George
Anca
BETWEEN MAHAVIRA
AND EMINESCU
GANDHIAN JAINISM IN ROMANIA
*
Meeting Acharya Mahapragya, listening to His Words,
reading his books, and especially understanding, all the way through, what
happens with one’s mind and actual Ahimsa path of transformation of heart and
thus of mankind itself were among life term achievements. Post-Gandhian career
of non-violence appeared as a global re-foundation of urgent ahimsa practice,
from a non-violent life style to economics – e.g. hunger and poverty as sources
of violence -, and spirituality in the light of Ahimsa Prashikshan. Instead of
formal declarations we shared, tens and thousands of us, an intimate, almost
silent consciousness change helped by most qualified trainers, under the
guidance of Acharya Mahapragya and Uvacharya Mahashraman.
As A Romanian, I tried to spread the teachings of
Rajsamand. I wrote afterwards a micro-novel – The Orissa Woman.
Jain Poem – and I did a research on Ahimsa in Romanian
literature from the ancient ballad Mioritsa/The Little
Lamb/Memna (in Hindi) to the new Romanian Heysichasm,
rereading in ahimsa-key poets like Mihai Eminescu, Lucian Blaga, Vasile
Voiculescu. Before Rajsamand I lectured, at Delhi
University, on Mircea Eliade’s
Centenary in the World, mentioning that he has introduced ahimsa concept in Romania and
commented Mahatma Gandhi’s non-violent revolution.
Mihai Eminescu (1850-1889) rewrote in Romanian on his own
the beginning of the world from a sparkling point, as in Nasadya Sukta. Even a violent birth of cosmos has to be
challenged. I wish Eminescu were in Rajsamand and see the tenth
Terapanth Acharya, Mahapragya as a confirmation of his holy visions.
Climbing the Hill with thought to Tirthankaras and
Terapanths, some of us got an increased feeling of Christmas on 25th December, few days after Id. Dr. Gandhi made
clear once more our growth through Rajsamand encounter, a landarmak in our way
to better humanity. Rudi sent here his Introduction to Jainism. Mezaki found
similarities between Shinto and Dacian Zalmoxe. Gabriela spoke of enthusiasm in
Rajsamand. Thomas reformulated his interfaith statement.
Vinod wrote me a letter just in Rajsamand. And I received
in Bucharest from the editors – P.V. Rajagopal and S. Jeyapragasam – Ahimsa
NONVIOLENCE -, International Gandhian Institute for
Nonviolence and Peace, Madurai, May-June 2007, including articles “Economics of
Nonviolence and Peace” by Acharya Mahapragyaji, and “The Nonviolent Revolution
– the Italian who embraced Gandhi’s Satyagraha to oppose Fascism and War-II” by
Rocco Altieri.
“The
search for spiritual salvation did not require Gandhi to retire to a cave as a
hermit, for he carries the cave with him” (A. Capitini )
*
Romanian priest and scholar
Constantin Galeriu speaks on Mahatma Gandhi as the only leader of revolutions
who discovered the Saviour, through Sermon on the Mountain preaching to love one's enemies. He proved to his enemies
that he loved them, even dying as a martyr. In his own words: “I think only evil should be hated not evil-doers even when I could be
the victim”; “Not to admit and to detest your enemies’ mistakes should never rule out
compassion”,
and even love for them”.
The same spirit was shared recently in Romania by the
author of The man, his people and the empire: ‘What is
freedom?’ probed one student after Rajmohan Gandhi’s address at a university in
Baia Mare, a northern Romanian city of 130,000 that was once a major mining
centre. Prof Gandhi replied that ‘if the state tells me what to do, I say I
will resist. But if my conscience asks me not to do something, I want to obey
it. Then I find I have inner freedom.’
For them, and his university audience, Gandhi highlighted four key
points;
‘If you’re planning a strategy for a
community or country, leave absolutely no-one out;
‘Have the courage to speak the truth to
your own side;
‘Think a lot but also leave room for
inspiration;
‘If you
find hatred around you, fight it. If people are hating each other, reconcile
them. If someone is hating you, forgive him.’ (Rob Lancaster, “Romania:
Reaching out to young leaders” 22/04/2010).
On a blog on
internetnet, Ion Burhan sees in Gandhi's satyagraha a way to make conscious
some “social sins” of Romanian society
such as: richness without work, pleasure without conscience, knowledge without
character, gain without morals; science without humanism, religion without
personal sacrifice, politics without principles. An article by Satish Kumar on Jain religion,
translated into Romanian, keeps in original the supplementary readings as for a
global communion: Padmanabha Jaini, Jaina Path of Purification, Jawahar Nagar,
Delhi, India: Motilal Banarsidas, 1979. / Acharya Mahaprajna, Anekanta: The
Third EyeLadnun, Rajasthan,
India: Jain
Vishva Bhavati, 2002. Email: books@JVBI.org. / Umasvati, That Which Is:
Tattvartha Sutra, translated by Nathmal Tatia, San Francisco and London: Harper
Collins, 1994. / Pratapaditya Pal, The Peaceful Liberators: Jain Art from India (1995). New York and London:
co-published by Los Angeles County Museum
of Art and Thames and Hudson.
/ Jan Van Alphen, Steps to Liberation: 2,500 Years of
Jain Art and Religion (2000). Antwerp, Belgium: Etnografisch Museum.
On the site of Biblitheca publishing house is announced
(May 2011) the last book issued in Romanian translation: Introducere in Jainism by Rudi Jansma and Sneh Rani Jain. Ahimsa - “the heart of Jainism” -,
Gandhi – modern apostle of Jainism -, Karma are among key words of the
presentation for general public.
A letter sent to Romanian Parliament by Cristina María
Speluzzi from Buenos
Aires República Argentina is opened by a quotation
from Gandhi:
Honorable Members of the Romanian Parliament,
Distinguished Officials,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
“The greatness and the MORAL progress of a
nation can be judged by the way the animals are treated ” (M. Gandhi)
The dark specter of a death sentence for strays in Romania is
again of major concern for people from all over the world…
Again, poor innocent animals are about to be legally massacred by the
tens of thousands…
We found out that The Romanian Parliament’s Committee for Public
Administration Territorial Planning and Ecological Balance intends to make a
new law regarding the management of strays….and they want :
- the dogs captures by the dog catchers will be PTS after 14 or maximum
60 days ( those considered dogs for fights, aggressive breeds will be PTS after
48h or 10 days ; those sick will be PTS immediately )
- sick animals will not be given for adoption.
- those who feed or take care of strays will be fined
- the minimum conditions for the captures, living quarters, transport,
care ( food and shelter ) WILL BE ELIMINATED FROM the new law
- the clear description of how the euthanasia will be done and what
substances are to be used WILL BE ELIMINATED FROM the new law…it will be
replaced with ” the euthanasia will be done by a specialist “.
- the non profit organizations for animal protection WILL HAVE NO RIGHT
to complain about the living conditions of dogs in municipal shelters. the
control will be done only by the Sanitary-veterinary Authority.
- the non profit
organizations for animal protection WILL HAVE NO RIGHT to capture, take care or
spat/neuter strays.
*
In his book The Gandhian Mode of Becoming, Gujarat Vidyapith, Ahmedabad, 1998, Dr. Catalin
Mamali adds to the “simple list” of comparison terms - Socrates, Jesus, Buddha,
Confucius,
Martin Luther, Thoreau, Ruskin, Tolstoy, Steiner, Marx, Tagore, Freud, Mao, Lenin,
Savarkar, Martin Luther King Jr., and Mother Teresa - one more frame of reference: Niccolo
Machiavelli. A special feature for a book on Gandhi published in India may be
also the large number of Romanian authors in bibliography: Badina O, Blaga L,
Botez M, Brucan S, Constante L, Draghicescu M, Eliade M, Gusti D, Herseni T,
Ierunca V, Istrati P, Mamali C, Neculau A, Preda M, Zapan G.
“As a thinker and
practioner of politics Machiavelli had a profound influence on European political
life. Seeking power through any means was the major principle of his
philosophy.
As against this Gandhi preached and practiced ethical principles
of purity of means for attaining his objectives. One can hardly imagine two
completely opposite view points and
their paths of life. (Govindbhai Raval, Vice Chancellor, in
“Foreword”)
“Mamali’s book has one organizing
axis a comparison of Gandhi with Machiavelli, for
understanding
both of them better, as each other’s contrast, dialectionally – not to end up telling
the reader whom he should follow. Interestingly, they were both fighting for
freedom
of
their lands. But to Machiavelli such giant tasks accrued to the Prince. To
Gandhi the liberation could only be done by those who should be liberated; the
people, not the way Machiavelli (and the Marxist tradition) saw them, as
“masses,” as superficial admirers of success: hence to be led
by feeding them with successes.” (Johan Galtung in “Introduction”).
In
the end the author makes a pool - each of the 140 statements can be given
grades between 1 and 5 according to the readers’ degree of agreement or
disagreement to the respective position. Here are some of satyagraha, ahimsa, but also aparigraha
statements.
1. It is impossible to detach, to separate the ends from the means.
6. Any economy ignoring moral values is ultimately wicked and
artificial.
8. The individual entrusted with a public mission should by no means
accept valuable
presents.
20. Any person willing to act in support of social welfare should never
depend on public
charity.
21. Only when a person is able to look at his/her own errors through a
magnifying glass
and at the others’ through a minimizing one, is he/she capable to
correctly evaluate
his/her and the others’ mistakes.
42. Centralization as a system
is improper for the non-violent functioning, and organization
of the society. It is hard to achieve a non-violent society within
centralized systems.
47. Most of the people would rather forget their own father’s death
than the loss of their
fortunes.
50. Not to admit and to detest your enemies’ mistakes should never rule
out compassion
and even love for them.
The means should be in harmony with the purpose.
67. It is altogether difficult for a person living in dire poverty to
achieve his moral
development. Those who accomplish it in such strained circumstances are
people of
extraordinary ability.
73. Bad means cannot help attain good ends.
90. In my opinion any person who eats the fruits of the earth without
sharing them with the
others and who is of no use to the others is a thief.
96. Non-violence is indispensable to genuine economic development.
98. I think only evil should be hated not evil-doers even when I could
be the victim.
99. In my opinion a person should never use friendship to gain favours.
112. I think that the most efficient means to have justice done is to
do justice to my own
enemy.
114. When many people live in dire poverty, it is of utmost importance
to cultivate in all of
us the mental attitude of not boasting objects and appliances which are
denied tomillions of people, and, consequently, to reorganize our lives in
keeping with this mentality as fast as possible.
120. I think that
each and every person should give up the desires to possession of as many things
as possible.
124. Individuals
should primarily use goods produced by indigenous economy.
*
INDOEMINESCOLOGY (MIHAI EMINESCU AND INDIA)
*
Public Address to
the President of India, H.E.
Shanker Dayal Sharma, at ceremony
of Receiving Honorary Doctorate, Bucharest University
Your
Excellency Mr. President of India,
Sharmaji,
Your
gracious meeting offered to Romanian specialists in Indian studies, mainly from
Bucharest,
here, it's a high honor, a stimulation and also a consolation. For it's a
tragic issue of Stalinist-Communist dictatorship that best thinkers,
Indologists included, were jailed. But riks and slokas from Vedas and Upanishads
were still communicated by Morse alphabet.
We feel getting, at last, a free way
to knowledge of Indian spirit and culture. Perhaps the moksha/salvation was the
most appreciated quality of Indian spirit, together with Christian, Indian and
universal dharma and shanti.
Mihai Eminescu, Romanian national
poet, declared himself a Buddhist as an empowered Christian. During more than
15 years I had talks and letters about Mihai Eminescu, mainly in and from India, but also other continents; they make some
personal and Indo-eminescological history in an epistolar novel I had honor to
dedicate to your excellency, Mr. President of India, Dr. Sharma ji.
Kind of field researcher, I taught
Romanian, between 1977-1984, at University
of Delhi, while Prof. dr. Prabhu Dayal
Vidyasagar was teaching Hindi at Bucharest
University.
My mother has just died before and
so India became my mother –
now it was no problem how good India
was to me, but how good was I to her.
I am grateful to legions of people
in India, from great writers
and professors like Amrita Pritam, Ageya, Nagendra, R.C. Mehrotra, Gurbakhsh
Singh – former vicechancellors of Delhi
University – to my
colleagues and students in the university.
Surely the exchange of teachers
between universities is a must.
Suppose India and Romania would have
their cultural centers in Delhi and in Bucharest respectively, smaller and in a
way more cultural cities like Iaşi, Cluj, Timişoara, Râmnicu-Vâlcea, for
Romania, and Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Chandigarh, Bangalore, Trivandrum for India
may be taken in consideration.
Romanian-Indian Cultural Society,
started recently, in 1993, beyond university and formal scientific research on
Indology, is trying to gather interested people in different topics of Indian
culture. Many young and gifted persons are eager to study Indian arts, dance
and music, to be on scholarship in their dreamland.
We can only slightly open a door
toward an endless realm.
Finally, I will dare to evoke a very
special Indo-Romanian tradition dealing with human freedom and make a
call for your judgment.
Early 1990's Romanian new press
acknowledged both India's
international support to political prisoners and their recognition to pundit
Jawaharlal Nehru who provoked a visit of then UN Secretary General U Thant.
Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, when vice
president of India, made shorter the sentence of poet Radu Gyr.
As a representative to UN
International Association of Educators for World Peace, I request now, Mr.
President of India, your high intervention that Mr. Ilie Ilaşcu,
parliamentarian, jailed in Tiraspol, for only guilt of being Romanian, to be
liberated.
*
The International Academy Mihai Eminescu
First
draft – 1991 – to be completed by acknowledgments, other names of poets,
thinkers, artists, translators, eminescologists, educators, desiring to be
together unto poetry/shanti.
Albania, Argentina, Australia,
Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Chile, China,
Denmark, Egypt, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungarx, India, Iran, Irak,
Israel, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Moldova, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria,
Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Senegal, South Africa, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, Tanzania, Thailand, United Kingdom, USSR, USA, Yugoslavia
MEMBERS / HONORARY INVITED
Rafael Alberti, Robert Bly, Emil
Cioran, Rosa del Conte, Yolanda Eminescu, Evgheni Evtushenko, John Fowles,
Vaclav Havel, Daisaku Ikeda, Eugen Ionesco, Octavio Paz, Amrita Pritam
(president since 1981), Salman Rushdie, Leopold Sedhar Senghor, Bogdan
Suhodolsky, Grigore Vieru.
MEMBERS AT LARGE
Anna Aalten, B. Abanuka, Tawfik El
Abdo, Prachoomsuk Achava-Amrung, Ioan Alexandru (organizer), Ion Andreiţă, O.
M. Anujan, Lourdes Arizpe, Werner Bahner, Andrei Bantaş, Romano Baroni, Georges
Barthouil, Al Bayati, Enric Becescu, Eva Behring, Amita Bhose, Danuta
Bienkowska, Carlo Bernardini, Eveline Blamont, Ana Blandiana, Lucian Boz, Ion
Caramitru, Margaret Chatterjee, Mary Ellen-Chatwin, Mihai Cimpoi, Silvia
Chiţimia, Henri Claessen, Georges Condominas, Lean-Louis Courriol, Robert
Creeley, Petru Creţia, Marco Cugno, Nicolae Dabija, Rodny Daniel, Nilima Das,
Sisir Kumar Das, Mahendra Dave, Guenther Deicke, Francis Dessart, Stanislaw
Dobrowolski, P. Vidyasagar Dayal, Metoda Dodic-Fikfak, Mihai Drăgan, Livia
Drăghici, Jules Dufur, Zoe Dumitrescu-Buşulenga, Anton Dumitriu, Monika Egde,
Christian Eggebert, Didona Eminescu, Roland Erb, Jiri Felix, Galdi Laszlo, Roy
Mac Gregor-Hastie, Al Giuculescu, Allain Guillermou, Herbert Golder, Klaus
Heitmann, Helena Helva, Gerard Herberichs, Carmen Hendershott, Anna Hohenwart,
Peter Hook, Alexandra Hortopan, Kazimiera Illakowiczowna, Philip Iseley, Judith
Isroff, Ion Iuga, Vilenka Jakac-Bizjak, Rafik Vihati Joshi, Elena M.
Koenigsberg, Maria Kafkova, Iuri Kojevnikov, Henrik Konarkovski, Omar Lara,
Leonida Lari, Maria Teresa Leon, Catherine Lutard, Keshav Malik, Muhamed
Maghoub, Fidelis Masao, Liliana Mărgineanu, Pino Mariano, Constantin Mateescu,
Anna Mathai, Dumitru Matkovski, Charles Mercieca, Ion Milos, Baldev Mirza,
George Munteanu, Chie Nakane, Ion Negoiţescu, Wanda Ostap, Ayappa Panikar,
Sheila Pantry, Daniel Perdigao, Augustin Petre, Irina Petrescu, Max Demeter
Peyfuss, Jane Plaister, Franco Prendi, Carlos, Queiroz, Zorica Rajkovic, Lisa
Raphal, Peter Raster, Ruprecht Rohr, Marcel Roşculeţ, Mario Ruffini, Angelo
Sabbattini, A. M. Sadek, Zeus Salazar, Patricia Sarles, Monika Segbert, Joachim
Schuster, Vinod Seth, Satyavrat Shastri, Andrei Simic, Norman Simms, William
Snodgrass, Mihai Stan, Dumitru Stăniloae, Sygmunt Stobersky, Sanda Stoleru, Sorin
Stratilat, Arcadie Suceveanu, Eric Sunderland, Bathelemy Taladoire, Akile
Tezkan, Eugen Todoran, Fernando Tola, Mona Toscano-Pashke, Urmila Rani Trikha,
Kliment Tsacev, Mihai Ursachi, Bruno Uytersprot, Nelson Vainer, Isabela
Valmarin, Dimitrie Vatamaniuc, Romulus & Mihu Vulcănescu, J.L. Vig, Brenda
Walker, Xu Wende, Reinhold Werner, Rudolf Windish, Mario Zamora
MEMBERS IN MEMORIAM
Anna Ahmatova, Sergiu Al-George,
Gheorghe Anghel, Tudor Arghezi, George Bacovia, Ion Barbu, Lucian Blaga, Samson
Bodnărescu, Alexandru Bogdan, N.N. Botez, Petre Brânzeu, Victor Buescu, Anta
Raluka Buzinschi, George Călinescu, I. L. Caragiale, Iorgu Caragiale, Toma
Chiricuţă, Pompiliu Constantinescu, Aron Cotruş, Ion Creangă, Dimitrie Cuclin,
Mihail Dragomirescu, Mircea Eliade, Gheorghe Eminescu, Gheorghe Eminovici,
Franyo Zoltan, Galgi Laszlo, Gala Galaction, Mozes Gaster, Onisifor Ghibu,
Petre Grimm, Ion Goraş, N.I. Herescu, G. Ibrăileanu, Nicolae Iorga, Petru
Iroaie, Josef Sandor, Ivan Krascko, Mite Kremnitz, Franco Lombardi, E.
Lovinescu, Titu Maiorescu, Alfred Margul-Sperber, Veronica Micle, Matei Millo,
Gheorghe Nedioglu, Constantin Noica, Ramiro Ortiz, Sylvia Pankhurst, Vasile
Pârvan, Perpessicius, Ioana Em.
Petrescu, Gheorghe Pituţ, Miron Pompiliu, Augustin Z. N. Pop, Cornelui M.
Popescu, Aron Pumnul, Salvatore Quasimodo, Ianis Ritsos, Mihail Sadoveanu,
George Bernard Shaw, Ioan Slavici, Nichita Stănescu, Carmen Sylva, Carlo
Tagliavini, Fani Tardini, Vasile Văduva, Tudor Vianu
*
EMINESCU, A FOLKLORE...
(by Vinod Seth)
They call Eminescu a poet, a gem
I always called him a diamond
I called him folk-lore
He, whom we call Eminescu
Hardly separated from the air anywhere
A poet called him a tree, an echo
But he who is as clear as stones in the brook
Is a smoothened dazzling diamond
Never from mountain poetry is torn
Eyes from his Brancusi bird
Fly high to sit by his bust
Ion Mândrescu, the artist of skill
Takes away poetry from his crust
And hangs on him the diamond bullets
To let him be the martyr in revolution
Poet he was, but poets don't die
Eminescu was the folklore of revolutions
He hung poetry like muslin cloths
On his face a smile in store
Folklore made Eminescu and Eminescu made folklore
A Hindi, Sanskrit base as before
Eminescu took a round of whole this globe
Poetry beheads him, gives him folklore
Eminescu sings an epic tune to us
Eminescu we hear on telecom
Then we ask him May we come in?
Eminescu say Yes if you glass cut the rocks
P.S. You will be pleased a sculpture (a woman's head in brass in
French Museum's collection, made by Bruncush, was recently exhibited in the
National Gallery of Modern Art, which was the first sculpture I saw from
Bruncushi. If more than one busts of Eminescu are sent may be we can give them
to some institutions.
*
LIBERTIES...
(By Vinod Seth)
Death in the year of Eminescu's death
Better than Romanians speak
And speak they 25 years ache
Achile's heal has kicked Ceausescu's head
And with bullets riddled his face
We wouldn't dare a return
While dying he doesn't look as young
As much as in publicity photographs
which his ambassador has to give or gave
Liberty
Only you are young
Noe live with Romanian grace...
Up and up on this hill is love
Then on the peak is a flag
Brancusi has put there a slab
Romanians call it Eminescu's grave
Up on the hill one year is past
Up on the hill a look down is cast
Flags fly 80 000 at half mast
Revolution is like those of the French
Like Shiva's dance on Christ's cross
They had a thirst for poison, had to quench
The people had told at last who is the boss
Christmas said it is Santa-Claus
Death said no! he has worn my dress
The only liberty is on peoples' face.
Now will you read my poem again
Yes if my all friends are slain
And only free self of Romania is again
This army is friend of the poets
The army is Eminescu and also his poem
Eminescu at his death centenary awake
Has turned the quick most page
Salutes to people, to Eminescu, to army
Government's area TV serial case
*
Pastiche
The
intended review to the dissertation of Ms. Zircha Vaswani became mostly a pastiche.
Because we have to deal with a very free, kind of mystical construction of
comparisons, in which Mihai Eminescu's poems and Indian scriptures are brought
side-by-side into a fascinating personal adventure of the author. The abhored
by now Eminescu cult in his motherland
turns into an Indian cult, with a chance to be recovered, in
competition, for own culture.
A
sacrificial work, a puja full of piety and effervescence addresses everybody on
the way, like in a new beginning of the religious aesthetic spirit. Courageous
or euphoric, like in a trance, the author restarts as if the universe like in
solitary temple procession, hearing her native prayers in verses by Eminescu.
Ioan
Alexandru, Amita Bhose and myself were colleagues of doctorate under guidance
of professor Zoe Dumitrescu-Buşulenga. Ioan translated odes of Pindar in his
dissertation itself, Amita published separately her book of translations from
Eminescu into Bengali, myself didn't translate a line (perhaps also because
Baudelaire, my topic, is the most translated foreign poet into Romanian). Ms.
Zricha Vaswani translates Eminescuss “Indian” poems as her own soul and hope.
I don'n know her personally. There are
universities with the name of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar in Agra,
Hyderabad, Lucknow,
Muzaffarpur, Delhi.
The architect of Indian Constitution (while handling it to me also, the late
president of India Shankar Dyal Sharma said: The Constitution of the World!)
had the message. “Educate, organize,
agitate”.
*
A MASTER COURSE IN PSYCHOLOGY-SOCIOLOGY ON ENERGETIC NONVIOLENCE AND
NON-POSSESSION
Main themes of the master course on energetic nonviolence and non-possession:
Exploring social violence. Motivation of violent behaviour (protection,
„fight or flight”, groups and identity). Conflict prevention – systemic
(globalization, international crime), structural (predatory states, horizontal
inequities), operational (accelerators and detonators of conflict – e.g.
Poverty of sources, afflux of small guns, elections).
Anthropology
of nonviolence: Jain ahimsa and aparigraha. Buddhist karuna. Christian
pity. Gandhian nonviolence. Principles of anekanta (relativity).
Ancient Mahavira has classified people in three categories: having many
desires (Mahechha), having few desires (Alpechha), having no desires
(Ichhajayi). The economy of nonviolence, along with poverty eradication,
applies also Mhavira's concept of vrati (dedicated) society. He gave three
directions regarding production: not to be manufacturated weapons of violence
(ahimsappyane), not to be assembled weapons (asanjutahikarne), not to be made
instruction for sinful and violent work (apavkammovades). Following anekanta,
the philosophy of Mahavira synthesizes personal fate and initiative.
Book case: Blaga, energie românească / Lucian Blaga, Romanian
energy by Vasile Băncilă / Cluj, Colecţia „Gând românesc”, 1938 (a
re-edition with notes and a bio bibliographic table by Ileana Băncilă,
Timişoara, Editura Marineasa, 1995), is the first book on poet and philosopher,
remained until today “the most subtle analysis of ethnic coordinates of
Blagianism, on the fund of daring philosophy of Romanian spirit” (Răzvan
Codrescu). To the “mioritic” space, (hill), Băncilă adds the „supramioritic”
(mountain) and submioritic (Danube, „imperial Danube”).
Vasile Băncilă wrote, discreetly, under communist repression, four volumes of
„aphorisms and para-aphorisms”, published posthumously, 1990's, bringing out
own gigantic energies.
„The created world is the stage of divine
theater, and people are the actors. This theaters has scenery, props and
changes of stage at once fantastic and realist, and people act almost always
very well their role, what doesn't happen in the usual theaters or plays of
theater.
Shakespeare has caught only a ray from divine dramaturgy and delights
up to transfigured amazement. But what would it be if we could contemplate, in
its universality, the drama created by God? Only the mystics understand
something from it.” (Vasile Băncilă).
The divine energies were theologized betwee the two world wars by Dumitru
Stăniloae.
Here are some excerpts from Romanian
thinkers of the same epoch on related topics (translated by George Anca).
Lucian Blaga:
„The
intellect, destined among others to the enigmatic operation to husk intuition
from accidental and to rise it on a high plateau of essences, creates in
contact with concrete intuition certain concepts which from logical point of
view are impossible, because they imply the antinomy. As illustration, let
choose an example which played a remarkable role in certain „logics”. The
concepts we speak about are all made after the shape and resemblance of the
concept „becoming”. The concept of „becoming” closes in it, as it was remarked,
an antinomy. This concept, analysed under logical angle, splits in contradictory
terms: nonexistence-existence. Under pure logical aspect, the concept of
„becoming” is impossible, it couldn't be made on way of logical synthesis out
of the two antinomic terms. The concept has been made on foundation direct of
„intuition”, which shows us the „becoming” as possible.
When the intellect performs, for
instance, the act of puting of a space, of a moment, of a unity, it believes
justified to repeat at infinite this act, at least on an ideal plan. Such an
initial act is generated virtually at infinite on the basis of special dynamics
of the intellect. The licence of which the spirit makes use this time is that
to believe in possibility of repetition without limit of the same act of puting
of a something, be it even only on an ideal plan. The intellect behaves as if
the initial act would comprise in itself also all the others, at infinite. An
act of puting of a something is but from logical point of view identical only
with itself, but it is not identical with its repetition at infinite.
Evidently, the intellect assumes also this time a right, to whose influence can
not purloin, but which logically leads to gratuituous creations. Notions as
those of infinite space, infinite time, of infinite number, etc. presupose
after all the licence about which we speak.
The
human intellect, in state of autoconstruction, before operating on foundation
of logical principles – operates paradoxically, with feats of strength, on
bases of licences we don't know who accorded to it. All these licences are logically
impermeable. Their totality constitutes a kind „permanent” coefficient in
genere. This coefficient must be accepted as it is.”
„We have fixed, through these few ideas, the pillars of a
theory which authorises us to see in a new light also the problem of
„archetypes”. It is no doubt that in creations of culture (myths, art,
metaphysics, religious ideas, moral ideas, etc.) the nuclear presence of
certain „archetypes” can be guessed and then discovered as such in the back of
disguisings which it endures. And it is no doubt that the nuclear presence of
some archetypes can be discovered also in the fantesies of psychopats. But a
capital difference intervenes between modes as „the archetypes” manifest in
processes of culture and how they manifest in the fantesies of psychopats...
Archetypes, out of
most different ones, we can envision as effective nuclei around which so many
creations of culture coagulate, but in these processes of creation, the
archetypes appear „always” modelled „in stylistic patterns”, being dominated by
these, as long as in fantesies of psychopats some „autonomous complexes” make
felt their presence...
In marge of such
considerations it can be emited the hypothesis that in pshichic-spiritual life
of each human individual the archetypes and stylistic factors are effectively
present like certain „powers”. When between these powers is declared a
disequilibrium, in the sense that, through the enrgy inherent to them, the
stylistic factors are not any more able to dominate archtypes, is given the
failure of the individual in psychopathy.”
Dan Botta :
„The radiant universe of the Romanian and perfect world of his
conceptions is unendured. This is the entire sense, single sense of Eminescu's
pessimism. Eminescu adores the world, contemplate it greedily, gets drunk –
like in the verse of „Rugăciunea unui dac”/The prayer of a Dacian – from the
fountains of its splendours, but he knows himself destined to sorrow. So it
explains that sentiment „dureros de dulce”/sorrowfully
sweet of existence and all what in his verse is explosion of sorrow is anthem
of joy alltogether. He pushed his pessimism – if this is pessimism – up to
there where Romanians push it. Books of Schopenhauer didn't give neither its
conscience. It is alive since centuries in Romanian people. The Romanian says:
„I make shadow to the earth”. I put once this word in connection with believes
of Thracia: the existence throws a spot on luminous body of world. Life is a
guilt, a sin. The testimony of Herodot, who had noted this faith of Thracia, is
confirmed enirely by Romanian people.
„Shadow to earth”,
this sentiment of supreme bitterness, of solitude and supreme uselessness, goes
through Eminescian poetry. There are moments of deepest depression.
They don't exclude –
on the contrary – the conscience of infinite beauty of world. They utter the
thirst of detachment from the contingential, the thirst for evasion, of the
extasy. They invoke death – as threshold of joy, of that region where are open
the perspectives of supreme beauty, the power of participation to phrenetic
life of the whole – eternal comunication, cuminecătura/the eucharist of
elements.”
Constantin Noica :
„The being of world is
neither something determined, but nor blind undetermination, but endless
possibility, destined to accomplish itself to an all-good-ordering intellect or
through forms and laws ready given from outside.
And in the last
thought, that of today man, it seems as if, indeed, the being of world is an
endless possibility of the matter, but not of that which is informed from
outside, but of that which makes alone its form; that though the being of world
is a becoming with history.
This history of the
real which affirms is described, step by step, during own history, the thought
which denies...
When it rises from
anorganic nature to that organic, the matter obtains something unbelievable:
the finitude.
In the bosom of
anorganic nature, everything had to be infinite, the matter couldn't sum up.
The states were infinite, the movements – unlimited...
With its infinite
variety of forms, the alterity which closes into an identity realises the
infinity in the finite, the individual, the individual being, the „organism”;
It is like a whole inside of the whole of world; it is a part issued from
condition of part. Only with the individual being it starts the world of
realities instead of that of states, pocesses, elements or general
substances...
In fund, they are
categories of the „individual” real, therefore, categories of the finitude, as
the five Platonian ones were not, neither the being in genere, nor the state,
nor the movement, and nor identity or alterity.”
„The plurality is the
aspect of maturity of things...
The thought of man
only when „distinguishes” starts to understand and only when says „we” comes
out from minor stage...
Association, adhesion,
aggregation, amalgamation and so many other modes of dead or living matters are
suggested directly in bosom of plurality. A second one, naturally, is the
multiplication, which not only that carry , like the first, over plurality, but
it alone is spring of plurality, like in reproduction. A third operation,
rising to power, comes to prove mature operation in the bosom of plurality, in
measure in which it integrates the first two.
For rising to
power is a synthesis, an added multiplication. It represents an expansion which
in the same time preserves itself concentrated around a term, giving thus to
the plurality both the power to affirm itself as such, as well as, like in case
of the wave, that of not losing and spreading through one affirmation. When one
sees in the show of world – how we register it with the plant and now with the
entire material universe – the operations undertook everywhere, as well as
organised animation which resulted from here, one asks what more man has to
add.
The man is come to add
„the numbering”.
The number, the
„arithmos”, becomes the golden key for the world of plurality...
You can not number
with a single unity; from beginning you must have the decade, therefore 1,
2,..., 9, nine simple distinct units, „plus” the superior unit of decade. And
what are you doing in definitive when you number? You count before the first 9
units, that is you name them in order; then you count the tens seen as units,
that is you name nine „tens” and so on by nine.
But what is this? It
is our number, are our „classes” of numbers, it is our golden key for
plurality...
The man believed that
the number represents glorification of plurality and recognition of its
sovreignty in the world. In fact didn't do but to trivialize it...
Only retained
plurality, only unity in plurality give to this a sense...
And the unit of
plurality is other thing than both unity and plurality: It is totalaity.”
„The being gives only
the „knitting between general and individual”...
The science of being
doesn't reach its target if it doesen't account of individual being, of „this”
arbre, „this” man, „this” historical creature. But it must do it for „any
individual being, therefore from perspective of general being....
The individuality can
give and can acquire any determinations ( like vortex in void of material
points or spreading in void of waves), but has not truly the measure of being.
The world can be full
of this secondary nonbeing; and if in the world of inanimate matter it is not
striking, because here just secondary unbeing is the rule and being the
exception, in exchange, in the worlld of life and of man – which has costed the
matter so much endeavour in order to coagulate – the non being and
nonaccomlishment are a true cosmic failure, in a sense. And this doesn't mean
but: the conversion didn't happen.
It seems then that the
ontologic model resulting from here is simple: an individuality is open through
determinations which open under a generality; an ontological field acquire
being and insurence, as becoming field of generality...
... The being of
things, the being of the existent searched by the ontology – namely: what is truly in the world? - acquires, with
the archaei, a solidary conceptual answer with all what we have done visibly in
the developing of Romanian sentiment of
being, from the „question” over what it is upto the possible ontologic model.”
“The Romanian
sentiment of being is other than that of ultimate safety of it – not in what
regards the knoweledge of man over himself, rather of the order of essence than
of immediate and sure existence. That for, we have prefered to say here
pre-being, sometimes, for being (which comprises both essence as well as
existence); but in the same time, we don't invoke the simple „essence”, because
this „separates” from existence, while thr pre-being presuposes and sends to it
all the time.
Under pre-being we
comprised:
-
the
unaccomplished being, expressed in our language through „n-a fost să fie”/it
wasn't to be;
-
the superior
being, through „era să fie”/it was likely to be;
-
the
eventual being, with „va fi fiind”/it will be being;
-
the
possible being, with „ar fi să fie”/it would be to be;
-
the being
of entrance into being, with „este să fie”/it is to be;
-
the
finished, consummated accomplished being, with „a fost să fie”/it was to be.
In all these modalities it remains it appears a sending to existence as
a moment of accomplishment.But the moment remains an end of road, the
modalities being its steps of ensuring.
For why the being must appear in the hypostasis of safety and of
complete reality (which could mean, for some ones, the simple „individual
reality”)?”
Vasile Bancila:
„The man, in front of
the non-ego or of a cosmic infinity, seeing its smallness, answers often with
absolutisation of own ego. It is a reaction totally dispropotioned and as such
absurd. But as long as the man has lost the inconscience however sensible of
the animals, through which these live in harmony with universal reality, he is
obliged to search a compensation which to take him out from dispair of noticing
his unsignificance in the infinite of total existence.
But the soulution
found leads to solitude and to nihilism, that is to still a bigger dispair. So
that the true solution must be searched in other part: in noticing of the
absolute in things and beyond of them, who made these things and man himself,
of whom be it modest reflex is the man and to whom he follows to return. This
is, in fact, the essence of any proper religion. In this mode, the man
rebecomes an absolute, but not through automation, but through integration.
But the modern man
moves off often from religious vision and that for exploits the method of
autonomous absolutization, sometimes even luciferian, of own ego. On this way,
the modern man conceives himself as a kind of metaphisical Huitzilopochtli. But
this is a way of salvation which leads him at last to the madhouse. And if he
is philosopher, he creates phenomenist systems, to not say phenomenal.”
”We can not know the absolute but as reflex,
or as echo. Hence we can not know even at least a part of the absolute, because
the absolute is entire in each part and to know a part of it would mean to know
the whole absolute or absolute as such.
When it is question of
absolute, we can not express in quantitative values, we can not say, for
example, that we know the absolute through progressive accumulations with
tendency to know it once completely, as some ideologues apparently scientific
believe. The absolute can not be revealed in fragments, but in aspects,
transfigurations, reflexes or echos.
The knowledge of the
absolute is a Taborite phenomenon or act. It lights and blinds at the same
time. This knowledge ressembles to a certain extent with the kind how some
blind men „see” the light. They have not a proper organ for this, but feel the
light as an invasion, as a transfiguration of existence.
These reflexes or
echos of the absolute are captured and valorised in dogmas. These later are
crystals at the same time of light and of mystery. They are the precised
substance of mystical knowledge, of essential knowledge and represents all what
human mind can understand more deeply. Through them we are free of both
shortcoming of skepticism, which is funeral then when it doesn't content to be
only the beginning of philosophy, and not its end, as wel as of that of
positive knowledge, wich is brutal when it mixes in the field of ineffable
subtlety of the absolute.”
„The light disappears, but doesn't
transform into darkness.
The darkness
disappears, but doesn't transform in light.
Because here we touch
the two ultimate principles of existence, wich are reciprocal inconvertible.
Is the darkness a
weaker light and the light a weaker darkness?
Any opinion would have
the physicists, morally and ontologically, it can not be a transition from one
to another. From this point of view, at most the light can destroy the darkness
or inverse, but can not transform one into another.”
“The truth is that
religious men and all people with spiritual living are preoccupied by evil, but
with aim of salvation or of moral perfecting – and not for falling in
pessimism, in drama, in doubting about health and sense of existence as such
and so much little of its creator. They are not therefore obsessed of evil as
of a master who become the patron of the world, as of something which spoils
irremediable our life, but as a kind of props, be it even grave, in the strugle
and unique theatre of existence, of our life.
The evil becomes, in
other words, something which us, with help of God, we master.
With this the
reference inverts and the evil, as massive as it would appear, becomes however
something secondary.”
„The light disappears, but doesn't transform
into darkness.
The darkness
disappears, but doesn't transform in light.
Because here we touch
the two ultimate principles of existence, wich are reciprocal inconvertible.
Is the darkness a
weaker light and the light a weaker darkness?
Any opinion would have
the physicists, morally and ontologically, it can not be a transition from one
to another. From this point of view, at most the light can destroy the darkness
or inverse, but can not transform one into another.”
Nae Ionescu:
God, in hypostasis the Father, represents the pure existence, and in
hypostasis St. Ghost, represents God in us. Between God the Father and God St.
Ghost, stays God the the Son, who is – according to Christian metaphysics – the
logos become body, that is the form in which we can understand God. Chrit, that
is God the Son, is the intermediary which make the link God the Father and God
the St. Ghost, that is between emanatist God and immanentist God, between God
who creates the entire existence and God who is in us.
The after-war state has become merchant, participant to affairs,
industrialist, competitor to its subjects themselves. The old neutrality has
evaporated from conscience of citizens. Eahch of them doesn't content to ask
the State to warrant his person and fortune, but asks intervention of State in
any occasion, if not directly in his favour, but at least in favour of production class to which he belongs.
„Our STATE is too expansive
for our COUNTRY”. Too expansive and unproper. The theory woud be it good; but
we who are not doing theories – or don't do than „to explain” the realities
which are and not „to justify” realities which we would desire to set up – we
can not forget a fundamental fact: that Romanian modern state has been created
by townmen or by devotees of urban cult. And this was the original sin of this
state. Because in Romanian country the urban spirit didn't ever exist; or at
least it was never a prevailing decissive component of Romanian collectivity...
Mircea Vulcanescu:
„The principle of
material individuation, through time and through space, springs from a metaphysics
of objective existence, in which particular essences are conceived as things.
And the principle of
individuation through form, in sense of „act” is derived from a personalist metaphysics of working ,
efficient being.
In Romanian
metaphysics of the ins/individual, on cognitive plan, it is given by a certain configurative unity of features and
by a certain key which deciphers the significance and position of events in
relation to the ensemble of the existence.
It is question of
„chip”/shape, as originality of features of the individual; of „rost”/sense, as
his significance in the world, and of „soartă”/fate, as his integration in
time”. „On the other hand, this touch of positivism, of resistence of world and
of things from it, which opposes their own manner of being, becomes evanescent
in front of work of the builder, with creed that „where God wants, it is wan the order of
nature”.
Alexandru Dragomir:
„In Romanian, differently
from other languages, there are two words of different origins: „a trăi”/to
live (Slave) and „viaţă”/life (Latin), which make clearer what I want to say.
It is right that life is a fact, namely one foreign from me, but at the same
time it is a fact that life is lived, that can not be otherwise than lived.
Only biologically, that is abstract, the life is a „phenomenon” like the stone,
the triangle, etc., having, surely, the property that it evolves. But in
reality, life is lived, it is something of kind of becoming, otherwise said,
life is given to me in order to live it. (The ontologic difference between the
being according the substance and the being according to the time is outlined ,
in totally other context, by Aristotle in „Physics”. Here is the joining
between point of reference (the self) and the other side of me, the life. „I”
live my life; not only that it is „given” to me to live (life as foreign from
me), but life is given to me to „live” it”.
Teodor M. Popescu:
I must say a few words about Orthodox Church. Many judge it, accusing
it that didn't play a special role in the history of culture. Or, this means to
don't know its past, activity and influence had in ith East. Surely, the
Orthodox Church wasn't in situation of Roman Church, which had to take over in
the West the inheritance of Roman Empire, but
its cultural work is not at all negligeable. In a certain sense, the Orthodox
Church made more for its believers than Church of Rome itself. In represented
in the frame of state the most important and most venerable cultural
institution, it has cultivated national language, has created an entire
literature, has its art, has founded institutions of great social and national
utility, has constituted a true school for people, has educated it, modelled
its soul, insufflated a specific piety, virtues and morals which are the dowry
of any Orthodox people. I consider that can be affirmed that no other Church
made so much for national culture of people and especially didn't developed to
such extent the sense of Christian charity and love as the Orthodox Church. If
we take into account the role played by Orthodox Church in the bosom of
peoples, which, for many centuries, have been deprived of state organisation,
we must recognize that it merits fully the name of mother of these peoples and
of culture of these, which, until the XIXth century, was a medieval, churchish
and monastic culture, full of faith and harmony.
Dumitru Staniloae:
„The first step is that of the beginner, who must
endeavour to habituate with virtues. The virtues are in number of seven. At
their beginning stays the faith, at end the love, preceded immediately by
non-suffering. The love concentrates in it all virtues and passes tth man to
knowledge or contemplation.
The object of the
virtues and of endeavours from the first step is also liberation from
sufferings, its direct aim, the non-suffering. The virtues combating sufferings
serve thus undirectly to the spirit, constituting a step toward next aim, wich
is the knowledge.
The second step is
called of contemplation, althouh St. Maxim doesn't use this word in unique
sesnse, but gives it, as we saw, more meanings, according to object to which
refers, but which, in general, is almost always a creature. Only rarely and
namely then when he divides the ascent in two steps and not in three, we
understand through it also mystic contemplation, which refers to god directly.
But when he divides this ascent in three
steps, the contemplation constituting second part, it means almost always exclusively
contemplation oriented towards creatures. This contemplation has as object the”rations”
from creatures. Through it the man possesses a spiritual sight of rations from
created things, through it the nature is to him a pedagogue toward God.
The third step, of
mystical theology, doesn't occupy any more with rations from things, but with
those which refer to God himself, the object being the oversaint, overhappy,
overunuttered and oveunknown godhead and over all, the infinity. This knowledge
of God is an extasis of love which persists unmoved in a directing toward God”.
„The person is the
reality with highest degree of existence, because it knows about its existence
and of persons and things. And it is so because „este”/is, like „eu”/I, like
„tu”/you or like „el”/he, like a conscience directed to other conscience.
„Este”/is of a person has such a great importance for me through the fact that
it has the new form „eşti”/you are, or of a „tu”/you, that you know of me.
„Este”/is of a person is important
because „este”/is an „el”/he, as existence conscious of mine, that it knows or
can know about me as I. And my existence as person is so important for other
persons, not only due to the fact that I am otherwise than other persons, but
that I am an „eu”/I who knows about them, that I can be for them a „tu”/you or
an „el”/he, conscious of them, or capable to know about them. The simple words
: „sunt”/am, „eşti”/are, „este”/is doesn't express yet the mystery of person, but only their
addition to the words: „eu”/I, „tu”/you, „el (ea)”/he (she).
The stone, the plant,
the animal can not say : „eu,tu,el(ea)”/I, you, he (she). Hence nor: „sunt,
eşti, este”/am, are, is. Only man can say these words about them, that they
are, but can not add to their names these words: „tu”/you, „el (ea)”/he (she).
The man remains, in a way, himself, alone in the middle of them. „Tu”/you and
„el”/he mean an answer in reference to „eu”/I, with which I indicate me. This
answer can not give to me stones, plants, animals.And in such solitude, I am
lacked of the complete existence, or in sure mode of intensity of existence.
When I try to don't have any more the others as „tu”/you or as „el”/he (which
can become for me „tu”/you), I myself weeken in existence, or I loose it.
Perhaps into an „eu”/I
which habituated to have not any more at all a „tu”/you stays the hell, the extreme
diminution of existence. In „eu sunt”/I am of Descartes and so much even we
don't affirm as centres ones for others. I am as joyful to say „eu sunt”/I am,
as to be told by other „tu eşti”/you are or that „el (ea) este”/he (she) is.
And only in this reciproc reference ones to others we exist each in complete
mode. My complete existence I can not hence have but as personal supreme
centre.
In this it is shown
the common being as living being, as being lived in communion by different
persons, as being enriched through all persons, on measure of number of persons
found in relation and especially in communion. But my complete existence can
not give me but a personal existence, the supreme conscience.”
Indeed, the Orthodoxism, as Christian spirituality, must remain over
earthly interests. Its fund is a revelation. Invariable revelation. The
Orthodoxism can be clarified through examination of traditions, but not
modernized in spirit of time. The mission of Orthodoxism is to keep, for ever,
the teachings of Christ in their unalterated form. The românism/Romanian
spirit, on the contrary, is the spirituality which gives to us the mean to go
with the time, to modernize us. It is the fire which purifies our ethnic, in
order to put this in measure to create original works. The Ortodoxism is
tradition, the românism/Romanian spirit is vocation.”
„The merit of
existentialist philosophy is that it has discovered the absolute superiority of
the person face to the thing, to nature, to impersonal reality, be it even
spiritual, and, in the same time, superiority of relations between persons, out
of which she and you, in comparison with relation between person and thing. The
relation between person and person is something much more generator of life, is
a perfect relation, of a plenitude upto which it can not even to dream to rise
the poor living which is tried by person in relation to the impersonal. Only
the relation with other persons can make you to live completely your life, only
it is capable to stir all your ambitions, sentiments; only conscience that
other persons follow you makes to come up from your depths, which you even
dreamt containing something, powers of creation or of destruction straight away
gigantic. In exchange, the relation with a thing can not take out from
somnolence and indifference in which you are plunged but tired, superficial
vibrations without resonances in depth. If you appreciate however, often, with
passion certain things, you do it for the sake of persons you know they follow
you.”
Petre Tutea:
„The Fascism is, as well as the National-Socialism,
unreligious. These are ethno-historical explosions, but no religious... The
Romanian right does not seem with these two forms of European right, being
mystical-Christian... That is it doesn't feel well elswhere than in shadow of
churches and triptychs.”
„The autonomous man is
illusory, because either he is under
empire of transcendence , and then he is religious, or is under empire of
nature, and then he is materialist. Human autonomy can not be conclusive. ”
„There are too great
principles which struggle in an authentical consciousness: the principle of
authority and the principle of freedom. I try to reconcile them in a sort of
fundamental automatism of man in social body. The true organization belongs to
relation between man and state, formulated juridically so exactly, in order
to superpose no one over the other:
neither individual over state, nor state over individual. The true institution
is but isn't felt... Yet, not the individual is the source of order in the
state. He is but only biological, that is physic. And spiritually he is the
reflex of society, of community.
„In my time, it circulated a word: if someone untill
thirty years is not democrate and of the left, he has no heart; if over thirthy
years is not conservative and of the left, he is dull!... People live in the
Tower of Babel because they are people. The human is not natural. It represents
a biological mutation, consequence of the fall in the sin. And with all these,
Christianly speaking, between Kant and Adam it is no any difference... De! It
is regrettable that time passes. The efficacity of time pains... Untill now I
swung, ideatically, between superman and noman... present in all tragedies and
victories of this country, I feel like a pole in the middle of storm. The only
hope is that, man as I am, God loves me also so... between human and nohuman”.
„The man thinks predicatively or, more
precise, propositionally and systematically. When he is autonomous, he puts
neither on his affirmations, nor on his negations the seal of originality...
The salvation is of
religious nature, and not logical one. A concept is never exhaustive, because
uncomplete is also the expressed object. The metaphysics is useless in front of
death. Only the mysticalness is valid. The mysticalness is an autonomously human speculation and that for
the senses acquirred through metaphysical speculation keep of individuation.”
George Anca
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu