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 to
millions 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 – 1981 – 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 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.”
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu