mysterious and wonderful experience through which a lover of beauty (philosopher) was given a chance to encounter the absolute Beauty. What Diotima had in mind was most probably an ecstatic, mystic love experience which satisfied all love-related longings felt by the lover of beauty (Plato, Symposium , 210 E – 211 A). In Phaedrus Plato mentions consecration in the context of his famous chariot allegory in which human souls are depicted as chariots and watch the plains of truth together with gods (Plato, Phaedrus , 246 A – 250 E).³³ Consecration is associated with the mystic contemplation of mysteries of the primeval absolute truth, as well as the absolute values in general. It is available only for those who live recalling the blessed and felicific spectacles that their souls witnessed in the world of truth while joyfully following gods. This consecration makes people fail to remember all earthly affairs since they commune only with the divine and taste a piece of this forgotten happiness. Others, not knowing that it is god living in these people, reprove and treat them as madmen or hotheads (Plato, Phaedrus , 249 C–D). Plato explains these experiences of god’s presence in a philosopher’s soul, or the divine madness, saying that god is only able to access a man after making him mad. The madness of Eros is the most felicific of all kinds of madness sent by gods (Plato, Phaedrus , 245 B). The greatest of blessings come to people through madness. It relates especially to the philosopher. As it turns out, what happens to the philosopher results from the madness of love (Plato, Phaedrus , 249 D–E).³⁴

Purifications and initiations, together with knowledge on the immortal and divine soul, are the vital elements of “the secret doctrine”, referred to by Socrates in Phaedo, yet the most important one is the motif of death perceived as the beginning of a new life in the world of gods, at least for a person who lived righteously and searched for truth. The idea of death as a journey to the world of gods is the key moment of “Socrates’ swan song”, that is his song about the eternity, with its last accord expressed in words summarizing his eschatological parable about the soul’s fate after death:

“This then is why a man should be of good cheer about his soul, who in his life has rejected the pleasures and ornaments of the body, thinking they are alien to him and more likely to do him harm than good, and has sought eagerly for those of learning, and after adorning his soul with no alien ornaments, but with its own proper adornment of self-restraint and justice and courage and freedom and truth, awaits his departure to the other world, ready to go when fate calls him.” (Plato, Phaedo , 114 E – 115 A).³⁵