1
Contempt for the World (§4) is presupposed at the outset.
2
A 'world' here refers to a shared form-of-living, that is, a form-of-living-in-common.
3
For each form-of-living, there is a lived-experience which is – or lived-experiences which are – necessary to render it livable.
3.1
As such, for each world there is a lived-experience which is – or lived-experiences which are – necessary to render it livable (§2, §3).
4
To the extent that living can only be lived in accordance with a single form-of-living-in-common, a single world, that world is experienced as the World.*
4.1
The experience of a world as the World is therefore engendered by the unlivability of non-Worldly forms-of-living-in-common (which is to say, forms-of-living-in-common which do not accord with the World).
4.2
To the extent that it is only possible to live in accordance with the World, living is necessarily condemned to Worldliness.
4.2.1
Insofar as living is condemned to Worldliness, withdrawal from the World remains impossible.
5
As it is the unlivability of non-Worldly forms-of-living-in-common which condemns living to the World (§4.1), contempt for the World is as much a contempt for the unlivability of non-Worldly forms-of-living-in-common as it is for the World qua world.
5.1
As it is the unlivability of non-Worldly-worlds which endows a world with Worldliness (§4.1), it is by rendering livable non-Worldly forms-of-living-in-common that the World is stripped of its Worldliness, and reduced to the status of a world – which is to say, one world amongst others (§4).
5.1.1
It is in this way (§5.1), that withdrawal from the World becomes possible (§4.2.1).
6
A form-of-living is considered here as 'ascetic' to the extent that it is lived in order to live the lived-experience necessary to render a formerly unlivable form-of-living livable (§3).**
6.1
Ascesis, insofar as it is lived in order to live the lived-experience necessary to render a formerly unlivable form-of-living livable, can therefore also be lived in order to live the lived-experience necessary to render a formerly unlivable form-of-living-in-common (that is, another formerly unlivable world) livable (§2, §3).
6.1.1
Thus, motivated by a contempt for the World and occasioned by a formerly unlivable non-Worldly form-of-living-in-common, ascesis is capable of unbinding living from the World (§4), thereby stripping the World of its Worldliness, reducing the World to a single world amongst others, a world-without-Worldliness (§5.1).
6.2
To the extent that ascesis is able to live the lived-experience necessary to render non-Worldly forms-of-living-in-common livable (§6.1), it thereby serves as a lived-demonstration of the worldliness of the World.
6.2.1
Such forms of ascesis (§6.2) reveal that the World is not Absolute, that the experience of Worldliness is relative to the unlivability of non-Worldly forms-of-living-in-common (§4.1).
7
To the extent that non-Worldly forms-of-living-in-common are livable, withdrawal from the World-qua-world is possible (4.2.1).***
7.1
In withdrawal, the World-qua-world is deprived of life, diminished ad nihilum (§2).
*
The World takes many forms and is known by many names, not least of which include: the State, Church, Economy, Philosophy, etc.
**
Here, 'ascesis' is described by means of 'living' in order to unbind it from the (religious, spiritual, moral, athletic, etc.) teloi which often restrict it, thereby making possible the conception of novel forms of ascesis – forms of ascesis which are necessary to render yet-unlived forms-of-living livable.
1′
For each form-of-living, there is a lived-experience which is – or lived-experiences which are – necessary to render it livable.
1.1′
Lived-experience is lived in living.
2′
A form-of-living is considered here as 'ascetic' to the extent that it is lived in order to live the lived-experience necessary to render a formerly unlivable form-of-living livable.
2.1′
In this way, ascesis has for its occasion an unlivable form-of-living.
2.2′
In ascesis, the lived-experience which is necessary to render the occasioning form-of-living livable is lived through the living of already-livable forms-of-living.
2.3′
There are not ascetic forms-of-living and non-ascetic forms-of-living; rather, a form-of-living is only ascetic to the extent that it is lived in order to live the lived-experience necessary to render the occasioning form-of-living livable.
2.3.1′
Each form-of-living can be lived as ascesis.
3′
Two forms-of-living can be said to be 'incompatible' to the extent that the lived-experience which is necessary to render one form-of-living livable also renders the other unlivable.
3.1′
Insofar as the occasioning form-of-living is incompatible with other forms-of-living, ascesis necessarily entails the renunciation of those incompatible forms-of-living.
3.2′
In ascesis, the renunciation of a form-of-living is secondary to, and therefore a consequence of, the living of the lived-experience necessary to render the occasioning form-of-living livable.
3.3′
Ascesis does not entail the renunciation of living as such, only the renunciation of forms-of-living which are incompatible with the occasioning form-of-living.
3.3.1′
Far from renouncing living, ascesis is lived out of a devotion to living.
***
Withdrawal is elsewhere referred to as ἀναχώρησις and destitution.