Detachment and Liberation
How would one get over his own view,
Led on by preference, entrenched in personal inclination,
Working up consummate systems for himself?
Indeed, as one would understand, so would he argue.
Whatever person, even unasked,
Speaks to others of his own morality and observances,
Whoever even of his own accord speaks of himself—
Adept ones say his is an ignoble way.
But a mendicant at peace, with self completely blown out,
Not boasting about his morality saying, "I am like this,"
For whom there are no distinguished positions at all in the world—
Adept ones say that his is a noble way. (Aṭṭhakavagga 3.2-4)
sakañhi diṭṭhiṁ kathamaccayeyya
chandānunīto ruciyā niviṭṭho
sayaṁ samattāni pakubbamāno
yathā hi jāneyya tathā vadeyya
yo attano sīlavatāni jantu
anānupuṭṭhova paresa pāvā
anariyadhammaṁ kusalā tamāhu
yo ātumānaṁ sayameva pāvā
santo ca bhikkhu abhinibbutatto
itihanti sīlesu akatthamāno
tamariyadhammaṁ kusalā vadanti
yassussadā natthi kuhiñci loke
Thou wilt set little value on pleasing song and dancing and the pancratium, if thou wilt distribute the melody of the voice into its several sounds, and ask thyself as to each, if thou art mastered by this; for thou wilt be prevented by shame from confessing it: and in the matter of dancing, if at each movement and attitude thou wilt do the same; and the like also in the matter of the pancratium. In all things, then, except virtue and the acts of virtue, remember to apply thyself to their several parts, and by this division to come to value them little: and apply this rule also to thy whole life. (M. Aurelius, Meditations XI.2)
Only the man who is unmoved by any sensations, the wise man
indifferent to pleasure, to pain, is fit for becoming deathless. (Bhagavad Gīta 2.15)
yaṃ hi na vyathayanty ete puruṣaṃ puruṣarṣabha
samaduḥkhasukhaṃ dhīraṃ somṛtatvāya kalpate
Actions are really performed by the working of the three gunas;
but a man deluded by the I-sense imagines, "I am the doer."
The wise man knows that when objects act on the senses, it is merely
the gunas acting on the gunas; thus, he is unattached. (Bhagavad Gīta 3.28-29)
tattvavit tu mahābāho guṇakarmavibhāgayoḥ
guṇā guṇeṣu vartanta iti matvā na sajjate
prakṛter guṇasaṃmūḍhāḥ sajjante guṇakarmasu
tān akṛtsnavido mandān kṛtsnavin na vicālayet
To a student who wanted to know where I stood with regard to the author of Zarathustra, I replied that I had long since stopped reading him. Why? "I find him too naive. . . ."
I hold his enthusiasms, his fervors against him. He demolished so many idols only to replace them with others: a false iconoclast, with adolescent aspects and a certain virginity, a certain innocence inherent in his solitary's career. He observed men only from a distance. Had he come closer, he could have neither conceived nor promulgated the superman, that preposterous, laughable, even grotesque chimera, a crotchet which could occur only to a mind without time to age, to know the long serene disgust of detachment.
Marcus Aurelius is much closer to me. Not a moment’s hesitation between the lyricism of frenzy and the prose of acceptance: I find more comfort, more hope even, in the weary emperor than in the thundering prophet. (E. M. Cioran, The Trouble With Being Born p. 86)
The blessed and immortal is itself free from trouble nor does it cause trouble for anyone else; therefore, it is not constrained either by anger or by favor. For such sentiments exist only in the weak. (Epicurus, Principal Doctrines I)
He who understands the limits of life knows how easy it is to remove the pain that results from want and to make one's whole life complete. As a result, he does not need actions that bring strife in their wake. (Epicurus, Principal Doctrines XXI)
Necessity is an evil thing, but there is no necessity to live beneath the yoke of necessity. (Epicurus, Vatican Sayings IX)
There is no adept. He does not exist. He does not speak. They but seek to net the wind, who are diverted by such things. The hermetist has reached a state that categorically avoids all reaction to human judgment. He has stopped taking an interest in what others may think of him, or say about him, just or unjust, good or bad. He knows only that certain things must happen: he provides the precise means and conditions for them and that is all. He does not pretend the action is his own. He is pure instrumentality. "Self-affirmation" is a mania he does not recgonize. (J. Evola, The Hermetic Tradition p. 214)
Yoga is destroyed by the following six causes: over-eating, exertion,
talkativeness, adhering to rules, company of men, and unsteadiness.
The following six bring speedy success: courage, daring, perseverance,
discriminative knowledge, faith, aloofness from company. (Haṭha Yoga Pradīpikā 1.15-16)
atyāhāraḥ prayāsaścha prajalpo niyamāghrahaḥ
jana-sangghaścha laulyaṃ cha ṣhaḍbhiryogho vinaśyati
utsāhātsāhasāddhairyāttattva-jñānāścha niśchayāt
jana-sanggha-parityāghātṣhaḍbhiryoghaḥ prasiddhyati
Just as a bee, drinking sweet juice, does not care for the smell of the flower;
so the mind, absorbed in the nāda [interior sound], does not desire the objects of enjoyment.
The mind, like an elephant habituated to wander in the garden of enjoyments,
is capable of being controlled by the sharp goad of anāhata nāda.
The mind, captivated in the snare of nāda, gives up all its activity;
and, like a bird with clipped wings, becomes calm at once.
Those desirous of the kingdom of Yoga, should take up
the practice of hearing the anāhata nāda, with mind collected and free from all cares.
Nāda is the snare for catching the mind; and,
when it is caught like a deer, it can be killed also like it.
Nāda is the bolt of the stable door for the horse.
A yogī should determine to practise constantly in the hearing of the nāda sounds.
Mind gets the properties of calcined mercury. When deprived of its unsteadiness it is calcined,
combined with the sulfur of nāda, and then it roams like it in time supportless ākāśa or Brahmā.
The mind is like a serpent, forgetting all its unsteadiness
by hearing the nāda, it does not run away anywhere.
The fire, catching firewood, is extinguished along with it;
and so the mind also, working with the nāda, becomes latent along with it.
The mind, like a deer, becomes absorbed and motionless on hearing the sound of bells, etc.;
and then it is very easy for an expert archer to kill it. (Haṭha Yoga Pradīpikā 4.90-99)
makarandaṃ pibanbhṝngghī ghandhaṃ nāpekṣhate yathā
nādāsaktaṃ tathā chittaṃ viṣhayānnahi kāngkṣhate
mano-matta-ghajendrasya viṣhayodyāna-chāriṇaḥ
samartho|ayaṃ niyamane nināda-niśitāngkuśaḥ
baddhaṃ tu nāda-bandhena manaḥ santyakta-chāpalam
prayāti sutarāṃ sthairyaṃ chinna-pakṣhaḥ khagho yathā
sarva-chintāṃ parityajya sāvadhānena chetasā
nāda evānusandheyo yogha-sāmrājyamichchatā
nādo|antaranggha-sāranggha-bandhane vāghurāyate
antaranggha-kurangghasya vadhe vyādhāyate|api cha
antarangghasya yamino vājinaḥ parighāyate
nādopāsti-rato nityamavadhāryā hi yoghinā
baddhaṃ vimukta-chāñchalyaṃ nāda-ghandhaka-jāraṇāt
manaḥ-pāradamāpnoti nirālambākhya-khe|aṭanam
nāda-śravaṇataḥ kṣhipramantaranggha-bhujangghamam
vismṝtaya sarvamekāghraḥ kutrachinnahi dhāvati
kāṣhṭhe pravartito vahniḥ kāṣhṭhena saha śāmyati
nāde pravartitaṃ chittaṃ nādena saha līyate
ghaṇṭādināda-sakta-stabdhāntaḥ-karaṇa-hariṇasya
praharaṇamapi sukaraṃ syāchchara-sandhāna-pravīṇaśchet
A man ought therefore to mount above all creatures, and perfectly to renounce himself, and to see that Thou, the Creator of all things, hast nothing amongst creatures like unto Thyself. Unless a man be set free from all creatures, he cannot entirely attend unto divine things. And therefore are there so few contemplative, for that few can wholly withdraw themselves from things perishing. (T. à Kempis, The Imitation of Christ III.XXXI.1)
[N]o human affair is worth being very concerned about. (Plato, Republic X.604)
But what would significant human matters be such that they are not disdained by one who has ascended to a realm higher than all these and is no longer dependent on anything below? Since he does not think that occurrences of good fortune would be significant, no matter how great they may be […] why should he think that the fall from power or the destruction of his state would be something great? But if he actually thought that these were great evils, or evil at all, his belief would be ridiculous, and he would no longer be virtuous, thinking that pieces of wood and stone and, by Zeus, the deaths of mortals are great matters—he who, we say, ought to hold the belief that death is better than life with the body. (Plotinus, Enneads 1.4.7)
[The soul] has to be unqualified by anything, if it is to take on the impressions of all things; so, in this case, the soul has to be formless to a greater degree, if it is not to be prevented from being filled and illuminated by the first nature. If this is so, the soul should withdraw from everything external and revert entirely to its own inside, without any inclination to anything external. Rather, the soul should ignore everything, especially things in sense-perception, but also in forms, and then, in considering the One, come to ignore itself. (Plotinus, Enneads 6.9.7)
Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should oby it in the lusts thereof. Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God. For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. (Romans 6:12-14)
Repose the body and calm the passions; if you yourself control yourself in this way, you will attract the divine essence to you. (Zosimos qtd in J. Evola, The Hermetic Tradition p.118)
Dharma
Even the wise man acts in accordance with his inner nature.
All beings follow their nature. What good can repression do? (Bhagavad Gīta 3.33)
sadṛśaṃ ceṣṭate svasyāḥ prakṛter jñānavān api
prakṛtiṃ yānti bhūtāni nigrahaḥ kiṃ kariṣyati
God takes care of the universe; that is to say, providence never abandons it, and it does not become more evil. The Christians are silly to say, therefore, that God turns the world back to himself after a period of neglect, nor does he become angry because man "sins"—any more than he is angry with monkeys and mice for doing what they do naturally. For each has his allotted place in the scheme of things. (Celsus, On the True Doctrine p. 85)
We must not resist nature but obey her. We shall obey her by fulfilling the necessary desires and the physical ones if they do not harm us, but harshly rejecting the harmful ones. (Epicurus, Vatican Sayings XXI)
‘The world is unstable and swept away.’ This is the first summary of the Dhamma.
‘The world has no shelter and no savior.’ This is the second summary the Dhamma.
‘The world has no owner—you must leave it all behind and pass on.’ This is the third summary of the Dhamma.
‘The world is wanting, insatiable, the slave of craving.’ This is the fourth summary of the Dhamma. (Raṭṭhapāla Sutta 36)
‘Upaniyyati loko addhuvo’ti kho, mahārāja, tena bhagavatā jānatā passatā arahatā sammāsambuddhena paṭhamo dhammuddeso uddiṭṭho[.]
‘Atāṇo loko anabhissaro’ti kho, mahārāja, tena bhagavatā jānatā passatā arahatā sammāsambuddhena dutiyo dhammuddeso uddiṭṭho[.]
‘Assako loko, sabbaṁ pahāya gamanīyan’ti kho, mahārāja, tena bhagavatā jānatā passatā arahatā sammāsambuddhena tatiyo dhammuddeso uddiṭṭho[.]
‘Ūno loko atitto taṇhādāso’ti kho, mahārāja, tena bhagavatā jānatā passatā arahatā sammāsambuddhena catuttho dhammuddeso uddiṭṭho[.]
Our motto, as everyone knows, is to live in conformity with nature: it is quite contrary to nature to torture one’s body, to reject simple standards of cleanliness and make a point of being dirty, to adopt a diet that is not just plain but hideous and revolting. In the same way as a craving for dainties is a token of extravagant living, avoidance of familiar and inexpensive dishes betokens insanity. Philosophy calls for simple living, not for doing penance, and the simple way of life need not be a crude one. (Seneca, Letter V)
Foolishness
[The Christians] have carried to an extreme a principle that we revered first: namely, that it does no one any good, in the end, to love life inordinately. But to hate life is just as wicked. The Christians do not suffer for a principle but because they break the law; they are not martyrs but robbers. (Celsus, On the True Doctrine p. 122)
It could only occur to a chronic drunkard that the ending of intoxication was also the end of existence; so, only someone who knew nothing but the state of thirst and of mania could think that the cessation of this state meant the end of all life, "nothingness." (J. Evola, The Doctrine of Awakening p. 203)
With fools no company keeping.
With the wise ever consorting,
To the worthy homage paying:
This, the Highest Blessing. (Mahā Maṅgala Sutta 2)
Asevanā ca bālānaṃ,
paṇḍitānañca sevanā;
Pūjā ca pūjaneyyānaṃ,
etaṃ maṅgalamuttamaṃ.
But one hears and sees at the same time that even this Olympian spectator and judge [referencing Odyssey I.48-51] is far from being angry at them for this and from thinking evil of them: "how foolish they are!" so he thinks in the face of the misdeeds of the mortals,—and "foolishness," "lack of understanding," a little "disturbance in the head," this much even the Greeks of the strongest, bravest age allowed themselves as the reason for much that was bad and doo-laden,—foolishness, not sin! do you understand that? (F. Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morality II.23)
[M]ost people, when they look back at the end, find that they have lived their whole life through provisionally, and are amazed to see that what they allowed to pass by so unappreciated and unenjoyed was their very life, the very thing in whose expectation they lived. And so the course of one’s life, as a rule, is such that, made a fool of by hope, one dances into the arms of death. (A. Schopenhauer, Parerga and Paralipomena vol. II §145)
Greatness
[T]he Sun is the King of Stars, most full of light, but receives it from the intelligible world above all other Stars, because the soul thereof is more capable of intelligible splendor. Wherefore he that desires to attract the influence of the Sun, must contemplate upon the Sun, not only by the speculation of the exterior light, but also of the interior. And this no man can do unless he return to the soul of the Sun, and become like to it, and comprehend the intelligible light thereof with an intellectual sight, as the sensible light with a corporeal eye. (H. Agrippa, De occulta philosophia II.60)
The just man is most free of perturbation, while the unjust man is full of the greatest disturbance. (Epicurus, Principal Doctrines XVII)
No one is to be greatly envied, countless are to be greatly lamented. (A. Schopenhauer, Parerga and Paralipomena vol. II §156)
Humility
Since the renaissance, nobody has known resignation. Lack of resignation is modern man’s tragic aura. The ancients submitted to their fate. No modern man is humble enough to be resigned. Nor are we familiar with contempt for life. We are not wise enough not to love it with infinite agony.
The ancients did not make so much of their suffering. This, however, is not the case with us, for we rebel against pain. (E. M. Cioran, Tears and Saints pp. 34-35)
When we refuse to admit the interchangeable character of ideas, blood flows … firm resolves draw the dagger; fiery eyes presage slaughter. No wavering mind, infected with Hamletism, was ever pernicious: the principle of evil lies in the will’s tension, in the incapacity for quietism, in the Promethean megalomania of a race that bursts with ideals, that explodes with its convictions, and that, in return for having forsaken doubt and sloth—vices nobler than all its virtues—has taken the path to perdition, into history, that indecent alloy of banality and apocalypse. (E. M. Cioran, A Short History of Decay p. 4)
And if all our actions—from breathing to the founding of empires or metaphysical systems—derive from an illusion as to our importance, the same is true a fortiori of the prophetic instinct. Who, with the exact vision of his nullity, would try to be effective and to turn himself into a savior? (E. M. Cioran, A Short History of Decay p. 6)
The sheng-jen [真人] can externally be identified to the common man, even to the contemptible man, appearing to lack knowledge, ability, practical sense, culture or ambitions, as one who is transported by the worldly stream; avoiding to stand up, to be conspicuous. This happens because of some kind of reflection, in his empirical humanity and in his behavior, of his keeping to himself, without externalizing anything. This impenetrable type of initiate may seem, and to a certain extent it truly is, very Far Eastern; however, it is still found in other Traditions, such as Mahayana Buddhism, Islam and, in a later period, in the Western Hermetic tradition and in Rosicrucianism. In Lao-tzu the description of the "real man" in such a cryptic form includes a vein of antinomism, namely of contempt for current values and norms, of the so-called "little virtue" and of what is related to the regulated social life. In Sufism mention is made of the malamatiyah, the,"blameworthy ones," who enjoy a higher, yet unknown dignity. In a Tibetan legend, Naropa cannot find his master Tilopa, because every time he encounters him he cannot recognize him as the person doing something which he, Naropa, considers reproachable. In Islam one finds the type of the majadhib, who are initiates who have operated a split, whereby their transcendental development has no consequences for their inferior and human dimension, which is abandoned to itself. (J. Evola, Taoism: the Magic, the Mysticism p. 17)
In order to have a sure compass always in hand for finding our bearings in life, and in order to view life always in the proper light without ever going astray, nothing is more useful than to accustom oneself to regarding this world as a place of penance, hence as a prison, a penal colony as it were, a labour camp as it was already called by the oldest philosophers[.] (A. Schopenhauer, Parerga and Paralipomena vol. II §156)
But truly, if a High Asian were to ask me what Europe is, then I would have to answer him: It is that part of the world that is completely possessed of the unheard-of and incredible delusion that the birth of a human being is his absolute beginning and he was created from nothing. (A. Schopenhauer, Parerga and Paralipomena vol. II §177)
The very name of philosophy, however modest the manner in which it is purused, is unpopular enough as it is: imagine what the reaction would be if we started dissociating ourselves from the conventions of society. Inwardly everything should be different but our outward face should conform with the crowd. (Seneca, Letter V)
Love
I despise Christians because they love men at close quarters. Only in the Sahara could I rediscover love. (E. M. Cioran, Tears and Saints p. 64)
[Mettā] is not a matter of running after others with cures and solicitude and effusions, but is something that is based on "obtaining one's own health"—that is, one's own spiritual fulfillment—until it becomes "radiant," and like the light of the sun that shines equally, irresistibly, and impersonally upon the good as upon the evil, without any special "affection," without any particular intent.
In this connection, we recall the discrimination made by Christian theology in order to explain the possibility of loving even those for whom one harbors a natural aversion and repugnance so strong that one may have to restrain oneself physically from giving expression to it. Here the distinction is between natural and supernatural love, between love based on the senses and love based on the senses and love based on will and liberty. The former is, in fact, conditioned by feeling and is not free, since it does not stir until confronted by an object corresponding to a tendency; for this reason, when the object changes or when the mind alters its outlook, the love decreases or gives place to another feeling. In this form of love the individual, in fact, only loves himself or, more correctly, it is the saṃsāric being in him that loves; and this is so not only with lustful love but also with sublimated forms of love and affection. This is all part of the world of dukkha, it is an alteration, a bond, a disturbance of the spirit. The Ariyan path of awakening does not recognize love in this sense, and regards it in all its forms as a limitation and an imperfection.
Different is amor intellectualis, which, though preserving the characteristics of an affective state sui generis, is based not on sensibility but, as we have said, on will and liberty. In Christian theology this is "loving all creatures in God"; which means that we here remember each individual's transcendental source, liking in him that which he is in the impersonal, metaphysical sense, and resolutely excluding any like or dislike proceeding from our particular nature. In this case liberty of psirit triumphs over the conditioned character of the senses, and love becomes the purer and the sign of higher liberty the less it depends upon particular satisfactions and attachment to single beings. (J. Evola, The Doctrine of Awakening pp. 161-162)
None of you truly believes until he loves for his brother that which he loves for himself. (An-Nawawi, Hadith 13)
The morality that offers the other cheek—so far as morality can here be spoken of—means, not an unwonted solicitude towards one's adversary, but complete indifference toward the fetters of this world, or more precisely a refusal to let oneself to be caught up in the vicious circle of terrestrial causations. The man who wants to be right at any price on the personal plane loses serenity and moves away from the "one thing needful"; the affairs of this world bring with them only disturbances, and disturbances take one further from God. […]
The "non-violence" advocated by the Gospels symbolizes—and renders effective—the virtue of the mind preoccupied with "what is" rather than with "what happens". As a rule, man loses much time and energy in questioning himself about the injustice of his fellows as well as about possible hardships of destiny; whether there is human injustice or divine punishment the world—the "current of forms" or the "cosmic wheel"--is what it is: it simply follows its course; it is conformable to its own nature. Men cannot be unjust insofar as they form part of this current; to be detached from the current and to act contrary to the logic of facts and of the bondage that it engenders is bound to appear madness in the eyes of the world, but it is in reality to adopt here below the point of view of eternity. And to adopt this point of view is to see oneself from a great distance: it is to see that we ourselves form a part of this world of injustice, and this is one more reason for remaining indifferent amid the uproar of human quarreling. The saint is the man who acts as if he had died and returned to life; having already ceased to be "himself", in the earthly sense, he has absolutely no intention of returning to that dream, but maintains himself in a kind of wakefulness, which the world, with its narrowness and impurities, cannot understand.
Pure love is not of this world of oppositions; it is by origin celestial, and its end is God; it lives as if it were in itself by its own light and in the beam of God-Love[.] (F. Schuon, The Fullness of God pp. 52-53)
He therefore that despiseth, despiseth not men, but God, who hath also given unto us his holy Spirit. (I Thessalonians 4:8)
Lust
Don’t dream of women,
‘Cause they’ll only bring you down! (DIO, Don’t Talk to Strangers)
When sight is taken away along with association and intercourse, erotic passion ceases. (Epicurus, Vatican Sayings XVIII)
"Suppose, Māgaṇḍiya, there was a leper with sores and blisters on his limbs, being devoured by worms, scratching the scabs off the openings of his wounds with his nails, cauterizing his body over a burning charcoal pit. Then his friends and companions, his kinsmen and relatives, brought a physician to treat him. The physician would make medicine for him, and by means of that medicine the man would be cured of his leprosy and would become well and happy, independent, master of himself, able to go where he likes. Then two strong men would seize him by both arms and drag him toward a burning charcoal pit. What do you think, Māgaṇḍiya? Would that man twist his body this way and that?""Yes, Master Gotama. Why is that? Because the fire is indeed painful to touch, hot, and scorching."
"What do you think, Māgaṇḍiya? Is it only now that that fire is painful to touch, hot, and scorching, or previously too was that fire painful to touch, hot, and scorching?"
"Master Gotama, that fire is now painful to touch, hot, and scorching, and previously too that fire was painful to touch, hot, and scorching. For when that man was a leper with sores and blisters on his limbs, being devoured by worms, scratching the scabs off the openings of his wounds with his nails, his faculties were impaired; thus, though the fire was actually painful to touch, he acquired a mistaken perception of it as pleasant."
"So too, Māgaṇḍiya, in the past sensual pleasures were painful to touch, hot, and scorching; in the future sensual pleasures will be painful to touch, hot, and scorching; and now at present sensual pleasures are painful to touch, hot, and scorching. But these people who are not free from lust for sensual pleasures, who are devoured by craving for sensual pleasures, who burn with the fever of sensual pleasures, have faculties that are impaired; thus, though sensual pleasures are actually painful to touch, they acquire a mistaken perception of them as pleasant." (Māgaṇḍiya Sutta 15-16)
Celibacy as an advanced spiritual practice attempts to remove this dynamic and thus to weaken our foothold in samsaric phenomenal existence by attaining to a bland state of sexual neutrality. Also, celibacy is a liminal state that disrupts universal structures and pairs of opposites and thus allows for the chaotic and miraculous to enter this world[.] But celibacy really works, spiritually I mean, only if the struggle and friction of opposites is transcended. Anything that reinforces the dichotomy (any dichotomy really) reinforces one’s samsaric existence. In my case I have been too naturally heterosexual, or polarized towards masculinity, or lonely, or whatever, for celibacy to be entirely a success…let alone all the other issues on which I take a polarized stand. It reinforces my samsaric existence but at least I can accept THAT—because struggling against that, like anything else, also reinforces samsaric existence. You shouldn’t even be against your own againstness. It’s tricky. (Paññobhāsa, "On Celibacy, MGTOW, and Naked Women")
Virility and Feminity
Swooning saints have a moving charm. They prove that we cannot have revelations in a vertical position, that we cannot stand on our feet to face the ultimate truth. Swooning provokes such wild voluptuousness that a man cognizant of negative joys has a hard time deciding whether to fall or not. (E. M. Cioran, Tears and Saints p. 37)
What need have I of an external woman? I have an internal woman within me. (anonymous yogī qtd in J. Evola, The Doctrine of Awakening p. 124)
In principle, a Shakti does not offer herself to those who yearn for her, but rather comes, of her own will, to those who embody her spouse Shiva's calm and stable nature. (J. Evola, The Yoga of Power p. 73)
The meaning of the child to the mother is the future, the continuation, namely, of her own life, and mother-love is, as it were, a welding of two discontinuous individual existences; likewise, the meaning of the state to the man is comradeship in arms for the protection of hearth and home, wife and child, and for the insurance for the whole people of its future and its efficacy. The state is the inward form of a nation, its "form" in the athletic sense, and history, in the high meaning, is the State conceived as kinesis and not as kinema. The Woman as Mother is, and the Man as Warrior and Politician makes, History. (O. Spengler, The Decline of the West vol. I, IV.ii.vi)
Perhaps we must acknowledge the justness of the distinction which assigns to man the sphere of wisdom, and to woman that of love, though neither belongs exclusively to either. Man is continually saying to woman, "Why will you not be more wise?" Woman is continually saying to man, "Why will you not be more loving?" It is not in their wills to be wise or to be loving; but unless each is both wise and loving there can be neither wisdom nor love. (H. D. Thoreau, Friendship, Love, and Marriage p. 39)
No comments:
Post a Comment