"Ecce Homo" on Nietzsche autobiograafiline teos, kus ta võtab oma sõnadega (ja päris mahlakatega, sealjuures) kokku oma elutöö viljad. Ilmselt polnud just kõige targem valik võtta esimeseks Nietzsche teoseks just see raamat, kuna ta analüüsis siin oma teoseid, millest mul ülevaadet polnud. Teisalt andis see mulle põgusa arusaama Nietzschest kui indiviidist (või nagu talle meeldiks- üliinimesest), tema kirjastiilist ja teemadest, mis teda puudutasid. Teose algus oli paljutõotav- oli huvitav lugeda Nietzsche heietusi ühiskonna, moraali, kristluse, kaaskondlaste ja sakslaste suhtes. Raamatu lõpp muutus igavaks, aga ilmselt just seetõttu, et ma polnud ta teostega kursis. Vormilt meenutas see veidi Rosseau "Üksildase uitaja mõtisklusi". Nietzsche ülistas samamoodi üksindust, looduses viibimist ja väga olulisel määral rõhutas ta kliima- ja toitumisharjumusi inimese heaolu kujundamisel: "Kuid üksildus on minu hädavajadusi, teisisõnu, tervenemine, naasmine ensese juurde, hingetõmme vabas, kerges, värelevas õhus..." Nietzsche oli ääretult kriitiline tubase eluviisi suhtes: "Istuda nii vähe kui võimalik; mitte usaldada ühtki mõtet, mis pole sündinud vabas õhus ja vaba liikumise viljana- mida ka musklid poleks pühitsenud." Toasistumine oli Nietzsche meelest irooniliselt lausa päris patt püha vaimu vastu. Ridade vahelt tuli välja pisut ka Nietzsche zen-budistlik elufilosoofia: "Veel praeguselgi hetkel vaatan ma oma tulevikku- avarat tulevikku!- kui tüünet merd: mitte minid ihad ei säbrusta tema pinda." Eriti puudutatuna tundsin ma end Nietzsche kriitikast liigse lugemuse suhtes. Kui üldiselt seostatakse suurt lugemust positiivsete aspektidega, siis Nietzsche põhjendas väga hästi ära vastupidise argumendi. Nimelt kaotavad tema meelest õpetlased, kes ainult raamatuid lappavad, viimaks võime midagi oma peaga välja mõelda. Loomulikult annab lugemus juurde palju mõtteid ja ideid, aga seda enam vähenevad indiviidi autentsed mõtted. Pea muutub sisuliselt lihtsalt google'i otsingumootoriks, kust ei tule midagi originaalset. Loovus kaob. Eriti hästi ilmestab seda meie aegunud koolisüsteem, mille eesmärgiks näib siiski faktiteadmiste tuupimine, mis üldiseks tervikuks seostamata ja enesele lahti mõtestamata, peale eksami sooritamist unustusse vajuvad. Teisalt väitis isegi autor, et tema eelistatuimaks puhkamisviisiks on lugemine. See eest valib ta väga kriitiliselt oma lugemisvara. Mina selles vaatenurgas nii kindlameelseks ei jääks- loomulikult ei ole mõtet kõike lugeda, aga huvi tuleks siiski kõige vastu tunda ja lapse kombel ringi avastada- asjad, mille suhtes meil on eelarvamused, võivad tutvumisel hoopis vastupidise mulje tekitada. Teisalt suurte meeste papagoiks muutuda ka ei tahaks. Nietzsche ise väitis, et suured ja geniaalsed mõtted tulid tal just tänu haigusest tingitud üksinda olesklemisele ja raamatutest hoidumisele. Loomeperioodil ei lasknud ta endal midagi lugeda. Olen sama kuulnud ka paljudelt muusikutelt, kes loometöö juures ei saa teist muusikat kuulata. Ilmselt on väga lihtne kaotada nii oma autentsus. Üldiselt võis raamatust leida huvitavaid ja ka mitte nii huvitavaid mõttekäike ning anda endale põhiteadmised Nietzsche loominguga sügavamaks tutvumiseks. (Kaheks aastaks eraldusse minemine peab veel ootama)
Mõned tsitaadid veel: (turukärbes nagu ma olen, armastan ma tistaate)
"Vihavimm, mis sündinud nõrkusest, on kahjulik eelkõige nõrgale endale- kui aga eeldada rikast natuuri, siis on ta ülearune tunne, tunne mida valitseda on vaat et rikkuse tõend."
"Saksa vaim on indigestioon, seedehäire, ta ei saa millestki jagu."
"Õpetlane, kes õigupoolest veel ainult raamatuid "lappab"- filoloog mõõdua normiga umbes 200 päevas- kaotab viimaks täiesti võime midagi oma peaga välja mõelda. Ja kui ta parajasti ei lappa, siis ta ka ei mõtle. Mõeldes ta vastab ärritusele (loetud mõttele)- kuni ta viimaks üksnes reageerib. Õpetlane paneb kogu oma jõu juba valmismõeldud mõtete eitamisse või jaatamisse, nende kritiseerimisse- ise ta enam ei mõtle... Tema enesekaitseinstinkt on nürinenud; vastasel korral oskaks ta end raamatute eest kaitsta. Õpetlane on decadent. -Omaenese silmil olen ma näinud, kuidas andekad, vaba ja rikkaliku eelsoodumusega natuurid juba kolmekümnendais aastaid end "raisku loevad", saades tühipaljaiks tuletikukesteks, kes hõõrdudes sädeme- "mõtte" esile toovad."
"Vastuväiteid kutsub esile ka kannatamine üksinduse all- mina ise olen alati vaid "paljunduse" all kannatanud..."
"Lõppudelõpuks ei või mitte keegi mitte millestki- raamatud kaasa arvatud- välja meelitada häält, mida temas endas pole."
3/5
Sunday, April 19, 2015
Tuesday, April 14, 2015
Susan Brown "Does Work Really Work"
Those who do work (and they are becoming less numerous as our economies slowly disintegrate) are something — they are teachers, nurses, doctors, factory workers, machinists, dental assistants, coaches, librarians, secretaries, bus drivers and so on. They have identities defined by what they do. They are considered normal productive members of our society.
Whether machinist, dancer, teacher, secretary, or pharmacist, it is not only one’s skills that are being sold to an employer, it is also one’s very being. When employees contract out their labour power as property in the person to employers, what is really happening is that employees are selling their own self determination, their own wills, their own freedom. In short, they are, during their hours of employment, slaves.
Increasing the amount of free work in our lives requires that we be conscious of the corrupting effects of money and barter. Thus, baby-sit your friend’s children not for money, but because you want to do so. Teach someone how to speak a second language, or edit someone’s essay, or coach a running team for the simple pleasure of taking part in the activity itself. Celebrate giving and helping as play, without expecting anything in return. Do these things because you want to, not because you have to.
Whether machinist, dancer, teacher, secretary, or pharmacist, it is not only one’s skills that are being sold to an employer, it is also one’s very being. When employees contract out their labour power as property in the person to employers, what is really happening is that employees are selling their own self determination, their own wills, their own freedom. In short, they are, during their hours of employment, slaves.
Increasing the amount of free work in our lives requires that we be conscious of the corrupting effects of money and barter. Thus, baby-sit your friend’s children not for money, but because you want to do so. Teach someone how to speak a second language, or edit someone’s essay, or coach a running team for the simple pleasure of taking part in the activity itself. Celebrate giving and helping as play, without expecting anything in return. Do these things because you want to, not because you have to.
Ted Kaczynski "Industrial Society and It's Future"
In modern industrial society only minimal effort is necessary to satisfy one's physical needs. It is enough to go through a training program to acquire some petty technical skill, then come to work on time and exert the very modest effort needed to hold a job. The only requirements are a moderate amount of intelligence and, most of all, simple OBEDIENCE. If one has those, society takes care of one from cradle to grave. (Yes, there is an underclass that cannot take the physical necessities for granted, but we are speaking here of mainstream society.) Thus it is not surprising that modern society is full of surrogate activities. These include scientific work, athletic achievement, humanitarian work, artistic and literary creation, climbing the corporate ladder, acquisition of money and material goods far beyond the point at which they cease to give any additional physical satisfaction, and social activism when it addresses issues that are not important for the activist personally, as in the case of white activists who work for the rights of nonwhite minorities. These are not always PURE surrogate activities, since for many people they may be motivated in part by needs other than the need to have some goal to pursue. Scientific work may be motivated in part by a drive for prestige, artistic creation by a need to express feelings, militant social activism by hostility. But for most people who pursue them, these activities are in large part surrogate activities. For example, the majority of scientists will probably agree that the "fulfillment" they get from their work is more important than the money and prestige they earn.
For many if not most people, surrogate activities are less satistying than the pursuit of real goals (that is, goals that people would want to attain even if their need for the power process were already fulfilled). One indication of this is the fact that, in many or most cases, people who are deeply involved in surrogate activities are never satisfied, never at rest. Thus the money-maker constantly strives for more and more wealth. The scientist no sooner solves one problem than he moves on to the next. The long-distance runner drives himself to run always farther and faster. Many people who pursue surrogate activities will say that they get far more fulfillment from these activities than they do from the "mundane" business of satisfying their biological needs, but that is because in our society the effort required to satisfy the biological needs has been reduced to triviality. More importantly, in our society people do not satisty their biological needs AUTONOMOUSLY but by functioning as parts of an immense social machine. In contrast, people generally have a great deal of autonomy in pursuing their surrogate activities.
But for most people it is through the power process---having a goal, making an AUTONOMOUS effort and attaining the goal---that self-esteem, self-confidence and a sense of power are acquired. When one does not have adequate opportunity to go through the power process the consequences are (depending on the individual and on the way the power process is disrupted) boredom, demoralization, low self-esteem, inferiority feelings, defeatism, depression, anxiety, guilt, frustration, hostility, spouse or child abuse, insatiable hedonism, abnormal sexual behavior, sleep disorders, eating disorders, etc.
Among the abnormal conditions present in modern industrial society are excessive density of population, isolation of man from nature, excessive rapidity of social change and the breakdown of natural small-scale communities such as the extended family, the village or the tribe.
Our lives depend on decisions made by other people; we have no control over these decisions and usually we do not even know the people who make them. ("We live in a world in which relatively few people---maybe 500 or 1,000---make the important decisions," Philip B. Heymann of Harvard Law School, quoted by Anthony Lewis, New York Times, April 21, 1995.) Our lives depend on whether safety standards at a nuclear power plant are properly maintained; on how much pesticide is allowed to get into our food or how much pollution into our air; on how skillful (or incompetent) our doctor is; whether we lose or GET A JOB
may depend on decisions made by government economists or corporation executives; and so forth. Most individuals are not in a position to secure themselves against these threats to more than a very limited extent. The individual's search for security is therefore frustrated, which leads to a sense of powerlessness.
In primitive societies life is a succession of stages. The needs and purposes of one stage having been fulfilled, there is no particular reluctance about passing on to the next stage. A young man goes through the power process by becoming a hunter, hunting not for sport or for fulfillment but to get meat that is necessary for food. (In young women the process is more complex, with greater emphasis on social power; we won't discuss that here.) This phase having been successfully passed through, the young man has no reluctance about settling down to the responsibilities of raising a family. (In contrast, some modern people indefinitely postpone having children because they are too busy seeking some kind of "fulfillment." We suggest that the fulfillment they need is adequate experience of the power process---with real goals instead of the artificial goals of surrogate activities.) Again, having successfully raised his children, going through the power process by providing them with the physical necessities, the primitive man feels that his work is done and he is prepared to accept old age (if he survives that long) and death. Many modern people, on the other hand, are disturbed by the prospect of physical deterioration and death, as is shown by the amount of effort they expend trying to maintain their physical condition, appearance and health. We argue that this is due to unfulfillment resulting from the fact that they have never put their physical powers to any practical use, have never gone through the power process using their bodies in a serious way. It is not the primitive man, who has used his body daily for practical purposes, who fears the deterioration of age, but the modern man, who has never had a practical use for his body beyond walking from his car to his house. It is the man whose need for the power process has been satisfied during his life who is best prepared to accept the end of that life.
Another way in which people satisfy their need for the power process is through surrogate activities. As we explained in paragraphs 38-40, a surrogate activity is an activity that is directed toward an artificial goal that the individual pursues for the sake of the "fulfillment" that he gets from pursuing the goal, not because he needs to attain the goal itself. For instance, there is no practical motive for building enormous muscles, hitting a little white ball into a hole or acquiring a complete series of postage stamps. Yet many people in our society devote themselves with passion to bodybuilding, golf or stamp-collecting. Some people are more "other-directed" than others, and therefore will more readily attach importance to a surrogate activity simply because the people around them treat it as important or because society tells them it is important. That is why some people get very serious about essentially trivial activities such as sports, or bridge, or chess, or arcane scholarly pursuits, whereas others who are more clear-sighted never see these things as anything but the surrogate activities that they are, and consequently never attach enough importance to them to satisfy their need for the power process in that way. It only remains to point out that in many cases a person's way of earning a living is also a surrogate activity. Not a PURE surrogate activity, since part of the motive for the activity is to gain the physical necessities and (for some people) social status and the luxuries that advertising makes them want. But many people put into their work far more effort than is necessary to earn whatever money and status they require,
Assuming that industrial society survives, it is likely that technology will eventually acquire something approaching complete control over human behavior. It has been established beyond any rational doubt that human thought and behavior have a largely biological basis. As experimenters have demonstrated, feelings such as hunger, pleasure, anger and fear can be turned on and off by electrical stimulation of appropriate parts of the brain. Memories can be destroyed by damaging parts of the brain or they can be brought to the surface by electrical stimulation. Hallucinations can be induced or moods changed by drugs. There may or may not be an immaterial human soul, but if there is one it clearly is less powerful than the biological mechanisms of human behavior. For if that were not the case then researchers would not be able so easily to manipulate human feelings and behavior with drugs and electrical currents.
For many if not most people, surrogate activities are less satistying than the pursuit of real goals (that is, goals that people would want to attain even if their need for the power process were already fulfilled). One indication of this is the fact that, in many or most cases, people who are deeply involved in surrogate activities are never satisfied, never at rest. Thus the money-maker constantly strives for more and more wealth. The scientist no sooner solves one problem than he moves on to the next. The long-distance runner drives himself to run always farther and faster. Many people who pursue surrogate activities will say that they get far more fulfillment from these activities than they do from the "mundane" business of satisfying their biological needs, but that is because in our society the effort required to satisfy the biological needs has been reduced to triviality. More importantly, in our society people do not satisty their biological needs AUTONOMOUSLY but by functioning as parts of an immense social machine. In contrast, people generally have a great deal of autonomy in pursuing their surrogate activities.
But for most people it is through the power process---having a goal, making an AUTONOMOUS effort and attaining the goal---that self-esteem, self-confidence and a sense of power are acquired. When one does not have adequate opportunity to go through the power process the consequences are (depending on the individual and on the way the power process is disrupted) boredom, demoralization, low self-esteem, inferiority feelings, defeatism, depression, anxiety, guilt, frustration, hostility, spouse or child abuse, insatiable hedonism, abnormal sexual behavior, sleep disorders, eating disorders, etc.
Among the abnormal conditions present in modern industrial society are excessive density of population, isolation of man from nature, excessive rapidity of social change and the breakdown of natural small-scale communities such as the extended family, the village or the tribe.
Our lives depend on decisions made by other people; we have no control over these decisions and usually we do not even know the people who make them. ("We live in a world in which relatively few people---maybe 500 or 1,000---make the important decisions," Philip B. Heymann of Harvard Law School, quoted by Anthony Lewis, New York Times, April 21, 1995.) Our lives depend on whether safety standards at a nuclear power plant are properly maintained; on how much pesticide is allowed to get into our food or how much pollution into our air; on how skillful (or incompetent) our doctor is; whether we lose or GET A JOB
may depend on decisions made by government economists or corporation executives; and so forth. Most individuals are not in a position to secure themselves against these threats to more than a very limited extent. The individual's search for security is therefore frustrated, which leads to a sense of powerlessness.In primitive societies life is a succession of stages. The needs and purposes of one stage having been fulfilled, there is no particular reluctance about passing on to the next stage. A young man goes through the power process by becoming a hunter, hunting not for sport or for fulfillment but to get meat that is necessary for food. (In young women the process is more complex, with greater emphasis on social power; we won't discuss that here.) This phase having been successfully passed through, the young man has no reluctance about settling down to the responsibilities of raising a family. (In contrast, some modern people indefinitely postpone having children because they are too busy seeking some kind of "fulfillment." We suggest that the fulfillment they need is adequate experience of the power process---with real goals instead of the artificial goals of surrogate activities.) Again, having successfully raised his children, going through the power process by providing them with the physical necessities, the primitive man feels that his work is done and he is prepared to accept old age (if he survives that long) and death. Many modern people, on the other hand, are disturbed by the prospect of physical deterioration and death, as is shown by the amount of effort they expend trying to maintain their physical condition, appearance and health. We argue that this is due to unfulfillment resulting from the fact that they have never put their physical powers to any practical use, have never gone through the power process using their bodies in a serious way. It is not the primitive man, who has used his body daily for practical purposes, who fears the deterioration of age, but the modern man, who has never had a practical use for his body beyond walking from his car to his house. It is the man whose need for the power process has been satisfied during his life who is best prepared to accept the end of that life.
Another way in which people satisfy their need for the power process is through surrogate activities. As we explained in paragraphs 38-40, a surrogate activity is an activity that is directed toward an artificial goal that the individual pursues for the sake of the "fulfillment" that he gets from pursuing the goal, not because he needs to attain the goal itself. For instance, there is no practical motive for building enormous muscles, hitting a little white ball into a hole or acquiring a complete series of postage stamps. Yet many people in our society devote themselves with passion to bodybuilding, golf or stamp-collecting. Some people are more "other-directed" than others, and therefore will more readily attach importance to a surrogate activity simply because the people around them treat it as important or because society tells them it is important. That is why some people get very serious about essentially trivial activities such as sports, or bridge, or chess, or arcane scholarly pursuits, whereas others who are more clear-sighted never see these things as anything but the surrogate activities that they are, and consequently never attach enough importance to them to satisfy their need for the power process in that way. It only remains to point out that in many cases a person's way of earning a living is also a surrogate activity. Not a PURE surrogate activity, since part of the motive for the activity is to gain the physical necessities and (for some people) social status and the luxuries that advertising makes them want. But many people put into their work far more effort than is necessary to earn whatever money and status they require,
Assuming that industrial society survives, it is likely that technology will eventually acquire something approaching complete control over human behavior. It has been established beyond any rational doubt that human thought and behavior have a largely biological basis. As experimenters have demonstrated, feelings such as hunger, pleasure, anger and fear can be turned on and off by electrical stimulation of appropriate parts of the brain. Memories can be destroyed by damaging parts of the brain or they can be brought to the surface by electrical stimulation. Hallucinations can be induced or moods changed by drugs. There may or may not be an immaterial human soul, but if there is one it clearly is less powerful than the biological mechanisms of human behavior. For if that were not the case then researchers would not be able so easily to manipulate human feelings and behavior with drugs and electrical currents.
Ven. Thubten Yeste "Make Your Mind an Ocean"
Despite what you think, you are not free. I’m not saying that you are under the control of
someone else. It’s your own uncontrolled mind, your own attachment, that oppresses you. If you
discover how you oppress yourself, your uncontrolled mind will disappear. Knowing your own mind
is the solution to all your problems.
One day the world looks so beautiful; the next day it looks terrible. How can you say that? Scientifically, it’s impossible that the world can change so radically. It’s your mind that causes these appearances. This is not religious dogma; your up and down is not religious dogma. I’m not talking about religion; I’m talking about the way you lead your daily life, which is what sends you up and down. Other people and your environment don’t change radically; it’s your mind. I hope you understand that.
When you were a child you loved and craved ice-cream, chocolate and cake, and thought, “When I grow up, I’ll have all the ice-cream, chocolate and cake I want; then I’ll be happy.” Now you have as much ice-cream, chocolate and cake as you want, but you’re bored. You decide that since this doesn’t make you happy you’ll get a car, a house, television, a husband or wife — then you’ll be happy. Now you have everything, but your car is a problem, your house is a problem, your husband or wife is a problem, your children are a problem.
Lord Buddha says that all you have to know is what you are, how you exist. You don’t have to believe in anything. Just understand your mind: how it works, how attachment and desire arise, how ignorance arises, and where emotions come from. It is sufficient to know the nature of all that; that alone can bring you happiness and peace. Thus, your life can change completely; everything turns upside down. What you once interpreted as horrible can become beautiful.
If I told you that all you were living for was chocolate and ice-cream, you’d think I was crazy. “No! no!” your arrogant mind would say. But look deeper into your life’s purpose. Why are you here? To be Lama Yeshe Wisdom Archive: Make Your Mind an Ocean page 10 well liked? To become famous? To accumulate possessions? To be attractive to others? I’m not exaggerating — check for yourself, then you’ll see. Through thorough examination you can realize that dedicating your entire life to seeking happiness through chocolate and ice-cream completely nullifies the significance of your having been born human.
Realize that the nature of your mind is different from that of the flesh and bone of your physical body. Your mind is like a mirror, reflecting everything without discrimination. If you have understanding-wisdom, you can control the kind of reflection that you allow into the mirror of your mind. If you totally ignore what is happening in your mind, it will reflect whatever garbage it encounters — things that make you psychologically sick. Your checking-wisdom should distinguish between reflections that are beneficial and those that bring psychological problems. Eventually, when you realize the true nature of subject and object, all your problems will vanish.
No matter which of the many world religions we consider, their interpretation of God or Buddha and so forth is simply words and mind; these two alone. Therefore, words don’t matter so much. What you have to realize is that everything — good and bad, every philosophy and doctrine — comes from mind. The mind is very powerful. Therefore, it requires firm guidance. A powerful jet plane needs a good pilot; the pilot of your mind should be the wisdom that understands its nature. In that way, you can direct your powerful mental energy to benefit your life instead of letting it run about uncontrollably like a mad elephant, destroying yourself and others.
If you understand that satisfaction does not depend only on external things, you can enjoy both material possessions and peace of mind.
People should be totally aware of both what’s going on in their own minds and how their minds are relating to the outside world, what effect the environment is having on their minds. You can’t close your life off from the world; you have to face it; you have to be open to everything.
If you’re having a problem with your parents, maybe you can solve it in a month. But changing and overcoming the fundamental dissatisfied mind can take many, many years. The waves are easy; the ocean is more difficult
Nirvana is a Sanskrit word that means freedom, or liberation. Inner liberation. It means that your heart is no longer bound by the uncontrolled, unsubdued, dissatisfied mind, not tied by attachment. When you realize the absolute nature of your mind, you free yourself from bondage and are able to find enjoyment without dependence upon sense objects. Our minds are bound because of the conception of ego; to loosen these bonds we have to lose our ego. This might seem strange to you, that you should lose your ego. It’s certainly not something we talk about in the West. On the contrary, here we are taught to build our egos; if you don’t have a strong ego, you’re lost, you’re not human, you’re weak. This seems to be society’s view. However, from the point of view of Buddhist psychology, the conception of ego is our biggest problem, the king of problems; other emotions are like ministers, ego is king. When you reach beyond ego, the cabinet of other delusions disappears, the agitated, fettered mind vanishes, and you attain an everlasting blissful state of mind. That’s what we call nirvana, inner freedom. Your mind is no longer conditioned, tied to something else, like it is at the moment. Presently, because our mind is dependent upon other phenomena, when those other phenomena move, they take our mind with them. We have no control; our mind is led like an animal with a rope through its nose. We are not free; we have no independence. Of course, we think we’re free, we think we’re independent, but we’re not; we’re not free inside. Every time the uncontrolled mind arises, we suffer.Therefore, liberation means freedom from dependence upon other conditions and the experience of stable, everlasting bliss, instead of the up and down of our normal lives. That’s nirvana. Of course, this is just a brief explanation; we could talk about it for hours, but not now. However, if you understand the nature of inner freedom, you realize that transient sense pleasures are nowhere near enough, that they’re not the most important thing. You realize that as a human being you have the ability and the methods to reach a permanent state of everlasting, unconditional joy. That gives you a new perspective on life.
You have to learn to investigate the deeper nature of anger, aggression, anxiety or whatever it is that troubles you. When you look into the deeper nature of negative energy you’ll see that it’s really quite insubstantial, that it’s only mind. As your mental expression changes, the negative energy disappears, digested by the wisdom that understands the nature of hatred, anger, aggression and so forth.
When you look at the outside world you have a very strong impression of its substantiality. You probably don’t realize that that strong impression is merely your own mind’s interpretation of what it sees. You think that the strong, solid reality really exists outside, and perhaps, when you look within, you feel empty. This is also a misconception: the strong impression that the world appears to truly exist outside of you is actually projected by your own mind. Everything you experience — feelings, sensations, shapes and colors — comes from your mind.
Most of the decisions that your mind has been making from the time you were born — “This is right; this is wrong; this is not reality” — have been misconceptions. A mind possessed by misconceptions is an uncertain mind, never sure of anything. A small change in the external conditions and it freaks out; even small things make it crazy. If you could only see the whole picture, you’d see how silly this was. But we don’t see totality; totality is too big for us.
If you have the misconception that your life will be perfect, its nature will be up Lama Yeshe Wisdom Archive: Make Your Mind an Ocean page 35 and down. If you expect your life to be up and down, your mind will be much more peaceful. What in the external world is perfect? Nothing. So since the energy of your mind and body are inextricably bound up with the external world, how can you expect your life to go perfectly? You can’t.
L ook into your mind. If you fervently believe that all your enjoyment comes from the material objects and dedicate your entire life to their pursuit, you’re under the control of a serious misconception
A mind that has such strong faith in the material world is narrow, limited; it has no space. Its nature is sick, unhealthy, or, in Buddhist terminology, dualistic
Recognize the nature of your mind. As human beings, we always seek satisfaction. By knowing the nature of the mind, we can satisfy ourselves internally; perhaps even eternally. But you must realize the nature of your own mind. We see the sense world so clearly, but we’re completely blind to our internal world, where the constant functioning of misconceptions keeps us under the control of unhappiness and dissatisfaction. This is what we must discover.
To enter the spiritual path, you must begin to understand your own mental attitude and how your mind perceives things. If you’re all caught up in attachment to tiny atoms, your limited, craving mind will make it impossible for you to enjoy life’s pleasures. External energy is so incredibly limited that if you allow yourself to be bound by it, your mind itself will become just as limited. When your mind is narrow, small things easily agitate you. Make your mind an ocean.
One day the world looks so beautiful; the next day it looks terrible. How can you say that? Scientifically, it’s impossible that the world can change so radically. It’s your mind that causes these appearances. This is not religious dogma; your up and down is not religious dogma. I’m not talking about religion; I’m talking about the way you lead your daily life, which is what sends you up and down. Other people and your environment don’t change radically; it’s your mind. I hope you understand that.
When you were a child you loved and craved ice-cream, chocolate and cake, and thought, “When I grow up, I’ll have all the ice-cream, chocolate and cake I want; then I’ll be happy.” Now you have as much ice-cream, chocolate and cake as you want, but you’re bored. You decide that since this doesn’t make you happy you’ll get a car, a house, television, a husband or wife — then you’ll be happy. Now you have everything, but your car is a problem, your house is a problem, your husband or wife is a problem, your children are a problem.
Lord Buddha says that all you have to know is what you are, how you exist. You don’t have to believe in anything. Just understand your mind: how it works, how attachment and desire arise, how ignorance arises, and where emotions come from. It is sufficient to know the nature of all that; that alone can bring you happiness and peace. Thus, your life can change completely; everything turns upside down. What you once interpreted as horrible can become beautiful.
If I told you that all you were living for was chocolate and ice-cream, you’d think I was crazy. “No! no!” your arrogant mind would say. But look deeper into your life’s purpose. Why are you here? To be Lama Yeshe Wisdom Archive: Make Your Mind an Ocean page 10 well liked? To become famous? To accumulate possessions? To be attractive to others? I’m not exaggerating — check for yourself, then you’ll see. Through thorough examination you can realize that dedicating your entire life to seeking happiness through chocolate and ice-cream completely nullifies the significance of your having been born human.
Realize that the nature of your mind is different from that of the flesh and bone of your physical body. Your mind is like a mirror, reflecting everything without discrimination. If you have understanding-wisdom, you can control the kind of reflection that you allow into the mirror of your mind. If you totally ignore what is happening in your mind, it will reflect whatever garbage it encounters — things that make you psychologically sick. Your checking-wisdom should distinguish between reflections that are beneficial and those that bring psychological problems. Eventually, when you realize the true nature of subject and object, all your problems will vanish.
No matter which of the many world religions we consider, their interpretation of God or Buddha and so forth is simply words and mind; these two alone. Therefore, words don’t matter so much. What you have to realize is that everything — good and bad, every philosophy and doctrine — comes from mind. The mind is very powerful. Therefore, it requires firm guidance. A powerful jet plane needs a good pilot; the pilot of your mind should be the wisdom that understands its nature. In that way, you can direct your powerful mental energy to benefit your life instead of letting it run about uncontrollably like a mad elephant, destroying yourself and others.
If you understand that satisfaction does not depend only on external things, you can enjoy both material possessions and peace of mind.
People should be totally aware of both what’s going on in their own minds and how their minds are relating to the outside world, what effect the environment is having on their minds. You can’t close your life off from the world; you have to face it; you have to be open to everything.
If you’re having a problem with your parents, maybe you can solve it in a month. But changing and overcoming the fundamental dissatisfied mind can take many, many years. The waves are easy; the ocean is more difficult
Nirvana is a Sanskrit word that means freedom, or liberation. Inner liberation. It means that your heart is no longer bound by the uncontrolled, unsubdued, dissatisfied mind, not tied by attachment. When you realize the absolute nature of your mind, you free yourself from bondage and are able to find enjoyment without dependence upon sense objects. Our minds are bound because of the conception of ego; to loosen these bonds we have to lose our ego. This might seem strange to you, that you should lose your ego. It’s certainly not something we talk about in the West. On the contrary, here we are taught to build our egos; if you don’t have a strong ego, you’re lost, you’re not human, you’re weak. This seems to be society’s view. However, from the point of view of Buddhist psychology, the conception of ego is our biggest problem, the king of problems; other emotions are like ministers, ego is king. When you reach beyond ego, the cabinet of other delusions disappears, the agitated, fettered mind vanishes, and you attain an everlasting blissful state of mind. That’s what we call nirvana, inner freedom. Your mind is no longer conditioned, tied to something else, like it is at the moment. Presently, because our mind is dependent upon other phenomena, when those other phenomena move, they take our mind with them. We have no control; our mind is led like an animal with a rope through its nose. We are not free; we have no independence. Of course, we think we’re free, we think we’re independent, but we’re not; we’re not free inside. Every time the uncontrolled mind arises, we suffer.Therefore, liberation means freedom from dependence upon other conditions and the experience of stable, everlasting bliss, instead of the up and down of our normal lives. That’s nirvana. Of course, this is just a brief explanation; we could talk about it for hours, but not now. However, if you understand the nature of inner freedom, you realize that transient sense pleasures are nowhere near enough, that they’re not the most important thing. You realize that as a human being you have the ability and the methods to reach a permanent state of everlasting, unconditional joy. That gives you a new perspective on life.
You have to learn to investigate the deeper nature of anger, aggression, anxiety or whatever it is that troubles you. When you look into the deeper nature of negative energy you’ll see that it’s really quite insubstantial, that it’s only mind. As your mental expression changes, the negative energy disappears, digested by the wisdom that understands the nature of hatred, anger, aggression and so forth.
When you look at the outside world you have a very strong impression of its substantiality. You probably don’t realize that that strong impression is merely your own mind’s interpretation of what it sees. You think that the strong, solid reality really exists outside, and perhaps, when you look within, you feel empty. This is also a misconception: the strong impression that the world appears to truly exist outside of you is actually projected by your own mind. Everything you experience — feelings, sensations, shapes and colors — comes from your mind.
Most of the decisions that your mind has been making from the time you were born — “This is right; this is wrong; this is not reality” — have been misconceptions. A mind possessed by misconceptions is an uncertain mind, never sure of anything. A small change in the external conditions and it freaks out; even small things make it crazy. If you could only see the whole picture, you’d see how silly this was. But we don’t see totality; totality is too big for us.
If you have the misconception that your life will be perfect, its nature will be up Lama Yeshe Wisdom Archive: Make Your Mind an Ocean page 35 and down. If you expect your life to be up and down, your mind will be much more peaceful. What in the external world is perfect? Nothing. So since the energy of your mind and body are inextricably bound up with the external world, how can you expect your life to go perfectly? You can’t.
L ook into your mind. If you fervently believe that all your enjoyment comes from the material objects and dedicate your entire life to their pursuit, you’re under the control of a serious misconception
A mind that has such strong faith in the material world is narrow, limited; it has no space. Its nature is sick, unhealthy, or, in Buddhist terminology, dualistic
Recognize the nature of your mind. As human beings, we always seek satisfaction. By knowing the nature of the mind, we can satisfy ourselves internally; perhaps even eternally. But you must realize the nature of your own mind. We see the sense world so clearly, but we’re completely blind to our internal world, where the constant functioning of misconceptions keeps us under the control of unhappiness and dissatisfaction. This is what we must discover.
To enter the spiritual path, you must begin to understand your own mental attitude and how your mind perceives things. If you’re all caught up in attachment to tiny atoms, your limited, craving mind will make it impossible for you to enjoy life’s pleasures. External energy is so incredibly limited that if you allow yourself to be bound by it, your mind itself will become just as limited. When your mind is narrow, small things easily agitate you. Make your mind an ocean.
Sunday, April 12, 2015
The Taboo Against Knowiny Who You Are
Nevertheless, wonder is not a disease. Wonder,
and its expression in poetry and the arts, are among the most important
things which seem to distinguish men from other animals, and
intelligent and sensitive people from morons.
Most of us have the sensation
that "I myself" is a separate center of feeling and action, living inside
and bounded by the physical body—a center which "confronts" an
"external" world of people and things, making contact through the
senses with a universe both alien and strange. Everyday figures of
speech reflect this illusion. "I came into this world." "You must face
reality." "The conquest of nature."
This feeling of being lonely and very temporary visitors in the
universe is in flat contradiction to everything known about man (and all
other living organisms) in the sciences. We do not "come into" this
world; we come out of it, as leaves from a tree. As the ocean "waves,"
the universe "peoples." Every individual is an expression of the whole
realm of nature, a unique action of the total universe. This fact is rarely,
if ever, experienced by most individuals. Even those who know it to be
true in theory do not sense or feel it, but continue to be aware of
themselves as isolated "egos" inside bags of skin
.We do not need a new religion or a new bible. We need a new
experience—a new feeling of what it is to be "I." The lowdown (which
is, of course, the secret and profound view) on life is that our normal
sensation of self is a hoax or, at best, a temporary role that we are
playing, or have been conned into playing—with our own tacit consent,
just as every hypnotized person is basically willing to be hypnotized.
The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against
knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently
separate, independent, and isolated ego.
Sometime, somehow, you (the real you,
the Self) will do it anyhow, but it is not impossible that the play of the
Self will be to remain unawakened in most of its human disguises, and
so bring the drama of life on earth to its close in a vast explosion.
and its expression in poetry and the arts, are among the most important
things which seem to distinguish men from other animals, and
intelligent and sensitive people from morons.
Most of us have the sensation
that "I myself" is a separate center of feeling and action, living inside
and bounded by the physical body—a center which "confronts" an
"external" world of people and things, making contact through the
senses with a universe both alien and strange. Everyday figures of
speech reflect this illusion. "I came into this world." "You must face
reality." "The conquest of nature."
This feeling of being lonely and very temporary visitors in the
universe is in flat contradiction to everything known about man (and all
other living organisms) in the sciences. We do not "come into" this
world; we come out of it, as leaves from a tree. As the ocean "waves,"
the universe "peoples." Every individual is an expression of the whole
realm of nature, a unique action of the total universe. This fact is rarely,
if ever, experienced by most individuals. Even those who know it to be
true in theory do not sense or feel it, but continue to be aware of
themselves as isolated "egos" inside bags of skin
.We do not need a new religion or a new bible. We need a new
experience—a new feeling of what it is to be "I." The lowdown (which
is, of course, the secret and profound view) on life is that our normal
sensation of self is a hoax or, at best, a temporary role that we are
playing, or have been conned into playing—with our own tacit consent,
just as every hypnotized person is basically willing to be hypnotized.
The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against
knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently
separate, independent, and isolated ego.
Sometime, somehow, you (the real you,
the Self) will do it anyhow, but it is not impossible that the play of the
Self will be to remain unawakened in most of its human disguises, and
so bring the drama of life on earth to its close in a vast explosion.
Wednesday, April 8, 2015
Peter Ralston "The Book of Not Knowing"
We have to be willing to let go on familiar "landmarks" like our self-identity and cherised beliefs.
The supreme lesson of human consciousness is to learn how to not know.
Every aspect of a person's indivduality- indeed, his entire experience of self, life, and reality- is largery a product of the culture in which he lives.
In our culture, we spend most of our time looking outward in search of some satisfying experience. We focus on the circumstances of life- attaining our desires and avoiding our fear- yet, when all is said and done, we still find little satisfaction.
Since our experience is dominated by assumptions and beliefs, we're limited to pursuing a self that is more conceptual than real.
Cultural assumptions are part of foundation for our perceptions. We can't help but take them for granted. We look out from them, which makes it difficult to look at them.
By design, the modern human mind craves knowledge, especially in places where we can find none. When faced with absence of information, we'll make something up- we will believe and assume.
Without the clutter of opinions and beliefs, we are free of bias, and free to look in any direction. We are no longer stuck in beliefs or conventions, or limited by our cultural histories or individual past experiences.
If you think you are bad or stupid, clumsy of worthless, and that these assessments exist in the same category as having no legs, then you are just as stuck with them as you would be with a wheelchair.
On the other hand, if you realize that these attributes are conceptual in nature, immediately you will experience the possibility that you can change them, or get free of them altogether.
Usually, the strong influence that our feelings have on us is more readily apparent and acceptable than the fact that we're dominated by our own thinking.
The task of directly experiencing the real nature of Being requires that we recognize and free ourselves of any and every concept we have- even the subtle and hidden ones- about who we are.
To get free from culturally mandated destiny of a life spent trying to fulfill the needs of something unreal and unnecessary, we need to make a distinction between what is real or original within ourselves and what is secondary and conceptual.
The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes- Marcel Proust
Feeling truly complete and whole, authentic, and alive only becomes possible if we recognize this fabricated self-identity for what it is, and seek out an authentic experience of real-being.
Moving through life unknowingly dragging along and expressing yourself as a conceptual conglomerate can only lead do dissatisfaction. Being ill at ease with one's self and life, feeling like something is missing or not right, or having a sense of being inauthentic in some way, are all directly related to our inability to distinguish between our real beings and conceptual selves.
There is no inherent problem in having concepts, but we must not trap ourselves into being concepts.
You're still alive and you're still you, so mind will naturally protect and promote all the beliefs behind the activites that keep you that way. Unless you think to question the validity of the assumptions behind all this, they will simply appear to you as reality.
Whenever you get there, there is no there- Gertrude Stein
In simple terms, once we think we are some way, this though will become confused with ourselves, and so must be preserved.
In fact, the vast majority of our survival concerns are conceptual- even many that appear at first glance to be physical. When we think of such objective aspects as where we live, what we wear, and what we eat, we might hold them as matters of physical survival. Procuring basic food, clothing, and shelter for ourselves is quite straightforward, and if it were just a matter of physical survival, our work would end as soon as these needs were fulfilled in any way.
The act of comparing yourself to others, the idea of being a good or a bad person can only occur in relation to others.
Our social survival is the source of every concern of self-image, self-consciousness, and self-esteem, and these issues don't pause for us, ever.
We are largery made up of concerns such as what people think of us, what we want them to think or fear they may think of us, what we think of ourselves, and what we present as ourselves to others.
Being happy is confused with being successful, or being comfortable, or having life turn out as desired, or being free from pain and suffering.
Using "happiness" as a survival goal puts it out of our reach- it becomes unobtainable "cheese" that motivates us forward in life. We are stuck moving from one obtainment to another, from one struggle to the next, sometimes feeling good about it and sometimes feeling bad, yet never actually and only being happy with whatever is taking place.
Being programmed with so many nonoccurring images and ideals, we can't help but experience a huge emptiness. We can't help but compare and contrast what isn't- fantasies of our future destiny, images of how we should be or how things should turn out, beliefs what life should be like, standards to which we should measure up- with what "is", or at least "is preceived", and find the "is" lacking. By extension, we find ourselves lacking.
An "ideal" is largery used as something to indicate what we are not. At best it provides a direction in which to go. At worst, it is something we use to beat ourselves up with because we find ourselves and our lives continuously lacking.
The idea that we deserve fulfillment sets up for endless disappointments.
Where does suffering arise? In our experience of something, which means it is created by the mind. There is no suffering in an object. If suffering is not inherent within the existence of anything, then experiencing something as-itself and for-itself cannot produce suffering. It is only within the interpretive mind that suffering takes place.
Still, it's not the having of a self-image that creates suffering, it's that we identify with it. Those may seem like the same act, since for us the mere having of an image of self is the same as identifying oneself via conceptual imagery. But this doesn't need to be the case. It is possible not to identify with the images we have about ourselves. We can allow it to be just an image, separate from the reality of the self. No matter what form the self-identity takes, the same principle apples. The very act of identifying one's self occurs "having" or "being" any number of perceives phenomena. If we don't identify with any of it, we can't suffer in our struggle to maintain or defend or to persist as any of it.
Suffering is actually produced by such familiar actions as judging others, trying to control life, clinging to ideals, and resisting or conforming to what's happening, and it is even produced in the activity of wanting.
We have many conscious and subconscious images of how we and life should be or become. Anything we experience that does not match those images- which is most of it- will be viewed, in both small and large ways, as threats or failures to the goal of attaining our self-agenda objectives.
It isn't getting what we want that makes us happy. It's being happy whatever we experience- or perhaps I should say, being happy regardless what we experience.
Obviously, the chanches of being happy must by definition be reduced to moments of achieving something we want, and to be completely happy we would have to have achieved all that we want- which is very unlikely since our wanting never ends.
If we find nothing missing in our experience right now- nothing that should be experienced that isn't experienced- then we can have no desire. If we have no future as a possibility, we will also have no desire, no craving, no wanting.
Complaining about my choice and generating images of more exciting activities only creates pain. Enjoying my work while I work and my play while I play produces no separation and so no suffering.
Ordinarily we tend to focus on aqcuiring whatever will fulfill our needs. With experience, we notice that our needs are never finally or ultimately fulfilled no matter what we accomplish.
Happiness is as much about being free from ourselves as it is about being free to be ourselves.
Earlier I pointed out that no matter what is accomplished throughout life, no matter how successfully you meet all of life's challenges, the end of the story is that you will fail. You will not survive. All goals accomplished and ordeals overcome will fall away. That may be depressing and unacceptable fact for a self. But to Being it doesn't matter. If happiness is dependent on successfully realizing your goals, then ultimately there can be no satisfaction. On the other hand, if you are happy working toward your goals, then your happiness is not reserved for attaining them. If you are happy with whatever you experience, then you are happy. Being happy is a matter of being happy, period. As far as being happy goes, your true nature is already happy; simply let it "be".
This ability to create a discipline is what allows you to get free of your own immediate self drives. Without discipline we find no access to freedom.
Genius is eternal patience- Michelangelo
The supreme lesson of human consciousness is to learn how to not know.
Every aspect of a person's indivduality- indeed, his entire experience of self, life, and reality- is largery a product of the culture in which he lives.
In our culture, we spend most of our time looking outward in search of some satisfying experience. We focus on the circumstances of life- attaining our desires and avoiding our fear- yet, when all is said and done, we still find little satisfaction.
Since our experience is dominated by assumptions and beliefs, we're limited to pursuing a self that is more conceptual than real.
Cultural assumptions are part of foundation for our perceptions. We can't help but take them for granted. We look out from them, which makes it difficult to look at them.
By design, the modern human mind craves knowledge, especially in places where we can find none. When faced with absence of information, we'll make something up- we will believe and assume.
Without the clutter of opinions and beliefs, we are free of bias, and free to look in any direction. We are no longer stuck in beliefs or conventions, or limited by our cultural histories or individual past experiences.
If you think you are bad or stupid, clumsy of worthless, and that these assessments exist in the same category as having no legs, then you are just as stuck with them as you would be with a wheelchair.
On the other hand, if you realize that these attributes are conceptual in nature, immediately you will experience the possibility that you can change them, or get free of them altogether.
Usually, the strong influence that our feelings have on us is more readily apparent and acceptable than the fact that we're dominated by our own thinking.
The task of directly experiencing the real nature of Being requires that we recognize and free ourselves of any and every concept we have- even the subtle and hidden ones- about who we are.
To get free from culturally mandated destiny of a life spent trying to fulfill the needs of something unreal and unnecessary, we need to make a distinction between what is real or original within ourselves and what is secondary and conceptual.
The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes- Marcel Proust
Feeling truly complete and whole, authentic, and alive only becomes possible if we recognize this fabricated self-identity for what it is, and seek out an authentic experience of real-being.
Moving through life unknowingly dragging along and expressing yourself as a conceptual conglomerate can only lead do dissatisfaction. Being ill at ease with one's self and life, feeling like something is missing or not right, or having a sense of being inauthentic in some way, are all directly related to our inability to distinguish between our real beings and conceptual selves.
There is no inherent problem in having concepts, but we must not trap ourselves into being concepts.
You're still alive and you're still you, so mind will naturally protect and promote all the beliefs behind the activites that keep you that way. Unless you think to question the validity of the assumptions behind all this, they will simply appear to you as reality.
Whenever you get there, there is no there- Gertrude Stein
In simple terms, once we think we are some way, this though will become confused with ourselves, and so must be preserved.
In fact, the vast majority of our survival concerns are conceptual- even many that appear at first glance to be physical. When we think of such objective aspects as where we live, what we wear, and what we eat, we might hold them as matters of physical survival. Procuring basic food, clothing, and shelter for ourselves is quite straightforward, and if it were just a matter of physical survival, our work would end as soon as these needs were fulfilled in any way.
The act of comparing yourself to others, the idea of being a good or a bad person can only occur in relation to others.
Our social survival is the source of every concern of self-image, self-consciousness, and self-esteem, and these issues don't pause for us, ever.
We are largery made up of concerns such as what people think of us, what we want them to think or fear they may think of us, what we think of ourselves, and what we present as ourselves to others.
Being happy is confused with being successful, or being comfortable, or having life turn out as desired, or being free from pain and suffering.
Using "happiness" as a survival goal puts it out of our reach- it becomes unobtainable "cheese" that motivates us forward in life. We are stuck moving from one obtainment to another, from one struggle to the next, sometimes feeling good about it and sometimes feeling bad, yet never actually and only being happy with whatever is taking place.
Being programmed with so many nonoccurring images and ideals, we can't help but experience a huge emptiness. We can't help but compare and contrast what isn't- fantasies of our future destiny, images of how we should be or how things should turn out, beliefs what life should be like, standards to which we should measure up- with what "is", or at least "is preceived", and find the "is" lacking. By extension, we find ourselves lacking.
An "ideal" is largery used as something to indicate what we are not. At best it provides a direction in which to go. At worst, it is something we use to beat ourselves up with because we find ourselves and our lives continuously lacking.
The idea that we deserve fulfillment sets up for endless disappointments.
Where does suffering arise? In our experience of something, which means it is created by the mind. There is no suffering in an object. If suffering is not inherent within the existence of anything, then experiencing something as-itself and for-itself cannot produce suffering. It is only within the interpretive mind that suffering takes place.
Still, it's not the having of a self-image that creates suffering, it's that we identify with it. Those may seem like the same act, since for us the mere having of an image of self is the same as identifying oneself via conceptual imagery. But this doesn't need to be the case. It is possible not to identify with the images we have about ourselves. We can allow it to be just an image, separate from the reality of the self. No matter what form the self-identity takes, the same principle apples. The very act of identifying one's self occurs "having" or "being" any number of perceives phenomena. If we don't identify with any of it, we can't suffer in our struggle to maintain or defend or to persist as any of it.
Suffering is actually produced by such familiar actions as judging others, trying to control life, clinging to ideals, and resisting or conforming to what's happening, and it is even produced in the activity of wanting.
We have many conscious and subconscious images of how we and life should be or become. Anything we experience that does not match those images- which is most of it- will be viewed, in both small and large ways, as threats or failures to the goal of attaining our self-agenda objectives.
It isn't getting what we want that makes us happy. It's being happy whatever we experience- or perhaps I should say, being happy regardless what we experience.
Obviously, the chanches of being happy must by definition be reduced to moments of achieving something we want, and to be completely happy we would have to have achieved all that we want- which is very unlikely since our wanting never ends.
If we find nothing missing in our experience right now- nothing that should be experienced that isn't experienced- then we can have no desire. If we have no future as a possibility, we will also have no desire, no craving, no wanting.
Complaining about my choice and generating images of more exciting activities only creates pain. Enjoying my work while I work and my play while I play produces no separation and so no suffering.
Ordinarily we tend to focus on aqcuiring whatever will fulfill our needs. With experience, we notice that our needs are never finally or ultimately fulfilled no matter what we accomplish.
Happiness is as much about being free from ourselves as it is about being free to be ourselves.
Earlier I pointed out that no matter what is accomplished throughout life, no matter how successfully you meet all of life's challenges, the end of the story is that you will fail. You will not survive. All goals accomplished and ordeals overcome will fall away. That may be depressing and unacceptable fact for a self. But to Being it doesn't matter. If happiness is dependent on successfully realizing your goals, then ultimately there can be no satisfaction. On the other hand, if you are happy working toward your goals, then your happiness is not reserved for attaining them. If you are happy with whatever you experience, then you are happy. Being happy is a matter of being happy, period. As far as being happy goes, your true nature is already happy; simply let it "be".
This ability to create a discipline is what allows you to get free of your own immediate self drives. Without discipline we find no access to freedom.
Genius is eternal patience- Michelangelo
Monday, March 30, 2015
Christopher Panza, Gregory Gale "Existentialism for Dummies"
.jpg)
See mahukas ligikaudu 350 leheküljeline raamat annab hea lihtsa (loe: inimkeelse) ülevaate eksistentsialismist. Mulle meeldis raamatu ülesehitus (tõepoolest lollidele ja lihtsalt). Kui üldiselt võib paksemaid filosoofiateoseid kätte haarates tekkida kergemat sorti ängistus seal sisalduva keerulistest terminitest üleujutava informatsiooni ees, siis see raamat mõjus pigem vastupidiselt. Autorid olid lähenenud eksistentsialismile pisut humoorikal (sellegipoolest tugevalt analüütilisel) moel. Raamat võttis enda kohuseks selgitada, struktueerida ja anda hea ülevaade kõikidest eksistentsialismiga seonduvatest autoritest ja teemadest alustades Nietzschest ja Kierkegaardist ja lõpetades parimate eksistentsialistlikke kirjandus- ja filmiteostega.
Raamatu positiivseks küljeks ongi hea ülevaate andmine. Loomulikult tasuks Sartre' ja Camus' loominguga iseseisvalt tutvuda, kuid antud teos andis hea selgituse filosoofide peamistele ideedele ja mõtetele, millele ise kohe ei pruugi jõuda (eriti arvestades näiteks Nietzsche kirjastiili). Raamat sobib seega hästi neile, kes on eksistentsialistlikke autoritega juba tutvust teinud, et aidata neid paremini hoomata. Teisalt võib see teos tekitada just suuremat huvi mõne filosoofi iseseisvaks läbitöötamiseks. Ma usun, et filosoofide paremaks mõistmiseks on oluline teada veidi nende taustalugu ja ülevaadet ideedest. Tegemist pole siiski lihtsa ilukirjandusega, millesse ilma igasuguste eelteadmisteta sisse võib sukelduda. Antud teost on aga küll väga lihtne ja ladus lugeda.
Eksistentsialism on kirjanduslik ja filosoofiline vool, mis sai populaarseks enne II maailmasõda. Selle esiisadeks peetakse aga juba 19. sajandi suuri filosoofe Nietzschet ja Kierkegaardi. Olulise panuse eksistentsialismile andis ka Martin Heidegger. Eksistentsialismi jaoks on suurimaks küsimuseks inimese püüd leida elu mõtet, sellest vaikivast maailmast, mis tema küsimustele ei vasta. Me oleme sündinud siia maailma vaba tahteta, ning meil tuleb igapäevaselt, tegelikult igal hetkel, võtta vastu otsuseid, mille õigsuses me kunagi kindel ei saa olla. Selles tuleneb absurditunne, mis tekitab ängistust. Me elame irratsionaalses maailmas, mida me üritame ratsionaalse mõtlemisega analüüsida. Pole ime, et sellest tuleneb suur lahkheli. Kui inimene absurdiga algselt silmitsi seisab, tunneb ta tohutut ärevust ja võõrandumist. Ta on ärganud sellest ühiskonna poolt loodud unenäolisest elusaginast ning ei suuda enam end sellega kuidagi siduda. Kuidas võtta vastu otsuseid, kui me ei tea kunagi, mis on õige ja vale? Kõik inimeste eesmärgid ja teod näivad äkitselt tühise ajaraiskamisena. Eksistentsialistide meelest seisab inimene siis valiku ees- kas tappa end ära või summutada oma ängistus igapäevasesse kohustustest tulvil rutiini. Ära tapmise korral mõistetakse küll elu mõttetust, kuid ei jõuta selle mõttetusega kaasneva vabaduse tunnetamiseni. Teine valik ei muuda lihtsalt mitte midagi. Inimene unustab küsimuse ning allub teiste ühiskonnaliikmete konformsusele. Eksistentsialistide meelest pole kumbki valik õige. Eksistentsialistlik ängistus on nende meelest positiivne, kuna sellest on võimalik saada impulss oma elu ümber korraldamiseks. Eksistentsialismi põhiideeks on see, et inimene on oma eluvalikutes täiesti vaba. See tähendab, et igas olukorras on meil võimalik käituda täpselt nii, nagu me ise õigeks peame. Kuigi selline väide näib kõlavat hästi- me oleme täiesti vabad. Kas pole see just see, mida me oleme alati ihanud? Kuid paraku ei- näib, et enamik inimesi kardab seda vabadust veel rohkem, kui täielikku orjust. Mks? Aga loomulikult sellepärast, et vabadusega kaasneb vastutus oma otsuste ees. Kui me pole vabad, on meil võimalik alati kedagi/midagi teist süüdistada. Me teeme seda nõmedat tööd, sest meil on paratamatult vaja raha, et korteriüüri maksta. Aga kas tegelikult on? Kui seda väidet pikemalt analüüsida, ilmneb, et tegelikult on meil vabadus oma olukorda muuta. Meil on võimalik vahetada töökohta. Meil on võimalik öelda töö üldse täiesti üles. Meil ei ole sundi korteris elada. Me võime otsida odavama korteri. Me võime olla ka kodutud. Isegi, kui see pole enamike jaoks eelistatuim valik, ei tähenda, et see poleks valik. See võimalusterohkus annabki inimesele täieliku vabaduse. Paljud inimesed tõlgendavad seda vabadust endale hedonismina. Inimene suunab kogu oma energia naudingute ammutamisele. See pole eksistentsialistide meelest jätkusuutlik. Naudingute ihaldamine pole mingil juhul küll halb, kuid jõuab lõpuks ringiga tagasi jälle elu mõttetuse juurde. Inimene üritab summutada ängistust mässumeelsesse naudisklemisele, kuid tunneb end siiski tühjana. Teiseks ängistuse summutamise viisiks on tohutult tegevusterohke elu elamine. Teate küll neid inimesi, kelle päevad on hommikust õhtuni täispikitud erinevaid tegevusi, lihtsalt selleks, et saada elus võimalikult palju kogemusi. Sellega ei kaasne aga rahulduspakkuv elu. Inimene jookseb ringi selleks, et ei peaks vaikuses ootava tühjusega silmitsi seisma. Eksistentsialistide meelest tuleb igal inimesel leida enese jaoks see mõte ning hakata oma elu selle ümber üles ehitama. Mõte võib aja jooksul muutuda, nagu muutub ka inimese isiksus. 20. aastane mina ja 50. aastane mina ei ela kindlasti samade eesmärkide nimel. Inimese isiksus muutub pidevalt. Sa ei pea olema see inimene, kes sa olid 5 minutit tagasi, rääkimata aastakümnetest! Oluline on see, et inimene oleks truu oma praegusel hetkel keskmes olevale mõttele. Sellisel juhul on meil võimalik kujundada endale täpselt selline elu, nagu me ise soovime.
Meie elu on alati meie valikute tulemus. Eksistentialistide meelest oleme me alati oma elu eest täielikult vastutavad. Välised tegurid võivad küll meid mõjutada, kuid peamiseks jääb alati meie enda suhtumine antud olukorda. Kui me pole olukorraga rahul, saame sealt minema liikuda või oma suhtumist muuta. Ehedaks näiteks on Camus' kuulsaim essee "Sisyphose müüt", kus antiik-kreeka kangelane Sisyphos on määratud igavesti mäe tippu rasket kivi veeretama. Kui Sisyphos jõuab mäe tippu, veereb kivi tagasi alla ning Sisyphosel tuleb uuesti alustada. Camus' loo püant seisneb aga selles, et kivi alla veeretades on Sisyphose näol naeratus. See on ootamatu suhtumine, vastupidiselt sellele mida me Sisyphoselt selles olukorras ootaksime. Aga selles seisnebki Sisyphose vabadus. Võimalus otsutada oma suhtumise üle. Sisyphose tuima ja rutiinset tulemusteta tööd võib sama hästi üle kanda kõikide inimeste eludele. Inimese elu seisneb tegelikult tühja töö tegemises, mis suuremas plaanis ei oma mingisugust mõtet. Aga meil on võimalik muuta oma suhtumist sellesse töösse, või valida töö, mis pakub meile vähemalt rõõmu (erinevalt Sispyhosest pole me mäeahelikule vangistatud). Ehk siis ei tähenda eksistentsialistide jaoks elu mõttetus seda, et me peaks kõigele käega lööma ja loobuma (enesetapp), vaid me peame looma oma elule ise mõtte, võtma oma elu eest vastutuse ja elama just sellist elu, nagu meile endile kõige õigem tundub. See on eksistentsialismi ilusaim pool, mis tihtipeale eksistentsialismi tõlgendamisel varju jääb. Üldiselt on eksistentsialistidest jäänud arusaam, kui olemisevalude all kannatavatest boheemidest. Vastupidi- eksistentsialistid usuvad, et eksistentsialism teeb elu elamisväärseks. Tihtipeale raskemaks (ühiskonnale vastuvoolu ujumise pärast), kuid elamisväärsemaks, sest võimaldab meil elada autentset elu. See tähendab, et inimene lähtub oma eluotsuste tegemisel alati iseendast, mitte teistest välistest teguritest. Muidugi on alati palju lihtsam teha nii, nagu teised ütlevad- mine ülikooli, tee seda tööd, osta see auto. Ühine teiste eeskujulike kodanike kombel tuima rat race'iga! Kõrvaleastumine on riskantne. See võib tähendada kehvemat majanduslikku olukorda, konflikte kaasaegsetega jne. Kuid eksistentsialistide meelest on need kannatused väärt, kuna tulemuseks on autentne indiviid. Või siis Nietzsche sõnastuses "übermensch" (ülinimene).
Eksistentsialismi puhul on põnev veel ka see, millise tähtsuse annavad nad emotsioonidele. Nende meelest on inimeste emotsioonidel väga suur roll meie heaolu kujunemisel. Miks? Aga loomulikult sellepärast, et inimestel pole paratamatult muud võimalust kui kogu aeg eksisteerida- see tähendab, olla igal oma elu hetkel mingis olukorras, suhestuda ümbritseva maailma ja teiste inimestega. Maailma interpreteerimisel saab vastutavaks aga just inimese emotsionaalne meelestatus. Pole ime, et kui oleme näiteks pärast eksamil läbikukkumist halvas tujus, näeme enda ümber järjest rohkem halbu asju- vihma sajab, buss jääb hiljaks jne. Kui oleme aga eufoorilised ja põnevil, ei kipu me vihmast väljagi tegevat. Me võime olla vihma üle isegi õnnelikud. Kui emotsioonidel on niivõrd suur roll inimese heaolu tagamisel, näitab see seda, et pelgalt oma emotsioonide kontrollimisega suudame me oma elu õnnelikumalt elada (sealt tuleneb ka 90-ndatel alguse saanud positiivse psühholoogia suund). Eksistentsialistid jaotavad emotsioonid kaheks- igapäeva emotsioonid ja eksistentsialistlikud emotsioonid. Igapäeva emotsioonid on argise eluga kaasnevad erinevad emotsioonid, mis meie elule maiku annavad. Eksistentsialistlike emotsioonide puhul astume me iseenda suhtes aga justkui kõrvaltvaatajaks ning tunnetame iseenda suhestumist maailma/universumiga suuremas plaanis. Kui meid tabab mingil eluhetkel eksistentsialistlik ängistus, tuleb sellega silmitsi seista. Ängistus tuleneb sellest, et see viis, kuidas me elame, ei lähe kokku meie ideaalse minaga (või Freudist lähtuvalt alter egoga). Selle ängistusega tegelemine on tegelikult positiivne, sest aitab meil oma elu lahti mõtestada, et endale tähendusrikkal viisil edasi elada. Ängistuse allasurumise korral suleme taas silmad, hüppame rongile ning sukeldume robotikombel inimsaginasse. Elame teiste poolt meile ette söödetud moel. Eksistentsialistlik ängistus karjub meile, et meil on võimalus oma elu muuta!
Eksistentsialistide meelest peaksid kõik inimesed elama kirglikult. Kui inimene leiab endale mõtte, mis pole teiste poolt talle peale surutud, on tal võimalik seada endale tähendusrikkaid eesmärke ja elada kirglikku elu. Inimene pole kivi, kelle ülesandeks on eksisteerida. Inimene on indiviid, kes saab valida, missugust elu ta elab.
Raamat kritiseeris palju veel ka tänapäeva inimeste passiivset eluviisi. Juba Kierkegaard tegi maha meedia negatiivset mõju inimeste elule. Selle asemel, et elada oma elu ning tegeleda enda eesmärkidega, ahmime me sisse täiesti mõttetut informatsiooni ning elame passiivselt teiste inimeste elusid. Võib kurvalt tõdeda, et praguse aja inimesed ei taha tegelikult elada- nad tahavad tunda, nagu nad elaksid. Meedia annab neile selleks suurepärase võimaluse. Internetiajastu on võõrandumist meie iseendi elust veelgi enam suurendanud. Sotsiaalmeedia annab meile võimaluse kaduda teiste inimeste eludesse ja tegemistesse. Ka teadmistesse suhtumine on muutunud. Tänapäeva inimene ei pea enam midag iseseisvalt teadma- tal pruugib vaid mõne klikiga kohe õige informatsioonini jõuda. Inimesed on muutunud justkui svammideks, kes imavad endasse mõttetut informatsiooni, selleks, et iseenda eest põgeneda.
Viimaseks oluliseks eksistentsialistliku filosoofia kriteeriumiks on pidev surma teadvustamine. Selles osas (nagu ka paljus muus) sarnaneb eksistentsialism palju budismiga. Inimese jaoks on oluline igal hetkel oma surelikkust meeles pidada. Põhjus selleks on lihtne- kui me unustame oma surelikkuse, võtame me elu liiga lihtsakäeliselt ning ei omista sellele suurt väärtust. Pidev surma teadvustamine annab meie elule suurema tähenduse ning aitab meil endi valikutele truuks jääda. Eksistentsialistid lähevad koguni nii kaugele, et võiksime iga oma valiku võimaluse kõrvale asetada lisaks ka surma. Ma võin minna täna kontserdile, aga ma võin ka surra. Ma võin juua kohvi, aga ma võin end ka ära tappa. Selline lähenemine võib tunduda äärmuslik ja kohatu, kuid täidab tegelikult suurepäraselt oma eesmärki. Me ei pea surma kartma, aga me peame seda alati meeles pidama, sest ainult sellisel juhul väärtustame oma elu tõeliselt. Tänapäeva ühiskonnas toimime me hoopis vastupidi. Surm on tabuteema, mida me kogu aeg eirata üritame. Me elame kunstlikes tarbimiskeskkondades, kuhu surmal mingisugust asja pole. Meile tekib tunne, et me elame igavesti. Aga me ei ela. Ja see, kuidas me elame, on lõpuks täielikult meie otsutada.
5/5
Saturday, March 28, 2015
Artur Schopenhauer "Geniaalsusest" (kogumikust "Kunstidest")
See Schopenhaueri teos jäi mulle filosoofiasaalis kogemata silma ja kuna Schopenhauer on mulle varasemalt väga hea mulje jätnud, otsustasin sellele pilgu peale heita. Teos koosneb Schopenhaueri erinevatest esseedest. "Geniaalsusest" näis kutsuv juba ainuüksi oma nime pärast ning peab tõdema, et sisus ei pidanud pettuma. Essee eesmärgiks on luua geniaalse inimese portree- mille poolest erineb tõeline geenius ülejäänud ininmkonnast. Ja tuleb nentida, et selline arutlev analüüs on äärmiselt veenev (psühholoogide arvamusega pole ma veel end kurssi viinud).
Esmalt üritab Schopenhauer eristada geeniust tavalisest andekast inimesest. "Andekas mõtleb kiiremini ja õigemini kui teised, seevastu geenius teistsugust maalma kui kõik teised, ühtlasi tunnetab ta teistele avanevat maailma sügavamalt, sest see peegeldub tema peas objektiivsemalt, seega täielikumalt ja selgemalt." Schopenhaueri meelest on geeniusel tavalisest inimesest suurem tunnetusvõime. Kui tavalised inimesed tegutsevad vastavalt enda tahtele ja eesmärkidele ning muutuvad passiivseks kohe, kui nad seda aktiveerida ei suuda, siis geeniuse tunnetusvõime on ergas täiesti eesmärgivabas olekus. "Otse öeldes: geniaalsus seisneb selles, et tunnetusvõime on arenenud palju kaugemale, kui nõuab tahte teenimine- algul tekkis tunnetus üksnes selleks." Filosoofi meelest võib lihtsustavalt öelda, et tavaline inimene koosneb 2/3 tahtest ja 1/3 intellektist, seevastu geenius omab 2/3 intellekti ja 1/3 tahet. Üheks oluliseimaks geeniuse omaduseks ja tööriistaks peab Schopenhauer fantaasiat. "Ainult tänu fantaasiale saab geenius vastavalt oma kunsti-, luule, või mõtteloominguga seonduvatele vajadustele silme ette manada elava pildi igast esemest või protsessist ja sel moel ammutada meelelisest tunnetusest, st igasuguse tunnetuse algallikast pidevalt värsket toitu. Fantaasialennuga nimene oskaks nagu vaime välja kutsuda, kes ilmutavad talle õigel ajal tõdesid, mida asjade pelk reaalsus vaid nõrgalt, harva ja enamasti valel ajal ilmutab." Nagu eelnevalt mainitud, eristab geeniust tavalisest inimesest tahteväline tegevus st. looming, mis sünnib justkui iseenesest, geeniuse fantaasiarikkast tunnetusest tingituna. "See, mida nimetatakse geniaalsuse tärkamiseks, pühaks tunniks, vaimu silmapilguks, ei tähenda muud, kui et tahtest vabanenuna ei lasku intellekt tegevustesse ega lõtvu, vaid lühikese hetke vältel iseenesest aktiveerub." Seega leiab Schopenhauer, et andekatel ja teotahtelistel inimestel ei õnnestu elases geeniuse tasandile jõuda. "Maailm saab avalduda ehtsates värvides ja ehtsal kujul, täielikus ja õiges tähenduses alles siis, ku tahtest ja tahte tõugetest vabalt, ent tulvil energiat objektide kohal hõljudes tegutseb." Schopenhaueri meelest on geeniustele omaseks raskused igapäevaeluga toimetulekul. "Geenius aga elab sageli väga viletsalt, sest ta toob oma isikliku heaolu ohvriks objektiivsele eesmärgile." Geeniustele on kunsti
looming eesmärk, teistele vahend. "Sellega kooskõlas on geeniuse teos igavene, aga seda tunnustavad enamasti alles järeltulevad põlved, teised elavad ja surevad oma ajas." Kuna geeniused ei keskendu isiklikele eesmärkidele, jäävad nad teistest inimestest tihti eemale. "Suur tunnetab end kõiges ja seega kõiksuses, ta ei ela väikeste kombel üksnes mikro-, vaid pigem makrokosmoses." Teistest võõrandumist soosib ka geeniuse ebapraktiline eluviis, mis ülejäänud ühiskonnaliikmetele mingisugust silmaga mõõdetavat kasu ei tooda. See aga teebki filosoofi meelest geeniuse töö viljad niivõrd eriliseks. "Seepärast on meie süda neid nautides avali, me tõuseme maisest viletsusest kõrgemale.- Harva näeme koos ilusat ja kasulikku. Kõrged ja ilusad puud vilja ei kanna, viljapuud on väikesed ja inetud jändrikud." Kuigi järeltulevad põlved geeniuste töid kõrgelt hindavad, on tal omaaegsetega suhtlemine vägagi raskendatud."Geenius aga satub oma aega nagu komeet planeetide orbiidile, mille reeglipärasele ja ülevaatlkule korrale on tema ekstsentriline kulg võõras." Kuna geeniuse töid ei suudeta hinnata, tuleb tal elu veeta enamasti üksildaselt."Ta on selleks liiga haruldane, et kergesti omataolist kohata ja erineb liiga palju teistest, et nende kaaslane olla. Teistel domineerib tahe, geeniusel tunnetus, seega pole neil ühiseid rõõme." Väga hästi oskab Schopenhauer sõnastada talendi ja geeniuse põhimõttelist erinevust. "Talent võib ületada teiste võimet midagi saavutada, mtte aga võimet mõista, seetõttu leiab ta alati neid, kes teda hndavad. Geenius seevastu ei ületa teisi mitte ainult saavutuste, vaid ka mõistmisvõime poolest, seetõttu ei saa teised temast vahetult aru."
Geniaalsuse tärkamiseks peab autor loomulikult lapsepõlve, mil kõik inimesed on omamoodi geeniused, sest tunnetavad maailma palju sügavamalt, kui kunagi hilisemas elus. "Oleks ülearune lisada, millel lapseea ja geeniuse sarnasus põhineb- tunnetusvõime domineerimine tahtevajaduste üle ja sellest johtuval puhttunnetuslike tegevuse ülekaalul." Geeniused jäävad ühiskonnas alati teistest liikmetest eemale, kuna tajuvad seda lihtsalt teistmoodi, kui tavalised inimesed. "Kõik geeniused on juba sellepärast suured lapsed, et nad vaatavad maalma kui midagi võõrast, mingit vaatemängu- nende huvi on puhtobjektiivne."
Esmalt üritab Schopenhauer eristada geeniust tavalisest andekast inimesest. "Andekas mõtleb kiiremini ja õigemini kui teised, seevastu geenius teistsugust maalma kui kõik teised, ühtlasi tunnetab ta teistele avanevat maailma sügavamalt, sest see peegeldub tema peas objektiivsemalt, seega täielikumalt ja selgemalt." Schopenhaueri meelest on geeniusel tavalisest inimesest suurem tunnetusvõime. Kui tavalised inimesed tegutsevad vastavalt enda tahtele ja eesmärkidele ning muutuvad passiivseks kohe, kui nad seda aktiveerida ei suuda, siis geeniuse tunnetusvõime on ergas täiesti eesmärgivabas olekus. "Otse öeldes: geniaalsus seisneb selles, et tunnetusvõime on arenenud palju kaugemale, kui nõuab tahte teenimine- algul tekkis tunnetus üksnes selleks." Filosoofi meelest võib lihtsustavalt öelda, et tavaline inimene koosneb 2/3 tahtest ja 1/3 intellektist, seevastu geenius omab 2/3 intellekti ja 1/3 tahet. Üheks oluliseimaks geeniuse omaduseks ja tööriistaks peab Schopenhauer fantaasiat. "Ainult tänu fantaasiale saab geenius vastavalt oma kunsti-, luule, või mõtteloominguga seonduvatele vajadustele silme ette manada elava pildi igast esemest või protsessist ja sel moel ammutada meelelisest tunnetusest, st igasuguse tunnetuse algallikast pidevalt värsket toitu. Fantaasialennuga nimene oskaks nagu vaime välja kutsuda, kes ilmutavad talle õigel ajal tõdesid, mida asjade pelk reaalsus vaid nõrgalt, harva ja enamasti valel ajal ilmutab." Nagu eelnevalt mainitud, eristab geeniust tavalisest inimesest tahteväline tegevus st. looming, mis sünnib justkui iseenesest, geeniuse fantaasiarikkast tunnetusest tingituna. "See, mida nimetatakse geniaalsuse tärkamiseks, pühaks tunniks, vaimu silmapilguks, ei tähenda muud, kui et tahtest vabanenuna ei lasku intellekt tegevustesse ega lõtvu, vaid lühikese hetke vältel iseenesest aktiveerub." Seega leiab Schopenhauer, et andekatel ja teotahtelistel inimestel ei õnnestu elases geeniuse tasandile jõuda. "Maailm saab avalduda ehtsates värvides ja ehtsal kujul, täielikus ja õiges tähenduses alles siis, ku tahtest ja tahte tõugetest vabalt, ent tulvil energiat objektide kohal hõljudes tegutseb." Schopenhaueri meelest on geeniustele omaseks raskused igapäevaeluga toimetulekul. "Geenius aga elab sageli väga viletsalt, sest ta toob oma isikliku heaolu ohvriks objektiivsele eesmärgile." Geeniustele on kunsti
looming eesmärk, teistele vahend. "Sellega kooskõlas on geeniuse teos igavene, aga seda tunnustavad enamasti alles järeltulevad põlved, teised elavad ja surevad oma ajas." Kuna geeniused ei keskendu isiklikele eesmärkidele, jäävad nad teistest inimestest tihti eemale. "Suur tunnetab end kõiges ja seega kõiksuses, ta ei ela väikeste kombel üksnes mikro-, vaid pigem makrokosmoses." Teistest võõrandumist soosib ka geeniuse ebapraktiline eluviis, mis ülejäänud ühiskonnaliikmetele mingisugust silmaga mõõdetavat kasu ei tooda. See aga teebki filosoofi meelest geeniuse töö viljad niivõrd eriliseks. "Seepärast on meie süda neid nautides avali, me tõuseme maisest viletsusest kõrgemale.- Harva näeme koos ilusat ja kasulikku. Kõrged ja ilusad puud vilja ei kanna, viljapuud on väikesed ja inetud jändrikud." Kuigi järeltulevad põlved geeniuste töid kõrgelt hindavad, on tal omaaegsetega suhtlemine vägagi raskendatud."Geenius aga satub oma aega nagu komeet planeetide orbiidile, mille reeglipärasele ja ülevaatlkule korrale on tema ekstsentriline kulg võõras." Kuna geeniuse töid ei suudeta hinnata, tuleb tal elu veeta enamasti üksildaselt."Ta on selleks liiga haruldane, et kergesti omataolist kohata ja erineb liiga palju teistest, et nende kaaslane olla. Teistel domineerib tahe, geeniusel tunnetus, seega pole neil ühiseid rõõme." Väga hästi oskab Schopenhauer sõnastada talendi ja geeniuse põhimõttelist erinevust. "Talent võib ületada teiste võimet midagi saavutada, mtte aga võimet mõista, seetõttu leiab ta alati neid, kes teda hndavad. Geenius seevastu ei ületa teisi mitte ainult saavutuste, vaid ka mõistmisvõime poolest, seetõttu ei saa teised temast vahetult aru."
Geniaalsuse tärkamiseks peab autor loomulikult lapsepõlve, mil kõik inimesed on omamoodi geeniused, sest tunnetavad maailma palju sügavamalt, kui kunagi hilisemas elus. "Oleks ülearune lisada, millel lapseea ja geeniuse sarnasus põhineb- tunnetusvõime domineerimine tahtevajaduste üle ja sellest johtuval puhttunnetuslike tegevuse ülekaalul." Geeniused jäävad ühiskonnas alati teistest liikmetest eemale, kuna tajuvad seda lihtsalt teistmoodi, kui tavalised inimesed. "Kõik geeniused on juba sellepärast suured lapsed, et nad vaatavad maalma kui midagi võõrast, mingit vaatemängu- nende huvi on puhtobjektiivne."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)