THE PHILOSOPHY OF [EUROPEAN] HISTORY – Hegel (trad. e notas de J. Sibree)

PREFÁCIOS DA EDIÇÃO ESPANHOLA “FILOSOFÍA DE LA HISTORIA UNIVERSAL”, DE JOSÉ GAOS

I. SOBRE LA EDICIÓN ALEMANA

La primera edición fue hecha en 1837 por Eduard Gans. La segunda, en 1840 por Karl Hegel; esta fue reimpresa -con muchas erratas- en 1848. La segunda edición ha sido siempre considerada como la canónica, por las grandes adiciones que contiene respecto de la primera. Ha sido reeditada en 1907 por Fritz Brunstad en la conocida colección Reclam. Los 2 editores primeros, E. Gans y Karl Hegel, partieron del propósito equivocado de convertir en un ‘libro’ lo que era una serie de ‘lecciones’. Esto les llevó no sólo a pulir acaso excesivamente el estilo de los manuscritos que les sirvieron de base, sino a refundir realmente partes enteras y a suprimir lo que juzgaban repeticiones o pasajes sin interés. Todo ello con el buen deseo de convertir en un libro los materiales que tenían a mano.”

Karl Hegel asegura que las adiciones de su edición proceden todas no de cuadernos de apuntes, sino de manuscritos de la propia mano de su padre. Pero estos manuscritos no los ha visto nadie. Es posible que Karl Hegel dé este nombre a las notas volanderas, sin redactar, compuestas de palabras sueltas, que Hegel utilizaba en sus clases. En tal caso, las páginas de los apuntes resultarían más auténticas aún, puesto que Hegel no daba realmente forma plena a su pensamiento sino en la improvisación oral. Por todas estas razones puede considerarse la edición nueva de Lasson como la primera que refleja con exactitud bastante aproximada la forma que tuvieron las lecciones de Hegel sobre filosofía de la historia universal.”

II. SOBRE LA TRADUCCIÓN ESPAÑOLA

Esta traducción de la Filosofía de la historia, de Hegel, puede considerarse prácticamente como la primera que se hace a idiomas latinos.” “En italiano existen 2: 1°. Hegel. Filosofía della Storia, trad. G.P. Passerini (Capolago, 1840); 2°. Hegel. Filosofía della Storia, org. Eduardo Gans, 3° edizione fatta per cura di C. Hegel, traduzione dall’originale per A. Novelli, 1864.

La primera es la traducción de la edición de Gans, que quedó totalmente anulada por la edición de Karl Hegel con sus numerosas adiciones. La segunda, la traducción de Novelli, está juzgada por Benedetto Croce, en la introducción a su traducción italiana de la Enciclopedia de las ciencias filosóficas, en palabras duramente condenatorias, abonadas por una muestra a 2 columnas.”

La terminología de Hegel ha sido para nosotros causa, a veces, de perplejidades no todas satisfactoriamente resueltas y que comunicamos al lector.”

Hegel distingue entre Moralität y Sittlichkeit. Ambos términos tienen una sola traducción en español: moralidad. La palabra alemana Sittlichkeit es el derivado de Site que significa costumbre, como moralidad es el derivado de mos, la voz latina que también significa costumbre. La diferencia de sentido que Hegel establece entre Moralität y Sittlichkeit es que Moralität se refiere a la moralidad subjetiva, a la calidad o valor moral de una voluntad que obra por respeto al deber, mientras que Sittlichkeit señala más bien la moralidad objetiva, la moral como conjunto de normas, costumbres, leyes objetivas que constituyen la manera de obrar de un pueblo. Esta diferencia de sentido ha sido destacada en las traducciones italianas de Hegel por el uso de los 2 términos Moralitá y Eticitá. Podríamos -y en esto consiste nuestra perplejidad- haber empleado en nuestra traducción las palabras moralidad y eticidad. Pero la introducción de este neologismo nos resultaba algo dura y poco conforme con el espíritu de nuestro idioma, que parece más bien otorgar a la voz moralidad los 2 sentidos, el objetivo y el subjetivo. Acaso la mejor traducción de Sittlichkeit fuera: civilidad, dando a este término su sentido prístino de vida humana social sujeta a normas de convivencia, esto es, distinta de la vida animal o natural. En general puede decirse que lo que Hegel entiende por Estado (Staat) no tiene el sentido precisamente jurídico-político que tiene para nosotros, sino más bien el de sociedad humana. Pero esta distinción, ya vislumbrada por Hegel, que insiste en diferenciar el Estado de su constitución, etcétera, no se ha practicado hasta después. Por estas razones -y repetimos que en esto consiste nuestra perplejidad- hemos usado solamente el término de moralidad, confiando en que el contexto dará al lector facilidad para discernir el sentido en cada caso. De todos modos sírvale de guía nuestra advertencia de que el término está tomado en su sentido subjetivo.”

Otro problema terminológico nos ha planteado la expresión Volksgeist. Su traducción literal es espíritu del pueblo. Podría traducirse espíritu nacional. Hemos preferido la primera expresión, que tiene algún abolengo en nuestro idioma, habiendo sido usada por los filósofos y juristas españoles que en el pasado siglo tuvieron contacto con el pensamiento alemán (Hegel, Krause, etcétera). Pero también aquí tienen los términos nación y pueblo para Hegel el mismo sentido más amplio que hemos indicado para el término Estado.”

Hemos traducido Bildung casi siempre por cultura. Solamente en algún caso hemos puesto educación por tratarse de pasajes en donde se insiste principalmente sobre la noción de formación, de paso de un estado a otro, de una situación inculta a otra culta.”

Por último, no necesitamos decir que la palabra idea no ha sido empleada por nosotros nada más que para traducir la voz alemana Idee, cuyo valor terminológico en Hegel es conocido. Acaso hubiera sido mejor escribirla siempre con mayúscula.”

J.G., Madrid, 1928

PREFÁCIOS DA EDIÇÃO INGLESA, A QUE USAMOS PARA TODO O RESTANTE DO POST, DE SIBREE E K. HEGEL

I. TRANSLATOR’S INTRODUCTION

Hegel’s Lectures on the Philosophy of History are recognized in Germany as a popular introduction to his system; their form is less rigid than the generality of metaphysical treatises, and the illustrations, which occupy a large proportion of the work, are drawn from a field of observation more familiar perhaps than any other, to those who have not devoted much time to metaphysical studies.”

A few words however have necessarily been used in a rather unusual sense; and one of them is of very frequent occurrence. The German Geist, in Hegel’s nomenclature, includes both intelligence and will, the latter even more expressly than the former.” “It is pertinent to remark here, that the comparative disuse of this term in English metaphysical literature is one result of that alienation of theology from philosophy with which continental writers of the most opposite schools agree in taxing the speculative genius of Britain — an alienation which mainly accounts for the gulf separating English from German speculation, and which will, it is feared, on other accounts also be the occasion of communicating a somewhat uninviting aspect to the following pages.”

The word ‘moment’ is, as readers of German philosophy are aware, a veritable crux to the translator. In Mr. J.R. Morell’s very valuable edition of Johnson’s Translation of Tennemann’s Manual of the History of Philosophy, the following explanation is given: ‘This term was borrowed from mechanics by Hegel (see his Wissenschaft der Logik, Vol. 3, P. 104, Ed. 1841). He employs it to denote the contending forces which are mutually dependent, and whose contradiction forms an equation. Hence his formula, Esse = Nothing. Here Esse and Nothing are momentums, giving birth to Werden, i.e., Existence. Thus the momentum contributes to the same oneness of operation in contradictory forces that we see in mechanics, amidst contrast and diversity, in weight and distance, in the case of the balance.’ But in several parts of the work before us this definition is not strictly adhered to, and the translator believes he has done justice to the original in rendering the word by ‘successive’ or ‘organic phase’. In the chapter on the Crusades another term occurs which could not be simply rendered into English. The definite, positive, and present embodiment of essential being is there spoken of as ‘ein Dieses’, ‘das Dieses’, etc., literally ‘a This’, ‘the This’, for which repulsive combination a periphrasis has been substituted, which, it is believed, is not only accurate but expository.”

The translator would remark, in conclusion, that the ‘Introduction’ will probably be found the most tedious and difficult part of the treatise; he would therefore suggest a cursory reading of it in the 1st instance, and a 2nd perusal as a resume of principles which are more completely illustrated in the body of the work.

J. Sibree”

II. KARL HEGEL’S PREFACE

In proceeding to treat of China and India, he wished, as he said himself, only to show by example how philosophy ought to comprehend the character of a nation; and this could be done more easily in the case of the stationary nations of the East, than in that of peoples which have a bona fide history and a historical development of character.”

Had Hegel pursued the plan which most professors adopt, in adapting notes for use in the lecture room, of merely appending emendations and additions to the original draught, it would be correct to suppose that his latest readings would be also the most matured. But as, on the contrary, every delivery was with him a new act of thought, each gives only the expression of that degree of philosophical energy which animates his mind at the time” Hegel, o Filósofo da Síntese, não conseguia sintetizar suas próprias aulas!

INTRODUCTION

O imbecil se julgava superior a um Tucídides!

Legends, Balladstories, Traditions, must be excluded from such original history. These are but dim and hazy forms of historical apprehension, and therefore belong to nations whose intelligence is but half awakened.”

Reflections are none of his business, for he lives in the spirit of his subject; he has not attained an elevation above it.”

Such speeches as we find in Thucydides (for example) of which we can positively assert that they are not bona fide reports, would seem to make against our statement that a historian of his class presents us no reflected picture; that persons and people appear in his works in propria persona.” Imagine o ataque cardíaco que Hegel teria ao se deparar postumamente com o materialismo histórico!

ESSA ESTRANHA VENERAÇÃO PELA PERSONALIDADE DE PÉRICLES ADVIRIA DA PRÓPRIA LEITURA VICIADA DE HEGEL DE HISTORIADORES EM SUA FORMAÇÃO? “Granted that such orations as those of Pericles — that most profoundly accomplished, genuine, noble statesman — were elaborated by Thucydides, it must yet be maintained that they were not foreign to the character of the speaker.” Ao mesmo tempo, contradiz a passagem acima!

Xenophon’s Retreat of the Ten Thousand, is a work equally original.” Pois essa obra não é nada falada hoje em dia…

Caesar’s Commentaries are the simple masterpiece of a mighty spirit.”

Our culture is essentially comprehensive, and immediately changes all events into historical representations.” Hoje chegamos ao absurdo de verificar isso no ao vivo televisivo + novas mídias. Eu não escrevo essas linhas conforme meu presente, mas pensando num futuro leitor – num futuro leitor distante, muito depois de minha morte… E por quê? Porque é o espírito do tempo, eu não posso evitar esse preconceito ridículo.

In Germany such masters are rare. Frederick the Great (Histoire de Mon Temps) is an illustrious exception.” Puxa-saco descarado.

Instead of writing history, we are always beating our brains to discover how history ought to be written.”

Johannes von Müller has given a stiff, formal, pedantic aspect to his history, in the endeavor to remain faithful in his portraiture to the times he describes. We much prefer the narratives we find in old Tschudy. All is more naive and natural than it appears in the garb of a fictitious and affected archaism.”

But what experience and history teach is this — that peoples and governments never have learned anything from history, or acted on principles deduced from it.”

Looked at in this light, nothing can be shallower than the oft-repeated appeal to Greek and Roman examples during the French Revolution.”

It is only a thorough, liberal, comprehensive view of historical relations (such e.g., as we find in Montesquieu’s Ésprit des Lois) that can give truth and interest to reflections of this order.”

Disgusted by such reflective histories, readers have often returned with pleasure to a narrative adopting no particular point of view.”

The third form of Reflective History is the Critical. This deserves mention as pre-eminently the mode of treating history now current in Germany. It is not history itself that is here presented. We might more properly designate it as a History of History

Among us, the so-called ‘higher criticism’, which reigns supreme in the domain of philology, has also taken possession of our historical literature. This ‘higher criticism’ has been the pretext for introducing all the anti-historical monstrosities that a vain imagination could suggest.”

In this science it would seem as if Thought must be subordinate to what is given, to the realities of fact; that this is its basis and guide: while Philosophy dwells in the region of self-produced ideas, without reference to actuality.” “we seem to have in Philosophy a process diametrically opposed to that of the historiographer.”

The only Thought which Philosophy brings with it to the contemplation of History, is the simple conception of Reason; that Reason is the Sovereign of the World; that the history of the world, therefore, presents us with a rational process. This conviction and intuition is a hypothesis in the domain of history as such.”

Reason is the substance of the Universe”

[Reason] having its place outside reality, nobody knows where; something separate and abstract, in the heads of certain human beings.” Critica a coisa-em-si de Kant, que ele ‘deixa de fora’, mas o ‘fora’ de Hegel é ainda mais escandaloso, i.e., é dentro da cabeça de vento dos agentes históricos!

developing it not only in the phenomena of the Natural, but also of the Spiritual Universe — the History of the World. That this ‘Idea’ or ‘Reason’ is the True, the Eternal, the absolutely powerful essence; that it reveals itself in the World, and that in that World nothing else is revealed but this and its honor and glory — is the thesis which, as we have said, has been proved in Philosophy, and is here regarded as demonstrated.”

It is only an inference from the history of the World, that its development has been a rational process; that the history in question has constituted the rational necessary course of the World-Spirit — that Spirit whose nature is always one and the same, but which unfolds this its one nature in the phenomena of the World’s existence. This must, as before stated, present itself as the ultimate result of History.”

The movement of the solar system takes place according to unchangeable laws. These laws are Reason, implicit in the phenomena in question. But neither the sun nor the planets, which revolve around it according to these laws, can be said to have any consciousness of them.”

Aristotle says of Anaxagoras, as the originator of the thought in question, that he appeared as a sober man among the drunken. Socrates adopted the doctrine from Anaxagoras, and it forthwith became the ruling idea in Philosophy — except in the school of Epicurus, who ascribed all events to chance.” “the world is not abandoned to chance and external contingent causes, but (…) a Providence controls it.” “for Divine Providence is Wisdom, endowed with an infinite Power, which realizes its aim, viz., the absolute rational design of the World.”

The ignorance of Anaxagoras, as to how intelligence reveals itself in actual existence, was ingenuous. Neither in his consciousness, nor in that of Greece at large, had that thought been farther expanded.”

in recent times Philosophy has been obliged to defend the domain of religion against the attacks of several theological systems.”

Our mode of treating the subject is, in this aspect, a Theodicaea — a justification of the ways of God — which Leibnitz attempted metaphysically, in his method, i.e., in indefinite abstract categories — so that the ill that is found in the World may be comprehended, and the thinking Spirit reconciled with the fact of the existence of evil.” “Reason, whose sovereignty over the World has been maintained, is as indefinite a term as Providence, supposing the term to be used by those who are unable to characterize it distinctly” “The German nations, under the influence of Christianity, were the first to attain the consciousness that man, as man, is free: that it is the freedom of Spirit which constitutes its essence.”

The epoch when a State attains this harmonious condition, marks the period of its bloom, its virtue, its vigor, and its prosperity. But the history of mankind does not begin with a conscious aim of any kind, as it is the case with the particular circles into which men form themselves of set purpose.” Fala logo do Apocalipse ou de sua Apocatástase, idiota! Solta sua língua!

The History of the World is not the theatre of happiness. Periods of happiness are blank pages in it, for they are periods of harmony — periods when the antithesis is in abeyance.”

Their whole life was labor and trouble; their whole nature was nought else but their master-passion. When their object is attained they fall off like empty hulls from the kernel. They die early, like Alexander; they are murdered, like Caesar; transported to St. Helena, like Napoleon.”

Síndrome de Cleópatra

it has been demonstrated ad nauseam that princes are generally unhappy on their thrones; in consideration of which the possession of a throne is tolerated, and men acquiesce in the fact that not themselves but the personages in question are its occupants.”

Alexander of Macedon partly subdued Greece, and then Asia; therefore he was possessed by a morbid craving for conquest. He is alleged to have acted from a craving for fame, for conquest; and the proof that these were the impelling motives is that he did that which resulted in fame. What pedagogue has not demonstrated of Alexander the Great — of Julius Caesar — that they were instigated by such passions, and were consequently immoral men? — whence the conclusion immediately follows that he, the pedagogue, is a better man than they, because he has not such passions; a proof of which lies in the fact that he does not conquer Asia — vanquish Darius and Porus — but while he enjoys life himself, lets others enjoy it too.”

Man must eat and drink; he sustains relations to friends and acquaintances; he has passing impulses and ebullitions of temper. ‘No man is a hero to his valet-de-chambre’ is a well-known proverb; I have added — and Goethe repeated it ten years later [hmmm!] — ‘but not because the former is no hero, but because the latter is a valet.’ He takes off the hero’s boots, assists him to bed, knows that he prefers champagne, etc.” Os heróis de antigamente (digo, da modernidade quasi-recente!) tinham alguns luxos derivados do tempo da escravidão grega, certo, meu germânico amigo?

Nenhum homem é herói, porque nenhum homem tem um valet-de-chambre.

Provérbio atualizado com sucesso! A ironia é que heróis precisavam de valets-de-chambre para existirem com autonomia e tempo no mundo, muito embora seus próprios valets-de-chambre fossem uns ignaros. Quando ninguém tem valets-de-chambre, todos são valets-de-chambre, e portanto não poderiam reconhecer um herói, nem que ele desembarcasse de Marte!

Ser o empregado de alguém para desmoralizá-lo. Ser o secretário do seu pior inimigo! Até conhecer os podres tão podres que seria podre até divulgá-los – não são grandes podres, são comezinhos…

A PERSONALITY OF ‘NO CONSEQUENCE’: “The Thersites¹ of Homer who abuses the kings is a standing figure for all times. Blows — that is beating with a solid cudgel — he does not get in every age, as in the Homeric one; but his envy, his egotism, is the thorn which he has to carry in his flesh; and the undying worm that gnaws him is the tormenting consideration that his excellent views and vituperations remain absolutely without result in the world. But our satisfaction at the fate of Thersitism also may have its sinister side.” Tersites, a térmite.

¹ WIKI: “The Iliad does not mention his father’s name, which may suggest that he should be viewed as a commoner rather than an aristocratic hero. However, a quotation from another lost epic in the Trojan cycle, the Aethiopis, names his parents as Agrius of Calydon and Dia, a daughter of King Porthaon. (…) Homer described him in detail in the Iliad, Book II, even though he plays only a minor role in the story. He is said to be bow-legged and lame, to have shoulders that cave inward, and a head which is covered in tufts of hair and comes to a point. Vulgar, obscene, and somewhat dull-witted, Thersites disrupts the rallying of the Greek army (…) He is not mentioned elsewhere in the Iliad, but it seems that in the lost Aethiopis Achilles eventually killed him ‘for having torn out the eyes of the Amazon Penthesilea that the hero had just killed in combat.’ § In his Introduction to The Anger of Achilles, Robert Graves speculates that Homer might have made Thersites a ridiculous figure as a way of dissociating himself from him, because his remarks seem entirely justified. This was a way of letting these remarks, along with Odysseus’ brutal act of suppression, remain in the record. (…) The Alexander Romance refers to Thersites when Alexander the Great is claimed to have said that it would be a greater honor to be immortalized in the poetry of Homer, even if only as a minor and detestable character like Thersites, than by the poets of his own day: ‘I would sooner be a Thersites in Homer than an Agamemnon in your writing’. Other recensions replace Agamemnon with Achilles in the comparison. § Along with many of the major figures of the Trojan War, Thersites was a character in Shakespeare’s Troilus and Cressida (1602) in which he is described as ‘a deformed and scurrilous Grecian’ and portrayed as a comic servant, in the tradition of the Shakespearian fool, but unusually given to abusive remarks to all he encounters. He begins as Ajax’s slave, telling Ajax, ‘I would thou didst itch from head to foot and I had the scratching of thee; I would make thee the loathsomest scab in Greece.’ Thersites soon leaves Ajax and puts himself into the service of Achilles (portrayed by Shakespeare as a kind of bohemian figure), who appreciates his bitter, caustic humor. Shakespeare mentions Thersites again in his later play Cymbeline, when Guiderius says, ‘Thersites’ body is as good as Ajax’ / When neither are alive.’ (…) The role of Thersites as a social critic has been advanced by several philosophers and literary critics, including Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Friedrich Nietzsche, Edward Said, Thomas Woods and Kenneth Burke.”

SER E TÉRSITES

Quem é o parasita do parasita?

Quem é o cupim da casa dos cupins?

A expiação de todo bode velho?

This may be called the cunning of reason — that it sets the passions to work for itself, while that which develops its existence through such impulsion pays the penalty, and suffers loss.”

Age generally makes men more tolerant; youth is always discontented. The tolerance of age is the result of the ripeness of a judgment which, not merely as the result of indifference, is satisfied even with what is inferior”

God governs the world; the actual working of his government — the carrying out of his plan — is the History of the World. This plan philosophy strives to comprehend; for only that which has been developed as the result of it, possesses bona fide reality.”

The patriarchal condition is one of transition, in which the family has already advanced to the position of a race or people” “The Spirit of the Family — the Penates — form one substantial being, as much as the Spirit of a People in the State” “The head of the patriarchal clan is also its priest. If the Family in its general relations, is not yet separated from civic society and the state, the separation of religion from it has also not yet taken place”

The natural inference from this principle is that no law can be valid without the approval of all. This difficulty is attempted to be obviated by the decision that the minority must yield to the majority; the majority therefore bear the sway. But long ago J.J. Rousseau remarked that in that case there would be no longer freedom, for the will of the minority would cease to be respected. At the Polish Diet each single member had to give his consent before any political step could be taken; and this kind of freedom it was that ruined the State.” “It is only by a Constitution that the abstraction — the State — attains life and reality; but this involves the distinction between those who command and those who obey.”

Ideals of the Education of Princes (Fénelon, 1651-1715),¹ or of the governing body — the aristocracy at large (Plato)” Nunca foi isso que disse Platão.

¹ “Upon Beauvilliers’ recommendation, Fénelon was named the tutor of the Dauphin’s eldest son, the 7-year-old Duke of Burgundy, who was 2nd in line for the throne. This brought him a good deal of influence at court. (…) He wrote several important works specifically to guide his young charge. These include his Fables and his Dialogues des Morts. But by far the most lasting of his works that Fénelon composed for the duke was his Les Aventures de Télémaque (…) It also more directly supplied the plot for Mozart’s opera, Idomeneo (1781).” O anti-Bossuet. A revolução francesa é a comprovação empírica de que a virtude não pode ser ensinada. Pois vemos que tentaram fazer com que ela fosse ensinada!

Two phases of royalty, therefore, must be distinguished — a primary and a secondary one.”

The so-called Representative Constitution is that form of government with which we connect the idea of a free constitution; and this notion has become a rooted prejudice.”

HEGEL & A BANCADA EVANGÉLICA: “Obedience to King and Law naturally follows in the train of reverence for God. This reverence, indeed, since it exalts the general over the special, may even turn upon the latter — become fanatical — and work with incendiary and destructive violence against the State, its institutions and arrangements. Religious feeling, therefore, it is thought, should be sober — kept in a certain degree of coolness — that it may not storm against and bear down that which should be defended and preserved by it. The possibility of such a catastrophe is at least latent in it.”

For in affirming that the State is based on Religion — that it has its roots in it — we virtually assert that the former has proceeded from the latter; and that this derivation is going on now and will always continue; i.e., the principles of the State must be regarded as valid in and for themselves, which can only be in so far as they are recognized as determinate manifestations of the Divine Nature.” “so that, in fact, the Athenian or the Roman State was possible only in connection with the specific form of Heathenism existing among the respective peoples; just as a Catholic State has a spirit and constitution different from that of a Protestant one.” “Another and opposite folly which we meet with in our time, is that of pretending to invent and carry out political constitutions independently of religion. The Catholic confession, although sharing the Christian name with the Protestant, does not concede to the State an inherent Justice and Morality — a concession which in the Protestant principle is fundamental.”

The remark next in order is that each particular National genius is to be treated as only One Individual in the process of Universal History. For that history is the exhibition of the divine, absolute development of Spirit in its highest forms — that gradation by which it attains its truth and consciousness of itself. The forms which these grades of progress assume are the characteristic ‘National Spirits’ of History; the peculiar tenor of their moral life, of their Government, their Art, Religion, and Science. To realize these grades is the boundless impulse of the World-Spirit — the goal of its irresistible urging; for this division into organic members, and the full development of each, is its Idea.” “in Nature there happens ‘nothing new under the sun’, and the multiform play of its phenomena so far induces a feeling of ennui; only in those changes which take place in the region of Spirit does anything new arise.”

The principle of perfectibility indeed is almost as indefinite a term as mutability in general; it is without scope or goal, and has no standard by which to estimate the changes in question: the improved, more perfect, state of things towards which it professedly tends is altogether undetermined.”

There are many considerable periods in History in which this development seems to have been intermitted; in which, we might rather say, the whole enormous gain of previous culture appears to have been entirely lost; after which, unhappily, a new commencement has been necessary, made in the hope of recovering — by the assistance of some remains saved from the wreck of a former civilization, and by dint of a renewed incalculable expenditure of strength and time — one of the regions which had been an ancient possession of that civilization.” “This view takes up the idea of the primitive paradisiacal condition of man, which had been previously expanded by the Theologians, after their fashion — involving, e.g., the supposition that God spoke with Adam in Hebrew — but remodelled to suit other requirements.” “The biblical account by no means justifies us in imagining a people, and a historical condition of such people, existing in that primitive form” “the assertion that such a condition occurred at the very beginning of History — or that the religions of various nations were traditionally derived from it, and have developed themselves in degeneracy and depravation (as is represented in the rudely-conceived so-called ‘Emanation System’)” “blessed ignorance is itself not a subject of History.” “The Family therefore, is excluded from that process of development in which History takes its rise.”

It is a great discovery in history — as of a new world — which has been made within rather more than the last 20 years, [~1800] respecting the Sanskrit and the connection of the European languages with it. In particular, the connection of the German and Indian peoples has been demonstrated, with as much certainty as such subjects allow of.” Já sabemos onde isso vai dar…

Even at the present time we know of peoples which scarcely form a society, much less a State, but that have been long known as existing” Desmente por completo a assunção do tradutor de que State significaria sempre sociedade no idioleto hegeliano.

A VENDETA DO ORIENTE ESTÁ PRÓXIMA: “which proves the diffusion of those nations from Asia as a centre, and the so dissimilar development of what had been originally related, as an incontestable fact; not as an inference deduced by that favorite method of combining, and reasoning from, circumstances grave and trivial, which has already enriched and will continue to enrich history with so many fictions given out as facts.” “It strikes every one, in beginning to form an acquaintance with the treasures of Indian literature, that a land so rich in intellectual products, and those of the profoundest order of thought, has no History; and in this respect contrasts most strongly with China — an empire possessing one so remarkable, one going back to the most ancient times. India has not only ancient books relating to religion, and splendid poetical productions, but also ancient codes; the existence of which latter kind of literature has been mentioned as a condition necessary to the origination of History — and yet History itself is not found. But in that country the impulse of organization, in beginning to develop social distinctions, was immediately petrified in the merely natural classification according to castes (…) Consequently, the element of morality is banished from the pomp of Indian life and from its political institutions.”

moreover, that the extension and organic growth of the empire of articulate sounds has itself remained voiceless and dumb — a stealthy, unnoticed advance.”

It is a fact revealed by philological monuments that languages, during a rude condition of the nations that have spoken them, have been very highly developed; that the human understanding occupied this theoretical region with great ingenuity and completeness. For Grammar, in its extended and consistent form, is the work of thought, which makes its categories distinctly visible therein. It is, moreover, a fact, that with advancing social and political civilization, this systematic completeness of intelligence suffers attrition, and language thereupon becomes poorer and ruder”

Speech is the act of theoretic intelligence in a special sense; it is its external manifestation. Exercises of memory and imagination, without language, [?] are direct, (non-speculative) manifestations. But this act of theoretic intelligence itself, as also its subsequent development, and the more concrete class of facts connected with it — viz. the spreading of peoples over the earth, their separation from each other, their comminglings and wanderings — remain involved in the obscurity of a voiceless past.”

ASSOPRA, MAS DEPOIS MORDE (ELOGIA, MAS DEPOIS MENOSCABA): “The rapid growth of language, and the progress and dispersion of Nations (sic), assume importance and interest for concrete Reason (sic), only when they have come in contact with States, or begin to form political constitutions themselves.”

This it must and is also destined to accomplish; but the accomplishment is at the same time its dissolution, and the rise of another spirit, another world-historical people, another epoch of Universal History.” Elaborate on that, please!

What traveller among the ruins of Carthage, of Palmyra, Persepolis, or Rome, has not been stimulated to reflections on the transiency of kingdoms and men, and to sadness at the thought of a vigorous and rich life now departed — a sadness which does not expend itself on personal losses and the uncertainty of one’s own undertakings, but is a disinterested sorrow at the decay of a splendid and highly cultured national life!”

This is a grand conception; one which the Oriental thinkers attained, and which is perhaps the highest in their metaphysics. In the idea of Metempsychosis we find it evolved in its relation to individual existence; but a myth more generally known, is that of the Phoenix as a type of the Life of Nature; eternally preparing for itself its funeral pyre, and consuming itself upon it; but so that from its ashes is produced the new, renovated, fresh life. But this image is only Asiatic; oriental not occidental.”

The Nation can still accomplish much in war and peace at home and abroad; but the living substantial soul itself may be said to have ceased its activity.” “The nation lives the same kind of life as the individual when passing from maturity to old age — in the enjoyment of itself — in the satisfaction of being exactly what it desired and was able to attain.”

Custom is activity without opposition, for which there remains only a formal duration; in which the fullness and zest that originally characterized the aim of life are out of the question — a merely external sensuous existence which has ceased to throw itself enthusiastically into its object.” “a political nullity and tedium.” Com certeza são esses excertos hegelianos que mais encantaram um Nietzche.

A people can only die a violent death when it has become naturally dead in itself, as, e.g., the German Imperial Cities, the German Imperial Constitution.”

Thus, it was first Chronos — Time — that ruled; the Golden Age, without moral products; and what was produced — the offspring of that Chronos — was devoured by it. It was Jupiter — from whose head Minerva sprang, and to whose circle of divinities belong Apollo and the Muses — that first put a constraint upon Time, and set a bound to its principle of decadence. He is the Political god, who produced a moral work — the State.”

If we wish to gain the general idea and conception of what the Greeks were, we find it in Sophocles and Aristophanes, in Thucydides and Plato. In these individuals the Greek spirit conceived and thought itself. This is the profounder kind of satisfaction which the Spirit of a people attains” “At such a time, therefore, we are sure to see a people finding satisfaction in the idea of virtue”

OUTONO [E] DA[-]NAÇÃO: “seeking to impeach the authority of duty generally, as destitute of a sound foundation.”

Zeus, therefore, who is represented as having put a limit to the devouring agency of Time, and stayed this transiency by having established something inherently and independently durable — Zeus and his race are themselves swallowed up, and that by the very power that produced them — the principle of thought, perception, reasoning, insight derived from rational grounds, and the requirement of such grounds.

Time is the negative element in the sensuous world. Thought is the same negativity, but it is the deepest, the infinite form of it, in which therefore all existence generally is dissolved; first finite existence — determinate, limited form: but existence generally, in its objective character, is limited; it appears therefore as a mere datum — something immediate — authority; — and is either intrinsically finite and limited, or presents itself as a limit for the thinking subject, and its infinite reflection on itself (unlimited abstraction).”

For Thought is that Universal — that Species which is immortal, which preserves identity with itself. The particular form of Spirit not merely passes away in the world by natural causes in Time, but is annulled in the automatic self-mirroring activity of consciousness.”

FLUSLERÍA: “Its principle is no longer that immediate import and aim which it was previously, but the essence of that import and aim.”

The individual traverses as a unity various grades of development, and remains the same individual; in like manner also does a people, till the Spirit which it embodies reaches the grade of universality. In this point lies the fundamental, the Ideal necessity of transition. This is the soul — the essential consideration — of the philosophical comprehension of History.”

A velha analogia porca (!) da semente de planta blá-blá-blá que depois vira erva daninha…

philosophy, as occupying itself with the True, has to do with the eternally present.” Taí UMA Verdade…

GEOGRAPHICAL BASIS OF HISTORY

It is not our concern to become acquainted with the land occupied by nations as an external locale, but with the natural type of the locality, as intimately connected with the type and character of the people which is the offspring of such a soil.”

In the Frigid and in the Torrid zone the locality of World-historical peoples cannot be found.” “In the extreme zones man cannot come to free movement; cold and heat are here too powerful to allow Spirit to build up a world for itself.” “The true theatre of History is therefore the temperate zone; or, rather, its northern half, because the earth there presents itself in a continental form, and has a broad breast, as the Greeks say.”

The World is divided into Old and New; the name of New having originated in the fact that America and Australia have only lately become known to us. But these parts of the world are not only relatively new, but intrinsically so in respect of their entire physical and psychical constitution.”

the Archipelago between South America and Asia shows a physical immaturity. The greater part of the islands are so constituted, that they are, as it were, only a superficial deposit of earth over rocks, which shoot up from the fathomless deep, and bear the character of novel origination. New Holland shows a not less immature geographical character; for in penetrating from the settlements of the English farther into the country, we discover immense streams, which have not yet developed themselves to such a degree as to dig a channel for themselves, but lose themselves in marshes. Of America and its grade of civilization, especially in Mexico and Peru, we have information, but it imports nothing more than that this culture was an entirely national one, which must expire as soon as Spirit approached it. America has always shown itself physically and psychically powerless, and still shows itself so. For the aborigines, after the landing of the Europeans in America, gradually vanished at the breath of European activity. In the United States of North America all the citizens are of European descent, with whom the old inhabitants could not amalgamate, but were driven back. The aborigines have certainly adopted some arts and usages from the Europeans, among others that of brandy-drinking, which has operated with deadly effect. In the South the natives were treated with much greater violence, and employed in hard labors to which their strength was by no means competent. A mild and passionless disposition, want of spirit, and a crouching submissiveness towards a Creole, and still more towards a European, are the chief characteristics of the native Americans; and it will be long before the Europeans succeed in producing any independence of feeling in them.” “The weakness of the American physique was a chief reason for bringing the negroes to America, to employ their labor in the work that had to be done in the New World”

America, as is well known, is divided into 2 parts, connected indeed by an isthmus, but which has not been the means of establishing intercourse between them. Rather, these 2 divisions are most decidedly distinct from each other. North America shows us on approaching it, along its eastern shore a wide border of level coast, behind which is stretched a chain of mountains — the blue mountains or Appalachians; further north the Alleghanies. Streams issuing from them water the country towards the coast, which affords advantages of the most desirable kind to the United States, whose origin belongs to this region. Behind that mountain-chain the St. Lawrence river flows (in connection with huge lakes), from south to north, and on this river lie the northern colonies of Canada. Farther west we meet the basin of the vast Mississippi, and the basins of the Missouri and Ohio, which it receives, and then debouches into the Gulf of Mexico. On the western side of this region we have in like manner a long mountain chain, running through Mexico and the Isthmus of Panama, and under the names of the Andes or Cordillera, cutting off an edge of coast along the whole west side of South America. The border formed by this is narrower and offers fewer advantages than that of North America. There lie Peru and Chili. On the east side flow eastward the monstrous streams of the Orinoco and Amazons; they form great valleys, not adapted however for cultivation, since they are only wide desert steppes. Towards the south flows the Rio de la Plata, whose tributaries have their origin partly in the Cordilleras, partly in the northern chain of mountains which separates the basin of the Amazon from its own. To the district of the Rio de la Plata belong Brazil, and the Spanish Republics. Colombia is the northern coast-land of South America, at the west of which, flowing along the Andes, the Magdalena debouches into the Caribbean Sea.

With the exception of Brazil, republics have come to occupy South as well as North America. In comparing South America (reckoning Mexico as part of it) with North America, we observe an astonishing contrast.

In North America we witness a prosperous state of things; an increase of industry and population civil order and firm freedom; the whole federation constitutes but a single state, and has its political centres. In South America, on the contrary, the republics depend only on military force; their whole history is a continued revolution; federated states become disunited; others previously separated become united; and all these changes originate in military revolutions.”

A segunda parte é verdade, mas a potência ultramilitarista que arruinou o mundo se tornou um superlativo desse quadro precário!

South America, where the Spaniards settled and asserted supremacy, is Catholic; North America, although a land of sects of every name, is yet fundamentally, Protestant.”

The North American States were, on the other hand, entirely colonised, by Europeans, since in England Puritans, Episcopalians, and Catholics were engaged in perpetual conflict, and now one party, now the other, had the upper hand, many emigrated to seek religious freedom on a foreign shore.”

for in the Protestant Church the entire life — its activity generally — is the field for what it deems religious works. Among Catholics, on the contrary, the basis of such a confidence cannot exist; for in secular matters only force and voluntary subservience are the principles of action; and the forms which are called Constitutions are in this case only a resort of necessity, and are no protection against mistrust.” Historicamente correto, atualmente um trapo velho de ideologia mal-costurada.

A subjective unity presents itself; for there is a President at the head of the State, who, for the sake of security against any monarchical ambition, is chosen only for 4 years.” Os EUA são hoje duas monarquias; duas castas; uma oligarquia dual petrificada.

We find, certainly, legal relations — a formal code of laws; but respect for law exists apart from genuine probity, and the American merchants commonly lie under the imputation of dishonest dealings under legal protection. If, on the one side, the Protestant Church develops the essential principle of confidence, as already stated, it thereby involves on the other hand the recognition of the validity of the element of feeling to such a degree as gives encouragement to unseemly varieties of caprice. Those who adopt this standpoint maintain, that, as everyone may have his peculiar way of viewing things generally, so he may have also a religion peculiar to himself. Thence the splitting up into so many sects, which reach the very acme of absurdity; many of which have a form of worship consisting in convulsive movements, and sometimes in the most sensuous extravagances. This complete freedom of worship is developed to such a degree, that the various congregations choose ministers and dismiss them according to their absolute pleasure; for the Church is no independent existence — having a substantial spiritual being, and correspondingly permanent external arrangement — but the affairs of religion are regulated by the good pleasure for the time being of the members of the community. In North America the most unbounded license of imagination in religious matters prevails, and that religious unity is wanting which has been maintained in European States, where deviations are limited to a few confessions. As to the political condition of North America, the general object of the existence of this State is not yet fixed and determined, and the necessity for a firm combination does not yet exist; for a real State and a real Government arise only after a distinction of classes has arisen, when wealth and poverty become extreme, and when such a condition of things presents itself that a large portion of the people can no longer satisfy its necessities in the way in which it has been accustomed so to do. But America is hitherto exempt from this pressure, for it has the outlet of colonization constantly and widely open, and multitudes are continually streaming into the plains of the Mississippi. By this means the chief source of discontent is removed, and the continuation of the existing civil condition is guaranteed. A comparison of the United States of North America with European lands is therefore impossible; for in Europe, such a natural outlet for population, notwithstanding all the emigrations that take place, does not exist. Had the woods of Germany been in existence, the French Revolution would not have occurred. North America will be comparable with Europe only after the immeasurable space which that country presents to its inhabitants shall have been occupied, and the members of the political body shall have begun to be pressed back on each other.” Bastante certeiro aqui. Imagino que Hegel via nisso uma virtude, entretanto!

Canada and Mexico are not objects of fear, and England has had 50 years’ experience, that free America is more profitable to her than it was in a state of dependence. The militia of the North American Republic proved themselves quite as brave in the War of Independence as the Dutch under Philip II; but generally, where Independence is not at stake, less power is displayed, and in the year 1814 the militia held out but indifferently against the English.

America is therefore the land of the future, where, in the ages that lie before us, the burden of the World’s History shall reveal itself — perhaps in a contest between North and South America.¹ It is a land of desire for all those who are weary of the historical [s]lumber-room [sala cheia – excelente metáfora!] of old Europe.”

¹ Arranhou a verdade se considerarmos Cuba e a Guerra Fria. Porém, ignorou totalmente a Eurásia, e por isso seu prognóstico falhou.

What has taken place in the New World up to the present time is only an echo of the Old World — the expression of a foreign Life; and as a Land of the Future, it has no interest for us here, for, as regards History, our concern must be with that which has been and that which is. In regard to Philosophy, on the other hand, we have to do with that which (strictly speaking) is neither past nor future, but with that which is, which has an eternal existence — with Reason”

The 3 Continents that compose it have an essential relation to each other, and constitute a totality.” “rivers and seas are not to be regarded as disjoining, but as uniting. England and Brittany, Norway and Denmark, Sweden and Livonia, have been united. For the ¾ of the globe the Mediterranean Sea is similarly the uniting element, and the centre of World-History.”

The extensive tract of eastern Asia is severed from the process of general historical development, and has no share in it; so also Northern Europe, which took part in the World’s History only at a later date, and had no part in it while the Old World lasted”

Eastern Asia and that trans-Alpine country are the extremes of this agitated focus of human life around the Mediterranean — the beginning and end of History — its rise and decline.”

The peculiarity of the inhabitants of this elevated region, which is watered sometimes only by rain, or by the overflowing of a river (as are the plains of the Orinoco) — is the patriarchal life, the division into single families. The region which these families occupy is unfruitful or productive only temporarily”

They are careless and provide nothing for the winter, on which account therefore, half of the herd is frequently cut off. Among these inhabitants of the upland there exist no legal relations, and consequently there are exhibited among them the extremes of hospitality and rapine; the last more especially when they are surrounded by civilized nations, as the Arabians, who are assisted in their depredations by their horses and camels. The Mongolians feed on mares’ milk, and thus the horse supplies them at the same time with appliances for nourishment and for war.”

Such an agitation was excited among those tribes under Genghis Khan and Tamerlane: they destroyed all before them; then vanished again, as does an overwhelming Forest-torrent — possessing no inherent principle of vitality. From the uplands they rush down into the dells: there dwell peaceful mountaineers — herdsmen who also occupy themselves with agriculture, as do the Swiss. Asia has also such a people: they are however on the whole a less important element.”

nothing unites so much as water, for countries are nothing else than districts occupied by streams.” Tales é o homem mais sábio da História!

Only Mountains separate. Thus the Pyrenees decidedly separate Spain from France.”

The sea gives us the idea of the indefinite, the unlimited, and infinite; and in feeling his own infinite in that Infinite, man is stimulated and emboldened to stretch beyond the limited: the sea invites man to conquest, and to piratical plunder, but also to honest gain and to commerce. The land, the mere Valley-plain attaches him to the soil; it involves him in an infinite multitude of dependencies, but the sea carries him out beyond these limited circles of thought and action. Those who navigate the sea, have indeed gain for their object, but the means are in this respect paradoxical, inasmuch as they hazard both property and life to attain it. The means therefore are the very opposite to that which they aim at. This is what exalts their gain and occupation above itself, and makes it something brave and noble. Courage is necessarily introduced into trade, daring is joined with wisdom. For the daring which encounters the sea must at the same time embrace wariness — cunning — since it has to do with the treacherous, the most unreliable and deceitful element. This boundless plain is absolutely yielding — withstanding no pressure, not even a breath of wind. It looks boundlessly innocent, submissive, friendly, and insinuating; and it is exactly this submissiveness which changes the sea into the most dangerous and violent element. To this deceitfulness and violence man opposes merely a simple piece of wood; confides entirely in his courage and presence of mind; and thus passes from a firm ground to an unstable support, taking his artificial ground with him. The Ship — that swan of the sea, which cuts the watery plain in agile and arching movements or describes circles upon it — is a machine whose invention does the greatest honor to the boldness of man as well as to his understanding. This stretching out of the sea beyond the limitations of the land, is wanting to the splendid political edifices of Asiatic States, although they themselves border on the sea — as for example, China. For them the sea is only the limit, the ceasing of the land; they have no positive relation to it. The activity to which the sea invites, is a quite peculiar one: thence arises the fact that the coast-lands almost always separate themselves from the states of the interior although they are connected with these by a river. Thus Holland has severed itself from Germany, Portugal from Spain.”

Africa must be divided into 3 parts: one is that which lies south of the desert of Sahara — Africa proper — the Upland almost entirely unknown to us, with narrow coast-tracts along the sea; the second is that to the north of the desert — European Africa (if we may so call it) — a coastland; the third is the river region of the Nile, the only valley-land of Africa, and which is in connection with Asia.”

Africa proper, as far as History goes back, has remained — for all purposes of connection with the rest of the World — shut up; it is the Gold-land compressed within itself — the land of childhood, which lying beyond the day of self-conscious history, is enveloped in the dark mantle of Night. Its isolated character originates, not merely in its tropical nature, but essentially in its geographical condition. The triangle which it forms (if we take the West Coast — which in the Gulf of Guinea makes a strongly indented angle — for one side, and in the same way the East Coast to Cape Gardafu for another) is on 2 sides so constituted for the most part, as to have a very narrow Coast Tract, habitable only in a few isolated spots. Next to this towards the interior, follows to almost the same extent, a girdle of marsh land with the most luxuriant vegetation, the especial home of ravenous beasts, snakes of all kinds — a border tract whose atmosphere is poisonous to Europeans. This border constitutes the base of a cincture of high mountains, which are only at distant intervals traversed by streams, and where they are so, in such a way as to form no means of union with the interior; for the interruption occurs but seldom below the upper part of the mountain ranges, and only in individual narrow channels, where are frequently found innavigable waterfalls and torrents crossing each other in wild confusion. During the 300 or 350 years that the Europeans have known this border-land and have taken places in it into their possession, they have only here and there (and that but for a short time) passed these mountains, and have nowhere settled down beyond them. The land surrounded by these mountains is an unknown Upland, from which on the other hand the Negroes have seldom made their way through. In the 16th century occurred at many very distant points outbreaks of terrible hordes which rushed down upon the more peaceful inhabitants of the declivities. Whether any internal movement had taken place, or if so, of what character, we do not know. What we do know of these hordes, is the contrast between their conduct in their wars and forays themselves — which exhibited the most reckless inhumanity and disgusting barbarism — and the fact that afterwards, when their rage was spent, in the calm time of peace, they showed themselves mild and well disposed towards the Europeans, when they became acquainted with them. This holds good of the Fullahs and of the Mandingo tribes, who inhabit the mountain terraces of the Senegal and Gambia.”

EGITO, CARACTERIZADO COMO ALIENÍGENA NO CONTINENTE NEGRO ENSIMESMADO: “the French have lately made a successful effort in this direction: like Hither-Asia, it looks Europe-wards. Here in their turn have Carthaginians, Romans, and Byzantines, Mussulmans, Arabians had their abode, and the interests of Europe have always striven to get a footing in it.”

In Negro life the characteristic point is the fact that consciousness has not yet attained to the realization of any substantial objective existence — as for example, God, or Law — in which the interest of man’s volition is involved and in which he realizes his own being.” “The Negro, as already observed, exhibits the natural man in his completely wild and untamed state. We must lay aside all thought of reverence and morality — all that we call feeling — if we would rightly comprehend him; there is nothing harmonious with humanity to be found in this type of character.” “Religion begins with the consciousness that there is something higher than man. But even Herodotus called the Negroes sorcerers: — now in Sorcery we have not the idea of a God, of a moral faith; it exhibits man as the highest power, regarding him as alone occupying a position of command over the power of Nature.” Quer dizer que agora você virou fã de Heródoto, né, Hegel?!

For the soul of man, God must be more than a thunderer, whereas among the Negroes this is not the case.”

they exalt to the dignity of a ‘Genius’; it may be an animal, a tree, a stone, or a wooden figure. This is their Fetich — a word to which the Portuguese first gave currency, and which is derived from feitizo, magic.”

CERNE DO AMOR ROMÂNTICO: “Such a Fetich has no independence as an object of religious worship; still less has it aesthetic independence as a work of art; it is merely a creation that expresses the arbitrary choice of its maker, and which always remains in his hands.”

There is however one feature that points to something beyond — the Worship of the Dead — in which their deceased forefathers and ancestors are regarded by them as a power influencing the living.” “Yet the power of the dead is not held superior to that of the living, for the Negroes command the dead and lay spells upon them.”

The undervaluing of humanity among them reaches an incredible degree of intensity. Tyranny is regarded as no wrong, and cannibalism is looked upon as quite customary and proper.” “to the sensual Negro, human flesh is but an object of sense — mere flesh. At the death of a King hundreds are killed and eaten; prisoners are butchered and their flesh sold in the markets; the victor is accustomed to eat the heart of his slain foe. When magical rites are performed, it frequently happens that the sorcerer kills the first that comes in his way and divides his body among the bystanders. Another characteristic fact in reference to the Negroes is Slavery. Negroes are enslaved by Europeans and sold to America. Bad as this may be, their lot in their own land is even worse, since there a slavery quite as absolute exists; for it is the essential principle of slavery, that man has not yet attained a consciousness of his freedom, and consequently sinks down to a mere Thing — an object of no value. Among the Negroes moral sentiments are quite weak, or more strictly speaking, non-existent. Parents sell their children, and conversely children their parents, as either has the opportunity. Through the pervading influence of slavery all those bonds of moral regard which we cherish towards each other disappear, and it does not occur to the Negro mind to expect from others what we are enabled to claim. The polygamy of the Negroes has frequently for its object the having many children, to be sold, everyone of them, into slavery; and very often naïve complaints on this score are heard, as for instance in the case of a Negro in London, who lamented that he was now quite a poor man because he had already sold all his relations. In the contempt of humanity displayed by the Negroes, it is not so much a despising of death as a want of regard for life that forms the characteristic feature.”

Among the Ashantees the King inherits all the property left by his subjects at their death. In other places all unmarried women belong to the King, and whoever wishes a wife, must buy her from him.”

AS ETERNAS MENTIRAS QUE OS HOMENS CONTAM: “Tradition alleges that in former times a state composed of women made itself famous by its conquests: it was a state at whose head was a woman. She is said to have pounded her own son in a mortar, to have besmeared herself with the blood, and to have had the blood of pounded children constantly at hand. She is said to have driven away or put to death all the males, and commanded the death of all male children. These furies destroyed everything in the neighborhood, and were driven to constant plunderings, because they did not cultivate the land. Captives in war were taken as husbands: pregnant women had to betake themselves outside the encampment; and if they had born a son, put him out of the way. This infamous state, the report goes on to say, subsequently disappeared.”

the English who have done most for abolishing the slave-trade and slavery, are treated by the Negroes themselves as enemies. (…) the essence of humanity is Freedom; but for this man must be matured. The gradual abolition of slavery is wiser and more equitable than its sudden removal.” “At this point we leave Africa, not to mention it again. For it is no historical part of the World; it has no movement or development to exhibit. Historical movements in it — that is in its northern part — belong to the Asiatic or European World.” “Egypt will be considered in reference to the passage of the human mind from its Eastern to its Western phase, but it does not belong to the African Spirit. What we properly understand by Africa, is the Unhistorical, Undeveloped Spirit, still involved in the conditions of mere nature, and which had to be presented here only as on the threshold of the World’s History.”

Asia is, characteristically, the Orient quarter of the globe — the region of origination. It is indeed a Western world for America; but as Europe presents on the whole, the centre and end of the old world, and is absolutely the West — so Asia is absolutely the East.” Now we are the old and Asia is the new.

First, the northern slope, Siberia, must be eliminated. This slope, from the Altai chain, with its fine streams, that pour their waters into the northern Ocean, does not at all concern us here; because the Northern Zone, as already stated, lies out of the pale of History.”

the Hoang-Ho and Yang-tse-Kiang (the yellow and blue streams) — next that of India, formed by the Ganges — less important is the Indus, which in the north, gives character to the Punjaub, and in the south flows through plains of sand. Farther on, the lands of the Tigris and Euphrates, which rise in Armenia and hold their course along the Persian mountains. The Caspian Sea has similar river valleys; in the East those formed by the Oxus and Jaxartes (Gihon and Sihon) which pour their waters into the Sea of Aral; on the West those of the Cyrus and Araxes (Kur and Aras).”

and although they have not attained an historical character, the beginning of History may be traced to them.”

Poucas passagens são tão grotescas na história da literatura universal… Hegel fazendo História com H maiúsculo!

It presents the origination of all religious and political principles, but Europe has been the scene of their development.”

The second portion is the heart of Europe, [TALVEZ UMBIGO SEJA MELHOR] which Caesar opened when conquering Gaul. This achievement was one of manhood on the part of the Roman General, and more productive than that youthful one of Alexander, who undertook to exalt the East to a participation in Greek life; and whose work, though in its purport the noblest and fairest for the imagination, soon vanished, as a mere Ideal, in the sequel. — In this centre of Europe, France, Germany and England are the principal countries.”

CLASSIFICATION OF HISTORIC DATA

In the geographical survey, the course of the World’s History has been marked out in its general features. The Sun — the Light — rises in the East. Light is a simply self-involved existence; but t[r?]hough possessing thus in itself universality, it exists at the same time as an individuality in the Sun. Imagination has often pictured to itself the emotions of a blind man suddenly becoming possessed of sight, beholding the bright glimmering of the dawn, the growing light, and the flaming glory of the ascending Sun. The boundless forgetfulness of his individuality in this pure splendor, is his first feeling — utter astonishment. But when the Sun is risen, this astonishment is diminished; objects around are perceived, and from them the individual proceeds to the contemplation of his own inner being, and thereby the advance is made to the perception of the relation between the two. Then inactive contemplation is quitted for activity; by the close of day man has erected a building constructed from his own inner Sun; and when in the evening he contemplates this, he esteems it more highly than the original external Sun. For now he stands in a conscious relation to his Spirit, and therefore a free relation. If we hold this image fast in mind, we shall find it symbolizing the course of History, the great Day’s work of Spirit. The History of the World travels from East to West, for Europe is absolutely the end of History, Asia the beginning.”

O ÁPICE DO COACHISMO METAFÍSICO!

EAST-ória do mundo

O-OU! “The East knew and to the present day knows only that One is Free; the Greek and Roman world, that some are free; the German World knows that All are free. The first political form therefore which we observe in History, is Despotism, the second Democracy and Aristocracy, the third Monarchy.”

PART I: THE ORIENTAL WORLD

If we compare these kingdoms in the light of their various fates, we find the empire of the 2 Chinese rivers the only durable kingdom in the World.” “The Chinese traditions ascend to 3000 years before Christ; and the Shu-King, their canonical document, beginning with the government of Yao, places this 2357 years before Christ.” “The Y-King consists of figures, which have been regarded as the bases of the Chinese written character, and this book is also considered the groundwork of the Chinese Meditation.” “Lastly, the Shi-King is the book of the oldest poems in a great variety of styles.” “Besides these 3 books of archives which are specially honored and studied, there are besides 2 others, less important, viz. the Li-Ki (or Li-King) which records the customs and ceremonial observances pertaining to the Imperial dignity and that of the State functionaries (with an appendix, Yo-King, treating of music); and the Tshun-tsin, the chronicle of the kingdom Lu, where Confucius appeared.”

In the 13th century a Venetian (Marco Polo) explored it for the first time, but his reports were deemed fabulous. In later times, everything that he had said respecting its extent and greatness was entirely confirmed.”

The long wall built by Shi-hoang-ti — and which has always been regarded as a most astounding achievement — was raised as a barrier against the inroads of the northern Nomades.”

Similarly they admitted the Manchus with whom they engaged in war in the 16th and 17th centuries, which resulted in the present dynasty’s obtaining possession of the throne.” Os Manchus foram os últimos forasteiros de relevo incorporados ao povo chinês, e chegaram, de forma talvez inaudita, ao poder. “The Manchus that live in China have to conform to Chinese laws, and study Chinese sciences.” Assimilação unilateral.

China has therefore succeeded in getting the greatest and best governors, to whom the expression ‘Solomonian Wisdom’ might be applied; and the present Manchu dynasty has especially distinguished itself by abilities of mind and body.”

ANTÍPODAS DA FRANÇA: “The deportment of the Emperor is represented to us as in the highest degree simple, natural, noble and intelligent. Free from a proud taciturnity or repelling hauteur in speech or manners, he lives in the consciousness of his own dignity and in the exercise of imperial duties to whose observance he has been disciplined from his earliest youth.”

In the instance of the revolution that occurred in the middle of the 17th century, the last Emperor of the dynasty was very amiable and honorable; but through the mildness of his character, the reins of government were relaxed, and disturbances naturally ensued. The rebels called the Manchus into the country. The Emperor killed himself to avoid falling into the hands of his enemies, and with his blood wrote on the border of his daughter’s robe a few words, in which he complained bitterly of the injustice of his subjects. A Mandarin, who was with him, buried him, and then killed himself on his grave. The Empress and her attendants followed the example. The last prince of the imperial house, who was besieged in a distant province, fell into the hands of the enemy and was put to death. All the other attendant Mandarins died a voluntary death.”

Their consciousness of moral abandonment shows itself also in the fact that the religion of Fo is so widely diffused; a religion which regards as the Highest and Absolute — as God — pure Nothing; which sets up contempt for individuality, for personal existence, as the highest perfection.”

religion is in China essentially State-Religion. The distinction between it and Lamaism [mongóis] must be observed, since the latter is not developed to a State, but contains religion as a free, spiritual, disinterested consciousness. That Chinese religion, therefore, cannot be what we call religion. For to us religion means the retirement of the Spirit within itself, in contemplating its essential nature, its inmost Being. In these spheres, then, man is withdrawn from his relation to the State, and betaking himself to this retirement, is able to release himself from the power of secular government.”

The Jesuits indeed, yielded to Chinese notions so far as to call the Christian God, HeavenTien; but they were on that account accused to the Pope by other Christian Orders. The Pope consequently sent a Cardinal to China, who died there. A bishop who was subsequently despatched, enacted that instead of Heaven, the term Lord of Heaven should be adopted. The relation to Tien is supposed to be such, that the good conduct of individuals and of the Emperor brings blessing; their transgressions on the other hand cause want and evil of all kinds.”

Each of the 5 Elements has its genius, distinguished by a particular color. The sovereignty of the dynasty that occupies the throne of China also depends on a Genius, and this one has a yellow color. Not less does every province and town, every mountain and river possess an appropriate Genius. All these Spirits are subordinate to the Emperor, and in the Annual Directory of the Empire are registered the functionaries and genii to whom such or such a brook, river, etc., has been intrusted. If a mischance occurs in any part, the Genius is deposed as a Mandarin would be. The genii have innumerable temples (in Pekin nearly 10,000) to which a multitude of priests and convents are attached. These ‘Bonzes’ live unmarried, and in all cases of distress are applied to by the Chinese for counsel. In other respects, however, neither they nor the temples are much venerated. Lord Macartney’s Embassy was even quartered in a temple — such buildings beings used as inns. The Emperor has sometimes thought fit to secularize many thousands of these convents; to compel the Bonzes to return to civil life; and to impose taxes on the estates appertaining to the foundations. The Bonzes are soothsayers and exorcists”

One of the highest Governmental Boards is the Academy of Sciences. The Emperor himself examines its members; they live in the palace, and perform the functions of Secretaries, Historians of the Empire, Natural Philosophers and Geographers. Should a new law be proposed, the Academy must report upon it. By way of introduction to such report it must give the history of existing enactments; or if the law in question affects foreign countries, a description of them is required. The Emperor himself writes the prefaces to the works thus composed. Among recent Emperors Kien-long especially distinguished himself by his scientific acquirements. He himself wrote much, but became far more remarkable by publishing the principal works that China has produced. At the head of the commission appointed to correct the press, was a Prince of the Empire; and after the work had passed through the hands of all, it came once more back to the Emperor, who severely punished every error that had been committed.”

They have, as is well known, beside a Spoken Language, a Written Language; which does not express, as our does, individual sounds — does not present the spoken words to the eye, but represents the ideas themselves by signs. This appears at first sight a great advantage, and has gained the suffrages of many great men — among others, of Leibniz.”

Although every Chinaman is at liberty to study these philosophical works, a particular sect, calling itself Tao-tse, Honorers of Reason, makes this study its special business. Those who compose it are isolated from civil life; and there is much that is enthusiastic and mystic intermingled with their views.”

Suicide, the result of revenge, and the exposure of children, as a common, even daily occurrence, show the little respect in which they hold themselves individually, and humanity in general.” Quem sabe eles exportaram para o Ocidente, que aperfeiçoou cada uma dessas artes inimaginavelmente!

The spread of Indian culture is prehistorical, for History is limited to that which makes an essential epoch in the development of Spirit.”

From the most ancient times downwards, all nations have directed their wishes and longings to gaining access to the treasures of this land of marvels, the most costly which the Earth presents” “pearls, diamonds, perfumes, rose-essences, elephants, lions, etc.” HAHAHAHA

there is scarcely any great nation of the East, nor of the Modern European West, that has not gained for itself a smaller or larger portion of it.”

The English, or rather the East India Company, are the lords of the land; for it is the necessary fate of Asiatic Empires to be subjected to Europeans; and China will, some day or other, be obliged to submit to this fate.”

Since the country of the Mahrattas was conquered by the English, no part of India has asserted its independence of their sway. They have already gained a footing in the Burman Empire, and passed the Brahmaputra, which bounds India on the east.” E depois um homem que não esmagaria um besouro deitou por terra todo esse ‘Império’…

India Proper is the country which the English divide into 2 large sections: the Deccan — the great peninsula which has the Bay of Bengal on the east, and the Indian Sea on the west — and Hindostan, formed by the valley of the Ganges, and extending in the direction of Persia. To the northeast, Hindostan is bordered by the Himalaya, which has been ascertained by Europeans to be the highest mountain range in the world, for its summits are about 26,000 feet above the level of the sea. On the other side of the mountains the level again declines; the dominion of the Chinese extends to that point, and when the English wished to go to Lassa to the Dalai-Lama, they were prevented by the Chinese.”

Prenda-me nas cadeias do Himalaia

Prende-me se fores um deus

PAQUISTÃO? “The dominion of the English does not extend to the Indus; the sect of the Sikhs inhabits that district, whose constitution is thoroughly democratic, and who have broken off from the Indian as well as from the Mohammedan religion, and occupy an intermediate ground — acknowledging only one Supreme Being. They are a powerful nation, and have reduced to subjection Cabul and Cashmere.”

A ÍNDIA E AS ÍNDIAS: “We call the inhabitants of the great country which we have now to consider Indians, from the river Indus (the English call them Hindoos). They themselves have never given a name to the whole, for it has never become one Empire, and yet we consider it as such.”

The distinctions in question are the Castes. In every rational State there are distinctions which must manifest themselves.”

The highest class therefore will be the one by which the Divine is presented and brought to bear on the community — the class of Brahmins. The second element or class will represent subjective power and valor. Such power must assert itself, in order that the whole may stand its ground, and retain its integrity against other such totalities or states. This class is that of the Warriors and Governors — the CshatriyasH. não deve ter percebido a incrível semelhança com os dois estratos superiores d’A República! “The third order of occupation recognized is that which is concerned with the specialities of life — the satisfying of its necessities — and comprehends agriculture, crafts and trade; the class of the Vaisyas.” De novo, o paralelo se mantém. “Lastly, the 4th element is the class of service, the mere instrument for the comfort of others, whose business it is to work for others for wages affording a scanty subsistence — the caste of Sudras. This servile class — properly speaking — constitutes no special organic class in the state, because its members only serve individuals: their occupations are therefore dispersed among them and are consequently attached to that of the previously mentioned castes.”

Yet even Arrian (Ind. 11) reckoned 7 castes, and in later times more than 30 have been made out; which, notwithstanding all obstacles, have arisen from the union of the various classes. Polygamy necessarily tends to this. A Brahmin, e.g., is allowed 3 wives from the 3 other castes, provided he has first taken one from his own. The offspring of such mixtures originally belonged to no caste, but one of the kings invented a method of classifying these casteless persons, which involved also the commencement of arts and manufactures. The children in question were assigned to particular employments; one section became weavers, another wrought in iron, and thus different classes arose from these different occupations. The highest of these mixed castes consists of those who are born from the marriage of a Brahmin with a wife of the Warrior caste; the lowest is that of the Chandâlas, who have to remove corpses, to execute criminals, and to perform impure offices generally.” Nenhuma autoridade deve ser creditada a essa teoria espúria da gênese das outras castas.

The Chandâlas are obliged to move out of the way for their superiors, and a Brahmin may knock down any that neglect to do so. [Mas se eles são intocáveis, i.e., estão poluídos!…] If a Chandâla drinks out of a pond it is defiled, and requires to be consecrated afresh.”

DEFENDENDO O INDEFENSÁVEL: “In the feudalism of mediaeval times, individuals were also confined to a certain station in life; but for all there was a Higher Being, superior to the most exalted earthly dignity, and admission to holy orders was open to all.” Logo, logo veremos quão sombria, taciturna e repulsiva era toda essa ordem “divina” européia…

To gain a more accurate idea of what the Brahmins are, and in what the Brahminical dignity consists, we must investigate the Hindoo religion and the conceptions it involves, to which we shall have to return further on; for the respective rights of castes have their basis in a religious relation.” Isso tudo linhas depois de dizer que na Índia a moral é tão primitiva que lá não existe religião…

A large number of the non-Brahminical population strive to attain Regeneration. They are called Yogis.”

The employment of the Brahmins consists principally in the reading of the Vêdas: they only have a right to read them.”

How minute these directions are may be especially judged of from the observances binding on the Brahmins in regard to satisfying the calls of nature. This is forbidden to them in a great thoroughfare, on ashes, on ploughed land, on a hill, a nest of white ants, on wood destined for fuel, in a ditch, walking or standing, on the bank of a river, etc. At such a time they may not look at the sun, at water, or at animals.” “The English wished to introduce trial by jury into India — the jury to consist half of Europeans, half of Hindoos — and submitted to the natives, whose wishes on the subject were consulted, the powers with which the panel would be intrusted. The Hindoos were for making a number of exceptions and limitations. They said, among other things, that they could not consent that a Brahmin should be condemned to death; not to mention other objections, e.g., that looking at and examining a corpse was out of the question. Although in the case of a Warrior the rate of interest may be as high as 3%, in that of a Vaisya 4%, a Brahmin is never required to pay more than 2%.”

In Manu’s Code it is said: ‘If anyone presumes to teach a Brahmin his duty, the King must order that hot oil be poured into the ears and mouth of such an instructor. If one who is only once-born, loads one who is twice-born with reproaches, a red-hot iron bar 10 inches long shall be thrust into his mouth.’

If a Brahmin or a member of any other Caste transgresses the above cited laws and precepts, he is himself excluded from his caste, and in order to be received back again, he must have a hook bored through the hips, and be swung repeatedly backwards and forwards in the air. There are also other forms of restoration. A Rajah who thought himself injured by an English Governor sent 2 Brahmins to England to detail his grievances. But the Hindoos are forbidden to cross the sea, and these envoys on their return were declared excommunicated from their caste, and in order to be restored to it they had to be born again from a golden cow. The imposition was so far lightened, that only those parts of the cow out of which they had to creep were obliged to be golden; the rest might consist of wood. These various usages and religious observances to which every caste is subject have occasioned great perplexity to the English, especially in enlisting soldiers. At first these were taken from the Sudra-Caste, which is not bound to observe so many ceremonies; but nothing could be done with them, they therefore betook themselves to the Cshatriya class. These however have an immense number of regulations to observe — they may not eat meat, touch a dead body, drink out of a pool in which cattle or Europeans have drunk, not eat what others have cooked, etc. Each Hindoo assumes one definite occupation, and that only, so that one must have an infinity of servants; — a Lieutenant has 30, a Major 60.”

Cases of theft are exceptional; in this case the higher the caste the heavier is the penalty”

All political revolutions, therefore, are matters of indifference to the common Hindoo, for his lot is unchanged.”

Brahma is distinct from Brahm — the former constituting one personality in contrasted relation to Vishnu and Siva. Many therefore call the Supreme Existence who is over the first mentioned deity, Para-brahma. The English have taken a good deal of trouble to find out what Brahm properly is. Wilford has asserted that Hindoo conceptions recognize 2 Heavens: the first, the earthly paradise, the second, Heaven in a spiritual sense.”

O BURRO DA HISTÓRIA É O EUROPEU: “if one asks a Hindoo whether he worships Idols, everyone says ‘Yes!’, but to the question ‘Do you worship the Supreme Being?’ everyone answers ‘No’.”

We are not conscious to ourselves of being Brahm, by reason of Maya (the delusion occasioned by the outward world). It is forbidden to pray to him, and to offer sacrifices to him in his own nature; for this would be to adore ourselves.”

No temples are consecrated to him, and he receives no worship. Similarly, in the Catholic religion, the churches are not dedicated to God, but to the saints.” Sério? Eu não sabia disso.

In the embodiment Vishnu are presented those incarnations in which God has appeared as man, and which are always historical personages, who effected important changes and new epochs.” Historical personages de um povo sem-história, querido Hegel?

When the English had become masters of the country, the work of restoring to light the records of Indian culture was commenced, and William Jones first disinterred the poems of the Golden Age. The English exhibited plays at Calcutta: this led to a representation of dramas on the part of the Brahmins, e.g., the Sacontala of Calidasa, etc. In the enthusiasm of discovery the Hindoo culture was very highly rated; and as, when new beauties are discovered, the old ones are commonly looked down upon with contempt, Hindoo poetry and philosophy were extolled as far superior to the Greek. For our purpose the most important documents are the ancient and canonical books of the Hindoos, especially the Vedas. They comprise many divisions, of which the 4th is of more recent origin. They consist partly of religious prayers, partly of precepts to be observed. Some manuscripts of these Vedas have come to Europe, though in a complete form they are exceedingly rare. The writing is on palm leaves, scratched in with a needle. The Vedas are very difficult to understand, since they date from the most remote antiquity, and the language is a much older Sanskrit. Colebrooke has indeed translated a part, but this itself is perhaps taken from a commentary, of which there are very many. Two great epic poems, Ramayana and Mahabharata, have also reached Europe.” “Besides these works, the Puranas must be particularly noticed. The Puranas contain the history of a god or of a temple.”

This Hindoo lawgiver has been compared with the Cretan Minos — a name which also occurs among the Egyptians; and certainly this extensive occurrence of the same name is noteworthy and cannot be ascribed to chance. Manu’s code of morals, (published at Calcutta with an English translation by Sir W. Jones) forms the basis of Hindoo legislation. It begins with a Theogony, which is not only entirely different from the mythological conceptions of other peoples (as might be expected), but also deviates essentially from the Hindoo traditions themselves. For in these also there are only some leading features that pervade the whole.” “The time when Manu’s code was composed, is also entirely unknown and undetermined. The traditions reach beyond 23 centuries before the birth of Christ: a dynasty of the Children of the Sun is mentioned, on which followed one of the Children of the Moon. Thus much, however, is certain, that the code in question is of high antiquity; and an acquaintance with it is of the greatest importance to the English, as their knowledge of Hindoo Law is derived from it.”

QUE SE DANE O ESTADO: “if China may be regarded as nothing else but a State, Hindoo political existence presents us with a people, but no State.”

There is indeed, a common character pervading the whole of India; but its several states present at the same time the greatest variety; so that in one Indian State we meet with the greatest effeminacy — in another, on the contrary, we find prodigious vigor and savage barbarity.”

The Religion of these peoples is Buddhism, which is the most widely extended religion on our globe. In China Buddha is reverenced as Fo; in Ceylon as Gautama; in Thibet and among the Mongols this religion has assumed the phase of Lamaism.”

Nothingness is the principle of all things” “The connection of this with the metempsychosis can be thus explained: All (that we see) is but a change of Form. The inherent infinity of Spirit — infinite concrete self-dependence — is entirely separate from this Universe of phenomena. Abstract Nothingness is properly that which lies beyond Finite Existence — what we may call the Supreme Being. This real principle of the Universe is, it is said, in eternal repose, and in itself unchangeable. Its essence consists in the absence of activity and volition. For Nothingness is abstract Unity with itself. To obtain happiness, therefore, man must seek to assimilate himself to this principle by continual victories over himself; and for the sake of this, do nothing, wish nothing, desire nothing.”

The Mongols — a race extending through the whole of central Asia as far as Siberia, where they are subject to the Russians — worship the Lama; and with this form of worship a simple political condition, a patriarchal life is closely united; for they are properly a nomad people, and only occasionally are commotions excited among them, when they seem to be beside themselves, and eruptions and inundations of vast hordes are occasioned. Of the Lamas there are 3: the best known is the Dalai-Lama, who has his seat at Lassa in the kingdom of Thibet. A second is the Teshoo-Lama, who under the title of Bantshen Rinbot-shee resides at Teshoo-Lomboo; there is also a third in Southern Siberia. The first 2 Lamas preside over 2 distinct sects, of which the priests of one wear yellow caps, those of the other, red. The wearers of the yellow caps — at whose head is the Dalai-Lama, and among whose adherents is the Emperor of China — have introduced celibacy among the priests, while the red sect allow their marriage. The English have become considerably acquainted with the Teshoo-Lama and have given us descriptions of him.”

The idea of a man being worshipped as God — especially a living man — has in it something paradoxical and revolting; but the following considerations must be examined before we pronounce judgment respecting it.” “It is not the individuality of the subject that is revered, but that which is universal in him; and which among the Thibetans, Hindoos, and Asiatics generally, is regarded as the essence pervading all things. This substantial Unity of Spirit is realized in the Lama, who is nothing but the form in which Spirit manifests itself; and who does not hold this Spiritual Essence as his peculiar property, but is regarded as partaking in it only in order to exhibit it to others, that they may attain a conception of Spirituality and be led to piety and blessedness. The Lama’s personality as such — his particular individuality — is therefore subordinate to that substantial essence which it embodies. The second point which constitutes an essential feature in the conception of the Lama is the disconnection from Nature. The Imperial dignity of China involved a supremacy over the powers of Nature; while here spiritual power is directly separated from the vis Natures.”

Those who have become acquainted with the Teshoo-Lama depict him as a most excellent person, of the calmest temper and most devoted to meditation. Thus also do the Lama-worshippers regard him. They see in him a man constantly occupied with religion, and who when he directs his attention to what is human, does so only to impart consolation and encouragement by his blessing, and by the exercise of mercy and the bestowal of forgiveness. These Lamas lead a thoroughly isolated life and have a feminine rather than masculine training.Nietzsche apelidava sua irmã de Lama. Talvez por ver nela a consumação do eterno-feminino…

Early torn from the arms of his parents the Lama is generally a well-formed and beautiful child. He is brought up amid perfect quiet and solitude, in a kind of prison: he is well catered for, and remains without exercise or childish play, so that it is not surprising that a feminine susceptible tendency prevails in his character. The Grand Lamas have under them inferior Lamas as presidents of the great fraternities. In Thibet every father who has 4 sons is obliged to dedicate one to a conventual life.”

Since Buddhism and Lamaism have taken the place of the Shaman Religion, the life of the Mongols has been simple, prescriptive and patriarchal. Where they take any part in History, we find them occasioning impulses that have only been the groundwork of historical development. (…) A Vizier has charge of the secular dominion and reports everything to the Lama”

With the Persian Empire we first enter on continuous History. The Persians are the first Historical People; Persia was the first Empire that passed away.” “Zoroaster’s ‘Light’ belongs to the World of Consciousness”

The elements of the Persian Empire are the Zend race — the old Parsees; next the Assyrian, Median and Babylonian Empire in the region mentioned; but the Persian Empire also includes Asia Minor, Egypt, and Syria, with its line of coast; and thus combines the Upland, the Valley Plains and the Coast region.”

Their national existence was put an end to by the Mahometans. The great Zerdusht — called Zoroaster by the Greeks — wrote his religious books in the Zend language. Until nearly the last third of the 18th century, this language and all the writings composed in it were entirely unknown to Europeans; when at length the celebrated Frenchman, Anquetil-Duperron, disclosed to us these rich treasures. Filled with an enthusiasm for the Oriental World, which his poverty did not allow him to gratify, he enlisted in a French corps that was about to sail for India. He thus reached Bombay, where he met with the Parsees, and entered on the study of their religious ideas. With indescribable difficulty he succeeded in obtaining their religious books; making his way into their literature, and thus opening an entirely new and wide field of research, but which, owing to his imperfect acquaintance with the language, still awaits thorough investigation.”

Zoroaster himself calls it the pure Aryan: we find a similar name in Herodotus, for he says that the Medes were formerly called Arii — a name with which the designation Iran is connected.” “Here in Bactriana appears to have been the seat of the Zend people. In the time of Cyrus we find the pure and original faith, and the ancient political and social relations such as they are described in the Zend books, no longer perfect.”

It is essential to note, that we find here no Castes, but only Classes, and that there are no restrictions on marriage between these different Classes; though the Zend writings announce civil laws and penalties, together with religious enactments.”

Ormuzd creates of his own free will; but also according to the decree of Zeruane-Akerene (the representation wavers)”

As the Zend Race was the higher spiritual element of the Persian Empire, so in Assyria and Babylonia we have the element of external wealth, luxury and commerce. Traditions respecting them ascend to the remotest periods of History; but in themselves they are obscure, and partly contradictory; and this contradiction is the less easy to be cleared up, as they have no canonical books or indigenous works.” “the accounts in the Bible are also valuable and remarkable in the highest degree, for the Hebrews were immediately connected with the Babylonians.”

The celebrated Epic just mentioned has the old heroic traditions of Iran (that is of West Persia proper) for its subject; but it has not the value of a historical authority, since its contents are poetical and its author a Mahometan. The contest of Iran and Turan is described in this heroic poem. Iran is Persia Proper — the Mountain Land on the south of the Oxus; Turan denotes the plains of the Oxus and those lying between it and the ancient Jaxartes. A hero, Rustan, plays the principal part in the poem; but its narrations are either altogether fabulous, or quite distorted.”

Nineveh is said to have been built 2050 years before Christ; consequently the founding of the Assyrian Kingdom is of no later date. Ninus reduced under his sway also Babylonia, Media and Bactriana; the conquest of which latter country is particularly extolled as having displayed the greatest energy; for Ctesias [historiador grego] reckons the number of troops that accompanied Ninus, at 1,700,000 infantry and a proportionate number of cavalry. Bactra was besieged for a very considerable time, and its conquest is ascribed to Semiramis; who with a valiant host is said to have ascended the steep acclivity of a mountain. The personality of Semiramis wavers between mythological and historical representations. To her is ascribed the building of the Tower of Babel, respecting which we have in the Bible one of the oldest of traditions.”

As to the religion of the Medes, the Greeks call all the oriental Priests Magi, which is therefore a perfectly indefinite name. But all the data point to the fact that among the Magi we may look for a comparatively close connection with the Zend religion; but that, although the Magi preserved and extended it, it experienced great modifications in transmission to the various peoples who adopted it. Xenophon says that Cyrus was the first that sacrificed to God according to the fashion of the Magi. The Medes therefore acted as a medium for propagating the Zend Religion.”

The Assyrian-Babylonian Empire, which held so many peoples in subjection, is said to have existed for 1,000 or 1,500 years. The last ruler was Sardanapalus — a great voluptuary, according to the descriptions we have of him.” “After this catastrophe the empire was entirely broken up: it was divided into an Assyrian, a Median, and a Babylonian Empire, to which also belonged the Chaldeans — a mountain people from the north which had united with the Babylonians. These several Empires had in their turn various fortunes; though here we meet with a confusion in the accounts which has never been cleared up. Within this period of their existence begins their connection with the Jews and Egyptians. The Jewish people succumbed to superior force; the Jews were carried captive to Babylon, and from them we have accurate information respecting the condition of this Empire. According to Daniel’s statements there existed in Babylon a carefully appointed organization for government business.” “the transmission of the sovereignty to the Persians makes no essential difference; for Cyrus was himself a relation of the Median King, and the names of Persia and Media melt into one.” “We recognize here a system of States, consisting of Lydia, Media, and Babylon. The latter had become predominant and had extended its dominion to the Mediterranean Sea. Lydia stretched eastward as far as the Halys; and the border of the western coast of Asia Minor, the fair Greek colonies, were subject to it; a high degree of culture was thus already present in the Lydian Empire. Art and poetry were blooming there as cultivated by the Greeks. These colonies also were subjected to Persia. Wise men, such as Bias, and still earlier, Thales, advised them to unite themselves in a firm league, or to quit their cities and possessions, and to seek out for themselves other habitations (Bias meant Sardinia).”

After the Lydian conquest Cyrus subjugated Babylon. With it he came into possession of Syria and Palestine; freed the Jews from captivity, and allowed them to rebuild their temple. Lastly, he led an expedition against the Massagetae; engaged with them in the steppes between the Oxus and the Jaxartes, but sustained a defeat, and died the death of a warrior and conqueror.” “The Persian Empire is an Empire in the modern sense — like that which existed in Germany, and the great imperial realm under the sway of Napoleon; for we find it consisting of a number of states, which are indeed dependent, but which have retained their own individuality, their manners, and laws.” “Thereby a stop is put to that barbarism and ferocity with which the nations had been wont to carry on their destructive feuds, and which the Book of Kings and the Book of Samuel sufficiently attest.”

Thus they invaded Egypt, Scythia, Thrace, and at last Greece; where their vast power was destined to be shattered. A march of this kind looked almost like an emigration: their families accompanied them. Each people exhibited its national features and warlike accoutrements, and poured forth en masse.” “Each had its own order of march and mode of warfare. Herodotus sketches for us a brilliant picture of this variety of aspect as it presented itself in the vast march of nations under Xerxes (2 millions of human beings are said to have accompanied him). Yet, as these peoples were so unequally disciplined — so diverse in strength and bravery — it is easy to understand how the small but well-trained armies of the Greeks, animated by the same spirit, and under matchless leadership, could withstand those innumerable but disorderly hosts of the Persians. The provinces had to provide for the support of the Persian cavalry, which were quartered in the centre of the kingdom. Babylon had to contribute the third part of the supplies in question, and consequently appears to have been by far the richest district. As regards other branches of revenue, each people was obliged to supply the choicest of the peculiar produce which the district afforded. Thus Arabia gave frankincense, Syria purple, etc.”

Quite free from passion, and without exhibiting any ambition, they agree that monarchy is the only form of government adapted to the Persian Empire. The Sun, and the horse which first salutes them with a neigh, decide the succession in favor of Darius. The magnitude of the Persian dominion occasioned the government of the provinces by viceroys — Satraps; and these often acted very arbitrarily to the provinces subjected to their rule, and displayed hatred and envy towards each other; a source of much evil. These satraps were only superior presidents of the provinces, and generally left the subject kings of the countries in possession of regal privileges. All the land and all the water belonged to the Great King of the Persians.”

Uniform taxes first make their appearance under the government of Darius Hystaspes. On the occasion of a royal progress the districts of the empire visited had to give presents to the King; and from the amount of these gifts we may infer the wealth of the unexhausted provinces. Thus the dominion of the Persians was by no means oppressive, either in secular or religious respects. The Persians, according to Herodotus, had no idols — in fact ridiculed anthropomorphic representations of the gods; but they tolerated every religion, although there may be found expressions of wrath against idolatry. Greek temples were destroyed, and the images of the gods broken in pieces.”

Through its intercourse with so many nations, Syria soon attained a high degree of culture. There the most beautiful fabrications in metals and precious stones were prepared, and there the most important discoveries, e.g., of Glass and of Purple, were made. Written language there received its first development, [dúbio] for in their intercourse with various nations the need of it was soon felt. (So, to quote another example, Lord Macartney observes that in Canton itself the Chinese had felt and expressed the need of a more pliable written language.)”

OVERRATED MOVEMENT (AND OVERRATED GOD, WITH CAPITAL ‘I’): “This opens to us an entirely new principle. Inactivity ceases, as also mere rude valor; in their place appears the activity of Industry, and that considerate courage which, while it dares the perils of the deep, rationally bethinks itself of the means of safety.”

The Prophets give the most terrible pictures of this — though their repulsive character must be partly laid to the account of the hatred of Jews against neighboring peoples. Such representations are particularly ample in the Book of Wisdom. Not only was there a worship of natural objects, but also of the Universal Power of Nature — Astarte, Cybele, Diana of Ephesus. The worship paid was a sensuous intoxication, excess, and revelry: sensuality and cruelty are its 2 characteristic traits. ‘When they keep their holy days they act as if mad’, (‘they are mad when they be merry’ — English Version) says the Book of Wisdom (14:28).” “Thus we see children sacrificed — priests of Cybele subjecting themselves to mutilation — men making themselves eunuchs — women prostituting themselves in the temple.”

Herodotus tells us that at Tyre Hercules was worshipped. If the divinity in question is not absolutely identical with the Greek demigod, there must be understood by that name one whose attributes nearly agree with his. This worship is particularly indicative of the character of the people; for it is Hercules of whom the Greeks say that he raised himself to Olympus by dint of human courage and daring. The idea of the Sun perhaps originated that of Hercules as engaged in his 12 labors; but this basis does not give us the chief feature of the myth, which is that Hercules is that scion of the gods who, by his virtue and exertion, made himself a god by human spirit and valor; and who, instead of passing his life in idleness, spends it in hardship and toil.”

The feast of Adonis was very similar to the worship of Osiris — the commemoration of his death — a funeral festival, at which the women broke out into the most extravagant lamentations over the departed god.”

While among the Phoenician people the Spiritual was still limited by Nature, in the case of the Jews we find it entirely purified — the pure product of Thought.” “Jehovah — the purely One. This forms the point of separation between the East and the West; Spirit descends into the depths of its own being, and recognizes the abstract fundamental principle as the Spiritual.”

the s(t)age of 6 ways

The Persian Empire is one that has passed away, and we have nothing but melancholy relics of its glory. Its fairest and richest towns — such as Babylon, Susa, Persepolis — are razed to the ground; and only a few ruins mark their ancient site. Even in the more modern great cities of Persia — Ispahan and Shiraz — half of them has become a ruin; and they have not — as is the case with ancient Rome — developed a new life, but have lost their place almost entirely in the remembrance of the surrounding nations. Besides the other lands already enumerated as belonging to the Persian Empire, Egypt claims notice — characteristically the Land of Ruins; a land which from hoar antiquity has been regarded with wonder, and which in recent times also has attracted the greatest interest. Its ruins, the final result of immense labor, surpass in the gigantic and monstrous, all that antiquity has left us.”

Egypt was always the Land of Marvels, and has remained so to the present day. It is from the Greeks especially that we get information respecting it, and chiefly from Herodotus. This intelligent historiographer himself visited the country of which he wished to give an account, and at its chief towns made acquaintance with the Egyptian priests. Of all that he saw and heard, he gives an accurate record; but the deeper symbolism of the Egyptian mythology he has refrained from unfolding. This he regards as something sacred, and respecting which he cannot so freely speak as of merely external objects. Besides him Diodorus Siculus is an authority of great importance; and among the Jewish historians, Josephus.”

It was found at a later date that a great part of the hieroglyphics are phonetic, that is, express sounds. Thus the figure of an eye denotes first the eye itself, but secondly the first letter of the Egyptian word that means ‘eye’ (as in Hebrew the figure of a house denotes the letter b, with which the word for house begins).”

European literati have eagerly investigated the lists given by Manetho and have relied upon them, and several names of kings have been confirmed by the recent discoveries. Herodotus says that according to the statements of the priests, gods had formerly reigned over Egypt, and that from the first human king down to the King Setho 341 generations, or 11,340 years, had passed away; but that the first human ruler was Menes (the resemblance of the name to the Greek Minos and the Hindoo Manu is striking).”

As the Dutch have gained their territory from the sea, and have found means to sustain themselves upon it; so the Egyptians first acquired their country, and maintained its fertility by canals and lakes. An important feature in the history of Egypt is its descent from Upper to Lower Egypt — from the South to the North. With this is connected the consideration that Egypt probably received its culture from Ethiopia; principally from the island Meroe, which, according to recent hypotheses, was occupied by a sacerdotal people. Thebes in Upper Egypt was the most ancient residence of the Egyptian kings. Even in Herodotus’ time it was in a state of dilapidation. The ruins of this city present the most enormous specimens of Egyptian architecture that we are acquainted with. Considering their antiquity they are remarkably well preserved: which is partly owing to the perpetually cloudless sky. The centre of the kingdom was then transferred to Memphis, not far from the modern Cairo; and lastly to Sais, in the Delta itself. The structures that occur in the locality of this city are of very late date and imperfectly preserved. Herodotus tells us that Memphis was referred to so remote a founder as Menes. Among the later kings must be especially noticed Sesostris, who, according to Champollion, is Rameses the Great.”

these 2 nations {Egypt and the Colchians[?]} and the Ethiopians were the only ones that had always practised circumcision.”

After the death of Setho, the Egyptians (Herodotus tells us) regarded themselves as free, and chose themselves 12 kings, who formed a federal union — as a symbol of which they built the Labyrinth, consisting of an immense number of rooms and halls above and below ground. In the year 650 B.C. one of these kings, Psammitichus, with the help of the Ionians and Carians (to whom he promised land in Lower Egypt), expelled the 11 other kings.”

From this point the history becomes clearer, because it is based on Greek accounts.” Presunção.

Cyrus desired an oculist from the Egyptians; for at that time the Egyptian oculists were very famous, their skill having been called out by the numerous eye-diseases prevalent in Egypt. This oculist, to revenge himself for having been sent out of the country, advised Cambyses to ask for the daughter of Amasis in marriage; knowing well that Amasis would either be rendered unhappy by giving her to him, or on the other hand incur the wrath of Cambyses by refusing. Amasis would not give his daughter to Cambyses, because the latter desired her as an inferior wife (for his lawful spouse must be a Persian); but sent him, under the name of his own daughter, that of Apries, who afterwards discovered her real name to Cambyses. The latter was so incensed at the deception, that he led an expedition against Egypt, conquered that country, and united it with the Persian Empire.”

Herodotus mentions the 7 following castes: the priests, the warriors, the neatherds, the swineherds, the merchants (or trading population generally), the interpreters — who seem only at a later date to have constituted a separate class — and, lastly, the seafaring class. Agriculturists are not named here, probably because agriculture was the occupation of several castes, as, e.g., the warriors, to whom a portion of the land was given. Diodorus and Strabo give a different account of these caste-divisions.”

But the several occupations did not remain so stereotyped as among the Hindoos; for we find the Israelites, who were originally herdsmen, employed also as manual laborers: and there was a king — as stated above — who formed an army of manual laborers alone.” Dois erros: levar em conta a Bíblia como fonte histórica; não considerar que a lei pode ser diferente para os forasteiros.

The castes are not rigidly fixed, but struggle with and come into contact with one another” Qual seria o sentido de chamar de castas então?

The Nile and the Sun constitute the divinities, conceived under human forms; and the course of nature and the mythological history is the same. In the winter solstice the power of the sun has reached its minimum, and must be born anew. Thus also Osiris appears as born; but he is killed by Typhon — his brother and enemy — the burning wind of the desert. Isis, the Earth — from whom the aid of the Sun and of the Nile has been withdrawn — yearns after him: she gathers the scattered bones of Osiris, and raises her lamentation for him, and all Egypt bewails with her the death of Osiris, in a song which Herodotus calls Maneros. Maneros he reports to have been the only son of the first king of the Egyptians, and to have died prematurely; this song being also the Linus-Song of the Greeks, and the only song which the Egyptians have.” Quão ridícula pode ser uma asserção como essa?

my favorite son(g)

Hermes then embalms Osiris; and his grave is shown in various places. Osiris is now judge of the dead, and lord of the kingdom of the Shades. These are the leading ideas.”

the symbol is changed into signification, and this latter becomes symbol of that symbol, which itself then becomes signification.”

CAPOEIRA DO MESTRE HEGEL: “o símbolo é trocado em significação, e esta se torna símbolo desse símbolo, que por sua vez se torna significação.”

Thus there arises one pregnant conception, composed of many conceptions, in which each fundamental nodus retains its individuality, so that they are not resolved into a general idea.”

In the first class, Fire and its use appears as Phtha, also as Knef, who is besides represented as the Good Genius; but the Nile itself is held to be that Genius, and thus abstractions are changed into concrete conceptions. Amman is regarded as a great divinity, with whom is associated the determination of the equinox; it is he, moreover, who gives oracles. But Osiris is similarly represented as the founder of oracular manifestations. So the Procreative Power, banished by Osiris, is represented as a particular divinity. But Osiris is himself this Procreative Power. Isis is the Earth, the Moon, the receptive fertility of Nature. As an important element in the conception Osiris, Anubis (Thoth) — the Egyptian Hermes — must be specially noticed.” “And thus the Egyptians had also specific divinities, conceived as spiritual activities and forces; but partly intrinsically limited” Hm.

According to Jamblichus, the Egyptian priests immemorially prefixed to all their inventions the name Hermes: Eratosthenes, therefore, called his book, which treated of the entire science of Egypt — Hermes. Anubis is called the friend and companion of Osiris. To him is ascribed the invention of writing, and of science generally — of grammar, astronomy, mensuration, music, and medicine.”

He is represented with a dog’s head, as an imbruted god; and besides this mask, a particular natural object is bound up with the conception of this divinity; for he is at the same time Sirius, the Dog-Star. He is thus as limited in respect of what he embodies, as sensuous in the positive existence ascribed to him.”

All astrological and sympathetic superstition may be traced to Egypt.”

Egyptian Worship is chiefly Zoolatry.”

We also, when we contemplate the life and action of brutes, are astonished at their instinct — the adaptation of their movements to the object intended — their restlessness, excitability, and liveliness; for they are exceedingly quick and discerning in pursuing the ends of their existence, while they are at the same time silent and shut up within themselves.”

A black tom-cat, with its glowing eyes and its now gliding, now quick and darting movement, has been deemed the presence of a malignant being — a mysterious reserved spectre: the dog, the canary-bird, on the contrary, appear friendly and sympathizing.” E parece que, se não é do Egito que vem toda a zoolatria, o sr. Hegel, pelo menos, mostra-se bastante egípcio!!

A pirâmide externa é só o chifre do corpo morto que jaz no subsolo.

It is related, that once when a Roman in Alexandria killed a cat, an insurrection ensued, in which the Egyptians murdered the aggressor. They would let human beings perish by famine, rather than allow the sacred animals to be killed” O mundo gira, meu amigo.

I refer here to the innumerable figures on the Egyptian monuments, of sparrow-hawks or falcons, dung-beetles, scarabaei, etc. It is not known what ideas such figures symbolized, and we can scarcely think that a satisfactory view of this very obscure subject is attainable. The dung-beetle is said to be the symbol of generation — of the sun and its course”

The refined art of Greece is able to attain a specific expression through the spiritual character given to an image in the form of beauty, and does not need to deform the human face in order to be understood.” Com certeza. Não existem minotauros, tampouco grifos… E que diabos seria uma Medusa – uma planta?!?

They are of two kinds — hieroglyphs proper, designed rather to express language, and having reference to subjective conception; and a class of hieroglyphs of a different kind, viz., those enormous masses of architecture and sculpture, with which Egypt is covered.”

These are the enormous excavations in the hills along the Nile at Thebes, whose passages and chambers are entirely filled with mummies — subterranean abodes as large as the largest mining works of our time: next, the great field of the dead in the plain of Sais, with its walls and vaults: thirdly, those Wonders of the World, the Pyramids, whose destination, though stated long ago by Herodotus and Diodorus, has been only recently expressly confirmed — to the effect, viz., that these prodigious crystals, with their geometrical regularity, contain dead bodies: and lastly, that most astonishing work, the Tombs of the Kings, of which one has been opened by Belzoni in modern times.”

The idea that Spirit is immortal, involves this — that the human individual inherently possesses infinite value. The merely Natural appears limited — absolutely dependent upon something other than itself — and has its existence in that other; but Immortality involves the inherent infinitude of Spirit. This idea is first found among the Egyptians. But it must be added, that the soul was known to the Egyptians previously only as an atom — that is, as something concrete and particular. For with that view is immediately connected the notion of Metempsychosis — the idea that the soul of man may also become the tenant of the body of a brute. Aristotle too speaks of this idea, and despatches it in few words. Every subject, he says, has its particular organs, for its peculiar mode of action: so the smith, the carpenter, each for his own craft. In like manner the human soul has its peculiar organs, and the body of a brute cannot be its domicile. Pythagoras adopted the doctrine of Metempsychosis; but it could not find much support among the Greeks, who held rather to the concrete. The Hindoos have also an indistinct conception of this doctrine, inasmuch as with them the final attainment is absorption in the universal Substance. But with the Egyptians the Soul — the Spirit — is, at any rate, an affirmative being, although only abstractedly affirmative. The period occupied by the soul’s migrations was fixed at 3,000 years; they affirmed, however, that a soul which had remained faithful to Osiris was not subject to such a degradation — for such they deem it.”

It is well known that the Egyptians embalmed their dead; and thus imparted such a degree of permanence, that they have been preserved even to the present day, and may continue as they are for many centuries to come. This indeed seems inconsistent with their idea of immortality; for if the soul has an independent existence, the permanence of the body seems a matter of indifference. But on the other hand it may be said, that if the soul is recognized as a permanent existence, honor should be shown to the body, as its former abode. The Parsees lay the bodies of the dead in exposed places to be devoured by birds; but among them the soul is regarded as passing forth into universal existence. Where the soul is supposed to enjoy continued existence, the body must also be considered to have some kind of connection with this continuance.”

CADA QUAL COM SEU GALO A ESCULÁPIO: “Many mummies have been found with a roll of papyrus under their arm, and this was formerly regarded as a remarkable treasure. But these rolls contain only various representations of the pursuits of life — together with writings in the Demotic character. They have been deciphered, and the discovery has been made that they are all deeds of purchase, relating to pieces of ground and the like; in which everything is most minutely recorded — even the duties that had to be paid to the royal chancery on the occasion. What, therefore, a person bought during his life is made to accompany him — in the shape of a legal document — in death. In this monumental way we are made acquainted with the private life of the Egyptians, as with that of the Romans through the ruins of Pompeii and Herculaneum.” “If Death thus haunted the minds of the Egyptians during life, it might be supposed that their disposition was melancholy. But the thought of death by no means occasioned depression. At banquets they had representations of the dead (as Herodotus relates), with the admonition: ‘Eat and drink — such a one wilt thou become, when thou art dead.’

Of Anubis-Hermes the myth says, that he embalmed the body of Osiris: this Anubis sustained also the office of leader of the souls of the dead; and in the pictorial representations he stands, with a writing tablet in his hand, by the side of Osiris. The reception of the dead into the Kingdom of Osiris had also a profounder import, viz., that the individual was united with Osiris. On the lids of the sarcophagi, therefore, the defunct is represented as having himself become Osiris”

HEGEL THE NAÏVE: “It is stated that, in a public market-place, sodomy was committed by a woman with a goat.”

These features are combined in the stories which Herodotus relates to us of the Egyptians. They much resemble the tales of the Thousand and One Nights; and although these have Bagdad as the locality of their narration, their origin is no more limited to this luxurious court than to the Arabian people, but must be partly traced to Egypt — as Von Hammer also thinks.” Hegel confiaria toda sua fortuna e status a um estranho – a Heródoto, no caso.

Love, Martial Daring, the Horse, the Sword, are the darling subjects of the poetry peculiar to the Arabians.” Devíamos copiá-los: cavalo não tem chifre, então já seria um ganho.

I am that which is, that which was, and that which will be; no one has lifted my veil.”

China and India, as already mentioned, have remained — Persia has not. The transition to Greece is, indeed, internal; but here it shows itself also externally, as a transmission of sovereignty — an occurrence which from this time forward is ever and anon repeated.” “the proper Emergence, the true Palingenesis of Spirit must be looked for in Greece first.” “Achilles, the ideal youth of poetry, commenced it: Alexander the Great, the ideal youth of reality, concluded it.”

Thus, Athens owes its origin to Cecrops, an Egyptian, whose history, however, is involved in obscurity. The race of Deucalion, the son of Prometheus, is brought into connection with the various Greek tribes. Pelops of Phrygia, the son of Tantalus, is also mentioned; next, Danaus, from Egypt: from him descend Acrisius, Danae and Perseus. Pelops is said to have brought great wealth with him to the Peloponnesus, and to have acquired great respect and power there. Danaus settled in Argos. Especially important is the arrival of Cadmus, of Phoenician origin, with whom phonetic writing is said to have been introduced into Greece; Herodotus refers it to Phoenicia, and ancient inscriptions then extant are cited to support the assertion. Cadmus, according to the legend, founded Thebes.” “Cadmus is said to have founded Thebes about 1490 B.C. — a date with which the Exodus of Moses from Egypt (1500 B.C.) nearly coincides.”

In Argolis, the walls of which the ancient fortresses consisted, were called Cyclopian; some of them have been discovered even in recent times, since, on account of their solidity, they are indestructible.” “Even now the gate with the lions, at Mycenas, can be recognized by the description of Pausanias. It is stated of Proetus [Proteus?], who ruled in Argos, that he brought with him from Lycia the Cyclopes who built these walls. It is, however, supposed that they were erected by the ancient Pelasgi.” “These fortresses, then, were the nuclei of small states; they gave a greater security to agriculture; they protected commercial intercourse against robbery. They were, however, as Thucydides informs us, not placed in the immediate vicinity of the sea, on account of piracy; maritime towns being of later date.”

Their subjects obeyed them, not as distinguished from them by conditions of caste, nor as in a state of serfdom, nor in the patriarchal relation — according to which the chief is only the head of the tribe or family to which all belong — nor yet as the result of the express necessity for a constitutional government; but only from the need, universally felt, of being held together, and of obeying a ruler accustomed to command — without envy and ill-will towards him. The Prince has just so much personal authority as he possesses the ability to acquire and to assert; but as this superiority is only the individually heroic, resting on personal merit, it does not continue long.”

In Homer’s Iliad we find a King of Kings, a generalissimo in the great national undertaking — but the other magnates environ him as a freely deliberating council; the prince is honored, but he is obliged to arrange everything to the satisfaction of the others; he indulges in violent conduct towards Achilles, but, in revenge, the latter withdraws from the struggle. Equally lax is the relation of the several chiefs to the people at large, among whom there are always individuals who claim attention and respect. The various peoples do not fight as mercenaries of the prince in his battles, nor as a stupid serf-like herd driven to the contest, nor yet in their own interest; but as the companions of their honored chieftain — as witnesses of his exploits, and his defenders in peril. A perfect resemblance to these relations is also presented in the Greek Pantheon.”

The occasion of that united expedition is said to have been the violation of the laws of hospitality by the son of an Asiatic prince, in carrying off the wife of his host. Agamemnon assembles the princes of Greece through the power and influence which he possesses. Thucydides ascribes his authority to his hereditary sovereignty, combined with naval power (Hom. II. ii. 108), in which he was far superior to the rest. It appears, however, that the combination was effected without external compulsion, and that the whole armament was convened simply on the strength of individual consent. [não era um protocapitalista de merda] The Hellenes were then brought to act unitedly, to an extent of which there is no subsequent example. The result of their exertions was the conquest and destruction of Troy, though they had no design of making it a permanent possession. No external result, therefore, in the way of settlement ensued, any more than an enduring political union, as the effect of the uniting of the nation in the accomplishment of this single achievement. But the poet supplied an imperishable portraiture of their youth and of their national spirit, to the imagination of the Greek people; and the picture of this beautiful human heroism hovered as a directing ideal before their whole development and culture.”

The people appears separated from the royal houses, and these are regarded as an alien body — a higher race, fighting out the battles and undergoing the penalties of their fate, for themselves alone. Royalty having performed that which it had to perform thereby rendered itself superfluous. The several dynasties are the agents of their own destruction, or perish not as the result of animosity, or of struggles on the side of the people: rather the families of the sovereigns are left in calm enjoyment of their power — a proof that the democratic government which followed is not regarded as something absolutely diverse.”

The Peloponnesus was conquered by the Heraclidae, who introduced a calmer state of things, which was not again interrupted by the incessant migrations of races. The history now becomes more obscure; and though the several occurrences of the Trojan war are very circumstantially described to us, we are uncertain respecting the important transactions of the time immediately following, for a space of many centuries. [talvez porque nenhuma transação tenha sido de fato importante!] No united undertaking distinguishes them, unless we regard as such that of which Thucydides speaks, viz., the war between the Chalcidians and Eretrians in Euboea, in which many nations took part. The towns vegetate in isolation, or at most distinguish themselves by war with their neighbors. Yet, they enjoy prosperity in this isolated condition, by means of trade; a kind of progress to which their being rent by many party-struggles offers no opposition.”

AS GRANDES COLONIZAÇÕES: SINTOMA DE DÉCADENCE: “This sending out of colonies — especially during the period between the Trojan war and Cyrus — presents us with a remarkable phenomenon. It can be thus explained. In the several towns the people had the governmental power in their hands, since they gave the final decision in political affairs. In consequence of the long repose enjoyed by them, the population and the development of the community advanced rapidly; and the immediate result was the amassing of great riches, contemporaneously with which fact great want and poverty make their appearance. Industry, in our sense, did not exist; and the lands were soon occupied. Nevertheless a part of the poorer classes would not submit to the degradations of poverty, for everyone felt himself a free citizen. The only expedient, therefore, that remained, was colonization. In another country, those who suffered distress in their own, might seek a free soil, and gain a living as free citizens by its cultivation. Colonization thus became a means of maintaining some degree of equality among the citizens; but this means is only a palliative, and the original inequality, founded on the difference of property, immediately reappears. The old passions were rekindled with fresh violence, and riches were soon made use of for securing power: thus Tyrants gained ascendancy in the cities of Greece.”

On the same principle the Greeks listened to the murmuring of the fountains, and asked what might be thereby signified; but the signification which they were led to attach to it was not the objective meaning of the fountain, but the subjective — that of the subject itself, which further exalts the Naiad to a Muse. The Naiads, or Fountains, are the external, objective origin of the Muses. Yet the immortal songs of the Muses are not that which is heard in the murmuring of the fountains; they are the productions of the thoughtfully listening Spirit — creative while observant.”

It has been long a much vexed question whether the arts and the religion of the Greeks were developed independently or through foreign suggestion. Under the conduct of a one-sided understanding the controversy is interminable; for it is no less a fact of history that the Greeks derived conceptions from India, Syria, and Egypt than that the Greek conceptions are peculiar to themselves, and those others alien.” “Just as in Art the Greeks may have acquired a mastery of technical matters from others — from the Egyptians especially — so in their religion the commencement might have been from without; but by their independent spirit they transformed the one as well as the other.” “All issue in works of art, and we may arrange under 3 heads: the subjective work of art, that is, the culture of the man himself — the objective work of art, i.e., the shaping of the world of divinities — lastly, the political work of art — the form of the Constitution, and the relations of the Individuals who compose it.”

In the notice of Agamemnon’s sceptre, its origin is given in detail: mention is made of doors which turn on hinges, and of accoutrements and furniture, in a way that expresses satisfaction. The honor of human invention in subjugating Nature is ascribed to the gods. But, on the other hand, man uses Nature for ornament, which is intended only as a token of wealth and of that which man has made of himself. We find Ornament, in this interest, already very much developed among the Homeric Greeks. It is true that both barbarians and civilized nations ornament themselves; but barbarians content themselves with mere ornament; they intend their persons to please by an external addition. But ornament by its very nature is destined only to beautify something other than itself, viz. the human body, which is man’s immediate environment, and which, in common with Nature at large, he has to transform. The spiritual interest of Primary importance is, therefore, the development of the body to a perfect organ for the Will — an adaptation which may on the one hand itself be the means for ulterior objects, and on the other hand, appear as an object per se. Among the Greeks, then, we find this boundless impulse of individuals to display themselves, and to find their enjoyment in so doing. Sensuous enjoyment does not become the basis of their condition when a state of repose has been obtained, any more than the dependence and stupor of superstition which enjoyment entails. They are too powerfully excited, too much bent upon developing their individuality, absolutely to adore Nature, as it manifests itself in its aspects of power and beneficence. That peaceful condition which ensued when a predatory life had been relinquished, and liberal nature had afforded security and leisure, turned their energies in the direction of self-assertion — the effort to dignify themselves. But while on the one side they have too much independent personality to be subjugated by superstition, that sentiment has not gone to the extent of making them vain”

Homer gives a noble description of the games conducted by Achilles, in honor of Patroclus; but in all his poems there is no notice of statues of the gods, though he mentions the sanctuary at Dodona, and the treasure-house of Apollo at Delphi. The games in Homer consist in wrestling and boxing, running, horse and chariot races, throwing the discus or javelin, and archery. With these exercises are united dance and song, to express and form part of the enjoyment of social exhilaration, and which arts likewise blossomed into beauty. On the shield of Achilles, Hephaestus represents, among other things, how beautiful youths and maidens move as quickly ‘with well-taught feet’, as the potter turns his wheel. The multitude stand round enjoying the spectacle; the divine singer accompanies the song with the harp, and 2 chief dancers perform their evolutions in the centre of the circle.” “Besides the Olympic games in the sacred district of Elis, there were also held the Isthmian, the Pythian, and Nemean, at other places.”

The transition from the Oriental to the Occidental Spirit is therein represented, for the Titans are the merely Physical — natural existences, from whose grasp sovereignty is wrested. It is true that they continue to be venerated, but not as governing powers; for they are relegated to the verge (the limbus) of the world.”

For Apollo is the prophesying and discerning god — Light, that makes everything clear. He is, moreover, the healer and strengthener; as also the destroyer, for he kills men. He is the propitiating and purifying god, e.g., in contravention of the Eumenides — the ancient subterrene divinities — who exact hard, stern justice. He himself is pure; he has no wife, but only a sister, and is not involved in various disgusting adventures, like Zeus; moreover, he is the discerner and declarer, the singer and leader of the dances — as the sun leads the harmonious dance of stars. — In like manner the Naiads became the Muses. The mother of the gods, Cybele — continuing to be worshipped at Ephesus as Artemis — is scarcely to be recognized as the Artemis of the Greeks — the chaste huntress and destroyer of wild beasts.”

While the gods remained more human,

The men were more divine.”

But why did God not appear to the Greeks in the flesh? Because man was not duly estimated, did not obtain honor and dignity, till he had more fully elaborated and developed himself in the attainment of the Freedom implicit in the aesthetic manifestation in question” Pequena porção de um dos trechos mais escusos de Hegel (ou de seus desastrados discípulos), sem dúvida.

Another circumstance that demands special attention here is the element of Slavery. This was a necessary condition of an aesthetic democracy, where it was the right and duty of every citizen to deliver or to listen to orations respecting the management of the State in the place of public assembly, to take part in the exercise of the Gymnasia, and to join in the celebration of festivals. It was a necessary condition of such occupations, that the citizens should be freed from handicraft occupations; consequently, that what among us is performed by free citizens — the work of daily life — should be done by slaves.”

At the beginning of the Median wars, Lacedaemon was in possession of the Hegemony, partly as the result of having subjugated and enslaved the free nation of the Messenians, partly because it had assisted many Greek States to expel their Tyrants. Provoked by the part the Greeks had taken in assisting the Ionians against him, the Persian King sent heralds to the Greek cities to require them to give Water and Earth, i.e. to acknowledge his supremacy. The Persian envoys were contemptuously sent back, and the Lacedaemonians went so far as to throw them into a well — a deed, however, of which they afterwards so deeply repented, as to send 2 Lacedaemonians to Susa in expiation. The Persian King then despatched an army to invade Greece. With its vastly superior force the Athenians and Plataeans, without aid from their compatriots, contended at Marathon under Miltiades, and gained the victory. Afterwards, Xerxes came down upon Greece with his enormous masses of nations (Herodotus gives a detailed description of this expedition); and with the terrible array of land-forces was associated the not less formidable fleet. Thrace, Macedon, and Thessaly were soon subjugated; but the entrance into Greece Proper — the Pass of Thermopylae — was defended by 300 Spartans and 700 Thespians, whose fate is well known. Athens, voluntarily deserted by its inhabitants, was ravaged; the images of the gods which it contained were ‘an abomination’ to the Persians, who worshipped the Amorphous, the Unformed. In spite of the disunion of the Greeks, the Persian fleet was beaten at Salamis; and this glorious battle-day presents the 3 greatest tragedians of Greece in remarkable chronological association: for Æschylus was one of the combatants, and helped to gain the victory, Sophocles danced at the festival that celebrated it, and on the same day Euripides was born. The host that remained in Greece, under the command of Mardonius, was beaten at Plataea by Pausanias, and the Persian power was consequently broken at various points.”

For these are World-Historical victories; they were the salvation of culture and Spiritual vigor, and they rendered the Asiatic principle powerless. How often, on other occasions, have not men sacrificed everything for one grand object!”

Never in History has the superiority of spiritual power over material bulk — and that of no contemptible amount — been made so gloriously manifest.”

The Athenians continued their wars of conquest for a considerable time, and thereby attained a high degree of prosperity; while the Lacedaemonians, who had no naval power, remained quiet. The antagonism of Athens and Sparta now commences — a favorite theme for historical treatment.” “The polity of the State was wavering between Aristocracy and Democracy. Solon effected, by his division into 4 property-classes, a medium between these opposites. All these together formed the popular assembly for deliberation and decision on public affairs; but the offices of government were reserved for the 3 superior classes.” “Lastly, Pericles rendered the constitution yet more democratic by diminishing the essential dignity of the Areopagus, and bringing causes that had hitherto belonged to it, before the Demos and the ordinary tribunals.” “It was Pericles who originated the production of those eternal monuments of sculpture whose scanty remains astonish posterity; it was before this people that the dramas of Æschylus and Sophocles were performed; and later on those of Euripides — which, however, do not exhibit the same plastic moral character, and in which the principle of corruption is more manifest.”

the Helots [hilotas] were doubtless aborigines. The fate that had befallen the Helots was suffered at a later epoch by the Messenians; for inhuman severity of this order was innate in Spartan character. While the Athenians had a family-life, and slaves among them were inmates of the house, the relation of the Spartans to the subjugated race was one of even greater harshness than that of the Turks to the Greeks; a state of warfare was constantly kept up in Lacedaemon. In entering upon office, the Ephors made an unreserved declaration of war against the Helots, and the latter were habitually given up to the younger Spartans to be practised upon in their martial exercises. The Helots were on some occasions set free, and fought against the enemy; moreover, they displayed extraordinary valor in the ranks of the Spartans; but on their return they were butchered in the most cowardly and insidious way. As in a slave-ship the crew are constantly armed, and the greatest care is taken to prevent an insurrection, so the Spartans exercised a constant vigilance over the Helots, and were always in a condition of war, as against enemies.” “As daughters were capable of inheriting, many estates had come by marriage into the possession of a few families, and at last all the landed property was in the hands of a limited number; as if to show how foolish it is to attempt a forced equality — an attempt which, while ineffective in realizing its professed object, is also destructive of a most essential point of liberty — the free disposition of property.” Um olhar MUITO crítico de H. em relação a Esparta. Mas se sustenta na bibliografia atual?

It was with an especial view to promote similarity of manners, and a more intimate acquaintance of the citizens with each other, that the Spartans had meals in common — a community, however, which disparaged family life; for eating and drinking is a private affair, and consequently belongs to domestic retirement.” “Lastly, one of the highest magistracies was that of the Ephors, respecting whose election we have no definite information; Aristotle says that the mode of choice was exceedingly childish. We learn from Aristotle that even persons without nobility or property could attain this dignity. The Ephors had full authority to convoke popular assemblies, to put resolutions to the vote, and to propose laws, almost in the same way as the tribuni plebis in Rome. Their power became tyrannical, like that which Robespierre and his party exercised for a time in France.” Comparações indevidas…

In their intercourse at home, they were, on the whole, honorable; but as regarded their conduct towards other nations, they themselves plainly declared that they held their own good pleasure for the Commendable, and what was advantageous for the Right.”

The perfect bloom of Greek life lasted only about 60 years”

In the Peloponnesian War, the struggle was essentially between Athens and Sparta. Thucydides has left us the history of the greater part of it, and his immortal work is the absolute gain which humanity has derived from that contest. Athens allowed herself to be hurried into the extravagant projects of Alcibiades; and when these had already much weakened her, she was compelled to succumb to the Spartans, who were guilty of the treachery of applying for aid to Persia, and who obtained from the King supplies of money and a naval force. They were also guilty of a still more extensive treason, in abolishing democracy in Athens and in the cities of Greece generally, and in giving a preponderance to factions that desired oligarchy, but were not strong enough to maintain themselves without foreign assistance. Lastly, in the peace of Antalcidas, Sparta put the finishing stroke to her treachery, by giving over the Greek cities in Asia Minor to Persian dominion.

Lacedaemon had therefore, both by the oligarchies which it had set up in various countries, and by the garrisons which it maintained in some cities — as, e.g., Thebes — obtained a great preponderance in Greece. But the Greek States were far more incensed at Spartan oppression than they had previously been at Athenian supremacy. With Thebes at their head, they cast off the yoke, and the Thebans became for a moment the most distinguished people in Hellas. But it was to 2 distinguished men among its citizens that Thebes owed its entire power — Pelopidas and Epaminondas

Weakened and distracted, Greece could no longer find safety in itself, and needed an authoritative prop. In the towns there were incessant contests; the citizens were divided into factions, as in the Italian cities of the Middle Ages. The victory of one party entailed the banishment of the other; the latter then usually applied to the enemies of their native city, to obtain their aid in subjugating it by force of arms. The various States could no longer co-exist peaceably: they prepared ruin for each other, as well as for themselves.”

A leading principle of the Sophists was that <Man is the measure of all things>; but in this, as in all their apophthegms, lurks an ambiguity, since the term <Man> may denote Spirit in its depth and truth, or in the aspect of mere caprice and private interest.” “This Sophistic principle appears again and again, though under different forms, in various periods of History; thus even in our own times subjective opinion of what is right — mere feeling — is made the ultimate ground of decision.”

Socrates is celebrated as a Teacher of Morality, but we should rather call him the Inventor of Morality.”

ZEUS FALLS: “The Phocians were then to be punished by the Thebans; but by an egregious piece of violence — by desecrating and plundering the temple at Delphi — the former attained momentary superiority. This deed completes the ruin of Greece; the sanctuary was desecrated, the god so to speak, killed; the last support of unity was thereby annihilated; reverence for that which in Greece had been as it were always the final arbiter — its monarchical principle — was displaced, insulted, and trodden under foot.”

The charge of littleness, harshness, violence, and political treachery — all those hateful characteristics with which Philip has so often been reproached — did not extend to the young Alexander, when he placed himself at the head of the Greeks.”

Though his generals were devoted to him, they had been the long tried servants of his father; and this made his position difficult: for his greatness and youth was a humiliation to them, as inclined to regard themselves and the achievements of the past as a complete work; so that while their envy, as in Clitus’ case, arose to blind rage, Alexander also was excited to great violence.” “He was great as a commander in battles, wise in conducting marches and marshalling troops, and the bravest soldier in the thick of the fight.”

Alexander had the good fortune to die at the proper time; i.e. it may be called good fortune, but it is rather a necessity. That he may stand before the eyes of posterity as a youth, an early death must hurry him away. Achilles, as remarked above, begins the Greek world, and his autotype Alexander concludes it: and these youths not only supply a picture of the fairest kind in their own persons, but at the same time afford a complete and perfect type of Hellenic existence.”

Thence the Greeks came into connection with India, and even with China. The Greek dominion spread itself over northern India, and Sandrokottus (Chandraguptas) is mentioned as the first who emancipated himself from it. The same name presents itself indeed among the Hindoos, but for reasons already stated, we can place very little dependence upon such mention. Other Greek Kingdoms arose in Asia Minor, in Armenia, in Syria and Babylonia. But Egypt especially, among the kingdoms of the successors of Alexander, became a great centre of science and art; for a great number of its architectural works belong to the time of the Ptolemies, as has been made out from the deciphered inscriptions.” Exagero da importância alexandrina.

Those who had been Alexander’s Generals, now assuming an independent appearance on the stage of history as Kings, carried on long wars with each other, and experienced, almost all of them, the most romantic revolutions of fortune. Especially remarkable and prominent in this respect is the life of Demetrius Poliorcetes.” Nada fala dele, entretanto.

In our times we can neither endure our faults nor the means of correcting them.” Livy

The distinction between the Roman and the Persian principle is exactly this — that the former stifles all vitality, while the latter allowed of its existence in the fullest measure. Through its being the aim of the State, that the social units in their moral life should be sacrificed to it, the world is sunk in melancholy: its heart is broken, and it is all over with the Natural side of Spirit, which has sunk into a feeling of unhappiness. Yet only from this feeling could arise the supersensuous, the free Spirit in Christianity.” Para Hegel o Império Romano era Roma, onde o estrangeiro não podia perpetuar sua própria cultura – é assimilado ou morre [quase o anagrama de Rome]. Qualquer um que lê como os romanos respeitaram as idiossincrasias dos povos que subjugaram e tornaram províncias do Império é capaz de refutar essa leitura bidimensional do período.

Erudition has regarded the Roman History from various points of view, and has adopted very different and opposing opinions: this is especially the case with the more ancient part of the history, which has been taken up by 3 different classes of literatiHistorians, Philologists, and Jurists. The Historians hold to the grand features, and show respect for the history as such; [empty expression nonetheless] so that we may after all see our way best under their guidance, since they allow the validity of the records in the case of leading events. It is otherwise with the Philologists, by whom generally received traditions are less regarded, and who devote more attention to small details which can be combined in various ways. These combinations gain a footing first as historical hypotheses, but soon after as established facts. To the same degree as the Philologists in their department, have the Jurists in that of Roman law, instituted the minutest examination and involved their inferences with hypothesis. The result is that the most ancient part of Roman History has been declared to be nothing but fable; so that this department of inquiry is brought entirely within the province of learned criticism, which always finds the most to do where the least is to be got for the labor. While on the one side the poetry and the myths of the Greeks are said to contain profound historical truths, and are thus transmuted into history, the Romans on the contrary have myths and poetical views affiliated upon them; [the Greeks] and epopees are affirmed to be at the basis of what has been hitherto taken for prosaic and historical.” Eneida, etc.

Niebuhr has prefaced his Roman history by a profoundly erudite treatise on the peoples of Italy; but from which no connection between them and the Roman History is visible. In fact, Niebuhr’s History can only be regarded as a criticism of Roman History, for it consists of a series of treatises which by no means possess the unity of history.”

As to the particular sections of the Roman History, the common division is that into the Monarchy, the Republic, and the Empire — as if in these forms different principles made their appearance; but the same principle — that of the Roman Spirit — underlies their development.” Esse idiota divide a História Romana em 3 e coloca as campanhas de César já no princípio da 3a!

Rome arose outside recognised countries, viz., in an angle where 3 different districts met — those of the Latins, Sabines and Etruscans” “but Rome was from the very beginning, of artificial and violent, not spontaneous growth.” Pura especulação

It is related that the descendants of the Trojans, led by Æneas to Italy, founded Rome; for the connection with Asia was a much cherished tradition, and there are in Italy, France, and Germany itself (Xanten) many towns which refer their origin, or their names, to the fugitive Trojans. Livy speaks of the ancient tribes of Rome, the Ramnenses, Titienses, and Luceres. Now if we look upon these as distinct nations, and assert that they were really the elements from which Rome was formed — a view which in recent times has very often striven to obtain currency — we directly subvert the historical tradition.”

SANOZAMA: “It is equally historical that in the newly formed State there were no women, and that the neighboring states would enter into no connubia with it: both circumstances characterize it as predatory union, with which the other States wished to have no connection.”

They also refused the invitation to their religious festivals; and only the Sabines — a simple agricultural people, among whom, as Livy says, prevailed a tristis atque tetrica superstitio — partly from superstition, partly from fear, presented themselves at them.”

A State which had first to form itself, and which is based on force, must be held together by force.” Que ingênuo. Trata-se de todas as configurações sociais conhecidas!

Remus was buried on the Aventine mount; this is consecrated to the evil genii, and to it are directed the Secessions of the Plebs. The question comes, then, how this distinction originated?” Pergunte ao Dühring!

the protected are called clientes.” Hoje são os mais desprotegidos. Essa relação de clientela entre plebe e aristocracia podia muito bem ser avaliada assim por um conservador: o povo não havia degradado tanto a ponto de se unir contra o alto e sublime, congregando-se numa confederação de irmãos esfarrapados (movimento socialista). Pois aqui o que temos são facções renitentes e eternas dissidências entre algumas famílias aristocratas e seus rábulas de aluguel. “How often in insurrection and in anarchical disorder was the plebs brought back into a state of tranquillity by a mere form, and cheated of the fulfilment of its demands, righteous or unrighteous! How often was a Dictator, e.g., chosen by the senate, when there was neither war nor danger from an enemy, in order to get the plebeians into the army, and to bind them to strict obedience by the military oath! It took Licinius 10 years to carry laws favorable to the plebs; the latter allowed itself to be kept back by the mere formality of the veto on the part of other tribunes, and still more patiently did it wait for the long-delayed execution of these laws. It may be asked: By what were such a disposition and character produced? Produced it cannot be, but it is essentially latent in the origination of the State from that primal robber-community, as also in the idiosyncrasy of the people who composed it, and lastly, in that phase of the World-Spirit which was just ready for development.” Racista com os latinos.

The laws of the Twelve Tables still contained much that was undefined; very much was still left to the arbitrary will of the judge — the Patricians alone being judges; the antithesis, therefore, between Patricians and Plebeians, continues till a much later period. Only by degrees do the Plebeians scale all the heights of official station, and attain those privileges which formerly belonged to the Patricians alone.”

The husband acquired a power over his wife, such as he had over his daughter, nor less over her property” Como se fosse diferente entre os gregos…

Of the spirit, the character, and the life of the ancient Italian peoples we know very little — thanks to the non-intelligent character of Roman historiography!” Mas pelo parágrafo acima Hegel assume que tudo sabe

We are accustomed to regard Greek and Roman religion as the same, and use the names Jupiter, Minerva, etc. as Roman deities, often without distinguishing them from those of Greeks. This is admissible inasmuch as the Greek divinities were more or less introduced among the Romans; but as the Egyptian religion is by no means to be regarded as identical with the Greek, merely because Herodotus and the Greeks form to themselves an idea of the Egyptian divinities under the names Latona, Pallas, etc., so neither must the Roman be confounded with the Greek.”

The Roman had always to do with something secret; in everything he believed in and sought for something concealed; and while in the Greek religion everything is open and clear, present to sense and contemplation — not pertaining to a future world, but something friendly, and of this world — among the Romans everything exhibits itself as mysterious, duplicate: they saw in the object first itself, and then that which lies concealed in it: their history is pervaded by this duplicate mode of viewing phenomena.” “The knowledge of these sacra is utterly uninteresting and wearisome, affording fresh material for learned research as to whether they are of Etruscan, Sabine, or other origin. On their account the Roman people have been regarded as extremely pious, both in positive and negative observances; though it is ridiculous to hear recent writers speak with unction and respect of these sacra.” “After the royal dignity had been done away with, there still remained a Rex Sacrorum; but he, like all the other priests, was subject to the Pontifex Maximus, who presided over all the <sacra>, and gave them such a rigidity and fixity as enabled the patricians to maintain their religious power so long.”

The Romans worshipped Pax, Tranquillitas, Vacuna (Repose), Angeronia (Sorrow and Grief), as divinities; they consecrated altars to the Plague, to Hunger, to Mildew (robigo [mofo!]), to Fever, and to the Dea Cloacina [Deusa da Limpeza dos Esgotos e do ‘Sexo Seguro’ (puro, sem doenças venéreas), associada à Vênus grega]. Juno appears among the Romans not merely as Lucina, the obstetric goddess, but also as Juno Ossipagina, the divinity who forms the bones of the child, and as Juno Unxia, who anoints the hinges of the doors at marriages (a matter which was also reckoned among the sacra).” “On the other hand, Jupiter as Jupiter Capitolinus represents the generic essence of the Roman Empire, which is also personified in the divinities Roma and Fortuna Publica.”

Among the Roman poets — especially Virgil — the introduction of the gods is the product of a frigid Understanding and of imitation. The gods are used in these poems as machinery, and in a merely superficial way; regarded much in the same way as in our didactic treatises on the belles-lettres, where among other directions we find one relating to the use of such machinery in epics — in order to produce astonishment.”

Nero’s deepest degradation was his appearing on a public stage as a singer, lyrist and combatant. As the Romans were only spectators, these diversions were something foreign to them; they did not enter into them with their whole souls. With increasing luxury the taste for the baiting of beasts and men became particularly keen. Hundreds of bears, lions, tigers, elephants, crocodiles, and ostriches, were produced, and slaughtered for mere amusement. A body consisting of hundreds, nay thousands of gladiators, when entering the amphitheatre at a certain festival to engage in a sham sea-fight, addressed the Emperor with the words: <Those who are devoted to death salute thee>, to excite some compassion. In vain! the whole were devoted to mutual slaughter. In place of human sufferings in the depths of the soul and spirit, occasioned by the contradictions of life, and which find their solution in Destiny, the Romans instituted a cruel reality of corporeal sufferings: blood in streams, the rattle in the throat which signals death, and the expiring gasp were the scenes that delighted them.”

each has it own political character, which it always preserves: strict, aristocratic severity distinguished the Claudii; benevolence towards the people, the Valerii; nobleness of spirit, the Cornelii.”

The Roman principle admits of aristocracy alone as the constitution proper to it, but which directly manifests itself only in an antithetical form — internal inequality. Only from necessity and the pressure of adverse circumstances is this contradiction momentarily smoothed over; for it involves a duplicate power, the sternness and malevolent isolation of whose components can only be mastered and bound together by a still greater sternness, into a unity maintained by force.”

As regards the accounts of the first Roman kings, every datum has met with flat contradiction as the result of criticism; but it is going too far to deny them all credibility. Seven kings in all, are mentioned by tradition; and even the <Higher Criticism> is obliged to recognize the last links in the series as perfectly historical.”

To the 2nd king, Numa, is ascribed the introduction of the religious ceremonies. This trait is very remarkable from its implying that religion was introduced later than political union, while among other peoples religious traditions make their appearance in the remotest periods and before all civil institutions. The king was at the same time a priest (rex is referred by etymologists to sacrifice).”

Livy says that as Numa established all divine matters, so Servius Tullius introduced the different Classes, and the Census, according to which the share of each citizen in the administration of public affairs was determined. The patricians were discontented with this scheme, especially because Servius Tullius abolished a part of the debts owed by the plebeians, and gave public lands to the poorer citizens, which made them possessors of landed property.” “With Servius the history becomes more distinct; and under him and his predecessor, the elder Tarquinius, traces of prosperity are exhibited.”

Almost all the Kings were foreigners — a circumstance very characteristic of the origin of Rome. Numa, who succeeded the founder of Rome, was according to the tradition, one of the Sabines — a people which under the reign of Romulus, led by Tatius, is said to have settled on one of the Roman hills. At a later date however the Sabine country appears as a region entirely separated from the Roman State.” “Tarquinius Priscus sprang from a Corinthian family, as we had occasion to observe above. Servius Tullius was from Corniculum, a conquered Latin town; Tarquinius Superbus was descended from the elder Tarquinius. Under this last king Rome reached a high degree of prosperity: even at so early a period as this, a commercial treaty is said to have been concluded with the Carthaginians; and to be disposed to reject this as mythical would imply forgetfulness of the connection which Rome had, even at that time, with the Etrurians and other bordering peoples whose prosperity depended on trade and maritime pursuits.”

The last king, Tarquinius Superbus, consulted the senate but little in state affairs; he also neglected to supply the place of its deceased members, and acted in every respect as if he aimed at its utter dissolution. Then ensued a state of political excitement which only needed an occasion to break out into open revolt. An insult to the honor of a matron — the invasion of that sanctum sanctorum — by the son of the king, supplied such an occasion. The kings were banished in the year 244 of the City and 510 [B.C.] of the Christian Era (that is, if the building of Rome is to be dated 753 B.C.) and the royal dignity abolished forever.

The Kings were expelled by the patricians, not by the plebeians; if therefore the patricians are to be regarded as possessed of <divine right> as being a sacred race, it is worthy of note that we find them here contravening such legitimation; for the King was their High Priest.” Quando se tratar do Rei da Inglaterra Hegel não usará aspas em divine right! Veja que não precisou-se de dois séculos e meio para os reis perderem sua dignidade no austero povo romano!

cum etiam in edicto praetoris hujusmodi viri infamia notati sunt”

Possessed by the same feeling, the plebs at a later date rose against the patricians, and the Latins and the Allies against the Romans; until the equality of the social units was restored through the whole Roman dominion (a multitude of slaves, too, being emancipated) and they were held together by simple Despotism.

Livy remarks that Brutus hit upon the right epoch for the expulsion of the kings, for that if it had taken place earlier, the state would have suffered dissolution. What would have happened, he asks, if this homeless crowd had been liberated earlier, when living together had not yet produced a mutual conciliation of dispositions? — The constitution now became in name republican.”

In the war against Porsena the Romans lost all their conquests, and even their independence: they were compelled to lay down their arms and to give hostages; according to an expression of Tacitus [antinomia!] (Hist. 3, 72) it seems as if Porsena had even taken Rome.”

Romulus is said to have founded the senate, consisting then of 100 members; the succeeding kings increased this number, and Tarquinius Priscus fixed it at 300. Junius Brutus restored the senate, which had very much fallen away, de novo.” “In the second Punic War, A.U.C. 538, a dictator was chosen, who nominated 177 new senators: he selected those who had been invested with curule dignities, the plebeian Ædiles, Tribunes of the People and Quaestors, citizens who had gained spolia opima or the corona civica. Under Caesar the number of the senators was raised from 177 to 800” “It has been regarded as great negligence on the part of the Roman historians that they give us so little information respecting the composition and reintegration of the senate. But this point which appears to us to be invested with infinite importance was not of so much moment to the Romans at large; they did not attach so much weight to formal arrangements, for their principal concern was how the government was conducted.” Franceses antes da letra.

The severity of the patricians their creditors, the debts due to whom they had to discharge by slave-work, drove the plebs to revolts. At first it demanded and received only what it had already enjoyed under the kings — landed property and protection against the powerful. It received assignments of land, and Tribunes of the People — functionaries that is to say, who had the power to put a veto on every decree of the senate. When this office commenced, the number of tribunes was limited to 2: later there were 10 of them; which however was rather injurious to the plebs, since all that the senate had to do was to gain over 1 of the tribunes, in order to thwart the purpose of all the rest by his single opposition. The plebs obtained at the same time the provocatio ad populum: that is, in every case of magisterial oppression, the condemned person might appeal to the decision of the people — a privilege of infinite importance to the plebs, and which especially irritated the patricians.”

after the decemviral epoch the clientes are less and less prominent and are merged in the plebs, which adopts resolutions (plebiscita); the senate by itself could only issue senatus consulta, and the tribunes, as well as the senate, could now impede the comitia and elections. By degrees the plebeians effected their admissibility to all dignities and offices; but at first a plebeian consul, aedile, censor, etc., was not equal to the patrician one, on account of the sacra which the latter kept in his hands; and a long time intervened after this concession before a plebeian actually became a consul. It was the tribunus plebis, Licinius, who established the whole cycle of these political arrangements — in the 2nd half of the 4th century, A.U.C. 387. It was he also who chiefly commenced the agitation for the lex agraria, respecting which so much has been written and debated among the learned of the day.” “How often does Livy, as well as Cicero and others, speak of the Agrarian laws, while nothing definite can be inferred from their statements!” “The Licinian law was indeed carried, but soon transgressed and utterly disregarded. Licinius Stolo himself, who had first <agitated> for the law, was punished because he possessed a larger property in land than was allowed, and the patricians opposed the execution of the law with the greatest obstinacy.” “The contradiction that existed could not but break out again fearfully at a later period; but previously to this time the greatness of Rome had to display itself in war and the conquest of the world.”

The Roman legions also present a close array, but they had at the same time an articulated organization: they united the 2 extremes of massiveness on the one hand, and of dispersion into light troops on the other hand: they held firmly together, while at the same time they were capable of ready expansion. Archers and slingers [lingadores; catapulteiros] preceded the main body of the Roman army when they attacked the enemy — afterwards leaving the decision to the sword.”

It is singular in regard to these transactions that the Romans, who have the justification conceded by World-History on their side, should also claim for themselves the minor justification in respect to manifestoes and treaties on occasion of minor infringements of them, and maintain it as it were after the fashion of advocates.” Conquistadores fora de casa, reis da pequena-intriga no lar!

The Romans had long and severe contests to maintain with the Samnites, the Etruscans, the Gauls, the Marsi, the Umbrians and the Bruttii, before they could make themselves masters of the whole of Italy. Their dominion was extended thence in a southerly direction; they gained a secure footing in Sicily, where the Carthaginians had long carried on war; then they extended their power towards the west: from Sardinia and Corsica they went to Spain. They thus soon came into frequent contact with the Carthaginians, and were obliged to form a naval power in opposition to them. This transition was easier in ancient times than it would perhaps be now, when long practice and superior knowledge are required for maritime service. The mode of warfare at sea was not very different from that on land.” O negócio era desembarcar na nave alheia e usar o fio da espada!

Italy and Rome remained the centre of their great far-stretching empire, but this centre was, as already remarked, not the less an artificial, forced and compulsory one. This grand period of the contact of Rome with other States, and of the manifold complications thence arising, has been depicted by the noble Achaean, Polybius, whose fate it was to observe the fall of his country through the disgraceful passions of the Greeks and the baseness and inexorable persistency of the Romans.”

The second Punic War laid the might of Carthage prostrate in the dust. The proper element of that state was the sea; but it had no original territory, formed no nation, had no national army; its hosts were composed of the troops of subjugated and allied peoples. In spite of this, the great Hannibal with such a host, formed from the most diverse nations, brought Rome near to destruction.”

After the conquest of Macedonia both that country and Greece were declared free by the Romans — a declaration whose meaning we have already investigated, in treating of the preceding Historical nation. It was not till this time that the Third Punic War commenced, for Carthage had once more raised its head and excited the jealousy of the Romans.” “the Romans were eager for war, destroyed Corinth in the same year as Carthage, and made Greece a province. The fall of Carthage and the subjugation of Greece were the central points from which the Romans gave its vast extent to their sovereignty.” “But after the danger from Carthage and Macedon was over, the subsequent wars were more and more the mere consequences of victories, and nothing else was needed than to gather in their fruits.”

The armies were used for particular expeditions, suggested by policy, or for the advantages of individuals — for acquiring wealth, glory, sovereignty in the abstract.”

A net of such fiscal farmers (publicani) was thus drawn over the whole Roman world.”

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam”

The Roman State, drawing its resources from rapine, came to be rent in sunder by quarrels about dividing the spoil.”

The enormous corruption of Rome displays itself in the war with Jugurtha, who had gained the senate by bribery, and so indulged himself in the most atrocious deeds of violence and crime. Rome was pervaded by the excitement of the struggle against the Cimbri and Teutones, who assumed a menacing position towards the State.”

at the command of Mithridates, 80,000 Romans had been put to death in Asia Minor. Mithridates was King of Pontus, governed Colchis and the lands of the Black Sea, as far as the Tauric peninsula, and could summon to his standard in his war with Rome the populations of the Caucasus, of Armenia, Mesopotamia, and a part of Syria, through his son-in-law Tigranes.” “Sulla then returned to Rome, reduced the popular faction, headed by Marius and Cinna, became master of the city, and commenced systematic massacres of Roman citizens of consideration. Forty senators and 600 knights were sacrificed to his ambition and lust of power.” “At the same time, Sertorius, a banished Roman, arose in revolt in Spain, carried on a contest there for 8 years, and perished only through treachery. The war against Mithridates was terminated by Pompey; the King of Pontus killed himself when his resources were exhausted. The Servile War in Italy is a contemporaneous event. A great number of gladiators and mountaineers had formed a union under Spartacus, but were vanquished by Crassus. To this confusion was added the universal prevalence of piracy, which Pompey rapidly reduced by a large armament. We thus see the most terrible and dangerous powers arising against Rome; yet the military force of this State is victorious over all.”

The biographies of Plutarch are here also of the deepest interest. It was from the disruption of the State, which had no longer any consistency or firmness in itself, that these colossal individualities arose, instinctively impelled to restore that political unity which was no longer to be found in men’s dispositions. It was their misfortune that they could not maintain a pure morality, for their course of action contravened things as they are, and was a series of transgressions. Even the noblest — the Gracchi — were not merely the victims of injustice and violence from without, but were themselves involved in the corruption and wrong that universally prevailed. But that which these individuals purpose and accomplish has on its side the higher sanction of the World-Spirit, and must eventually triumph.”

We should refer to Cicero to see how all affairs of State were decided in riotous fashion, and with arms in hand, by the wealth and power of the grandees on the one side, and by a troop of rabble on the other.” “Thus we see in Pompey and Caesar the 2 foci of Rome’s splendour coming into hostile opposition: on the one side, Pompey with the Senate, and therefore apparently the defender of the Republic — on the other, Caesar with his legions and a superiority of genius. This contest between the 2 most powerful individualities could not be decided at Rome in the Forum. Caesar made himself master, in succession, of Italy, Spain, and Greece, utterly routed his enemy at Pharsalia, 48 years before Christ, made himself sure of Asia, and so returned victor to Rome. In this way the world-wide sovereignty of Rome became the property of a single possessor.”

Aqui estou eu, mais ou menos, na leitura do 1º volume de Romans Under the Empire de Merivale (a ser publicado futuramente). Spoilers ahead!

The democratic constitution could no longer be really maintained in Rome, but only kept up in appearance. Cicero, who had procured himself great respect through his high oratorical talent, and whose learning acquired him considerable influence, always attributes the corrupt state of the republic to individuals and their passions. Plato, whom Cicero professedly followed, [imperfeitamente] had the full consciousness that the Athenian state, as it presented itself to him, could not maintain its existence, and therefore sketched the plan of a perfect constitution accordant with his views.” “The nature of the State, and of the Roman State in particular, transcends his comprehension. Cato, too, says of Caesar: <His virtues be execrated, for they have ruined my country!>

Elegance — Culture — was foreign to the Romans per se; they sought to obtain it from the Greeks, and for this purpose a vast number of Greek slaves were brought to Rome. Delos was the centre of this slave trade, and it is said that sometimes on a single day, 10,000 slaves were purchased there. To the Romans, Greek slaves were their poets, their authors, the superintendents of their manufactories, the instructors of their children.”

Caesar, who may be adduced as a paragon of Roman adaptation of means to ends — who formed his resolves with the most unerring perspicuity, and executed them with the greatest vigor and practical skill, without any superfluous excitement of mind — Caesar, judged by the great scope of history, did the Right; since he furnished a mediating element, and that kind of political bond which men’s condition required. Caesar effected 2 objects: he calmed the internal strife, and at the same time originated a new one outside the limits of the empire. For the conquest of the world had reached hitherto only to the circle of the Alps, but Caesar opened a new scene of achievement: he founded the theatre which was on the point of becoming the centre of History.” Hoje falar em teatro da História Universal ou das conquistas geopolíticas gera náusea no falante e nos ouvintes indistintamente.

His position was indeed hostile to the republic, but, properly speaking, only to its shadow; for all that remained of that republic was entirely powerless. Pompey, and all those who were on the side of the senate, exalted their dignitas auctoritas — their individual rule — as the power of the republic; and the mediocrity which needed protection took refuge under this title. Caesar put an end to the empty formalism of this title, made himself master, and held together the Roman world by force, in opposition to isolated factions. Spite of this we see the noblest men of Rome supposing Caesar’s rule to be a merely adventitious thing, and the entire position of affairs to be dependent on his individuality. So thought Cicero, so Brutus and Cassius. They believed that if this one individual were out of the way, the Republic would be ipso facto restored. Possessed by this remarkable hallucination, Brutus, a man of highly noble character, and Cassius, endowed with greater practical energy than Cicero, assassinated the man whose virtues they appreciated. But it became immediately manifest that only a single will could guide the Roman State, and now the Romans were compelled to adopt that opinion; since in all periods of the world a political revolution is sanctioned in men’s opinions, when it repeats itself. Thus Napoleon was twice defeated, and the Bourbons twice expelled. By repetition that which at first appeared merely a matter of chance and contingency becomes a real and ratified existence.”

the Roman government was so abstracted from interest, that the great transition to that rule hardly changed anything in the constitution. The popular assemblies alone were unsuited to the new state of things, and disappeared. The emperor was princeps senatus, Censor, Consul, Tribune: he united all their nominally continuing offices in himself; and the military power — here the most essentially important — was exclusively in his hands. The constitution was an utterly unsubstantial form, from which all vitality, consequently all might and power, had departed; and the only means of maintaining its existence were the legions which the Emperor constantly kept in the vicinity of Rome. Public business was indeed brought before the senate, and the Emperor appeared simply as one of its members; but the senate was obliged to obey, and whoever ventured to gainsay his will was punished with death, and his property confiscated. Those therefore who had certain death in anticipation, killed themselves, that if they could do nothing more, they might at least preserve their property to their family. Tiberius was the most odious to the Romans on account of his power of dissimulation: he knew very well how to make good use of the baseness of the senate, in extirpating those among them whom he feared.” “But the legions, and especially the Pretorians, soon became conscious of their importance, and arrogated to themselves the disposal of the imperial throne. At first they continued to show some respect for the family of Caesar Augustus, but subsequently the legions chose their own generals; such, viz., as had gained their good will and favor, partly by courage and intelligence, partly also by bribes, and indulgence in the administration of military discipline.

The Emperors conducted themselves in the enjoyment of their power with perfect simplicity, and did not surround themselves with pomp and splendor in Oriental fashion. We find in them traits of simplicity which astonish us. Thus, e.g., Augustus writes a letter to Horace, in which he reproaches him for having failed to address any poem to him, and asks him whether he thinks that that would disgrace him with posterity. Sometimes the Senate made an attempt to regain its consequence by nominating the Emperor: but their nominees were either unable to maintain their ground, or could do so only by bribing the Pretorians.”

The freedmen who surrounded the Emperor were often the mightiest in the empire; for caprice recognizes no distinction. In the person of the Emperor isolated subjectivity has gained a perfectly unlimited realization. Spirit has renounced its proper nature, inasmuch as Limitation of being and of volition has been constituted an unlimited absolute existence.”

Nero, e.g., died a death which may furnish an example for the noblest hero, as for the most resigned of sufferers. Individual subjectivity thus entirely emancipated from control, has no inward life, no prospective nor retrospective emotions, no repentance, nor hope, nor fear — not even thought; for all these involve fixed conditions and aims, while here every condition is purely contingent. The springs of action are none other than desire, lust, passion, fancy — in short, caprice absolutely unfettered.”

The concrete element in the character of the Emperors is therefore of itself of no interest, because the concrete is not of essential importance. Thus there were Emperors of noble character and noble nature, and who highly distinguished themselves by mental and moral culture. Titus, Trajan, the Antonines, are known as such characters, rigorously strict in self-government; yet even these produced no change in the state.” “they were only a kind of happy chance”

EXATAMENTE COMO NO SISTEMA HEGELIANO… “For these persons find themselves here in a position in which they cannot be said to act, since no object confronts them in opposition; they have only to will — well or ill — and it is so.”

The praiseworthy emperors Vespasian and Titus were succeeded by that coarsest and most loathsome tyrant, Domitian: yet the Roman historian tells us that the Roman world enjoyed tranquillizing repose under him.” Nada paradoxal; lógico, até.

Italy was depopulated; the most fertile lands remained untilled: and this state of things lay as a fate on the Roman world.”

Private Right, viz., is this, that the social unit as such enjoys consideration in the State, in the reality which he gives to himself — viz., in property.” Esse ponto é inconciliável com a acima citada onipotência do imperador! “Such a condition is Roman life at this epoch: on the one side, Fate and the abstract universality of sovereignty; on the other, the individual abstraction.”

The Emperor domineered only, and could not be said to rule” ???

He either recognized his destiny in the task of acquiring the means of enjoyment through the favor of the Emperor, or through violence, testamentary frauds, and cunning; or he sought repose in philosophy, which alone was still able to supply something firm and independent” Ora, mas até hoje isso é um resumo da vida humana!

Vejo agora claramente o motivo da superioridade atribuída a essas lições hegelianas sobre as de HISTÓRIA DA filosofia: quando não tem mais o que dizer, ele logo abrevia, encerra o capítulo. Nos outros fastidiosos 3 volumes, era justamente o contrário! Perdia seu tempo nas minúcias dos estóicos, céticos e epicuristas…

It has been remarked that Caesar inaugurated the Modern World on the side of reality, while its spiritual and inward existence was unfolded under Augustus.”

Tanto quanto o Império Romano é destituído de vida para Hegel, o Espírito do Mundo hegeliano o é no mundo real, ou nosso mundo. Vemos que tudo nele é perfeito mas só falta uma coisa, que nos incomoda e angustia até sabermos o que é: tudo! E tudo isso por odiar bacanais!

God is thus recognized as Spirit, only when known as the Triune. This new principle is the axis on which the History of the World turns. This is the goal and the starting point of History. <When the fulness of the time was come, God sent his Son>, is the statement of the Bible.”

Eu preferiria ser comandado por um Déspota Mundial que por uma plutocracia inconsciente regida por um sistema de satélites autoimpostos…

the Person of Persons”

Quando os reis perderam o respeito na Antiguidade, veio Jesus. Quando os reis perderam o respeito na modernidade, veio a bomba A. Ou veio o espectro do Cristianismo. Somos o(s) mais miserável(is) de todos os tempos!

Zucht (discipline) is derived from Ziehen (to draw). This <drawing> must be towards something; there must be some fixed unity in the background in whose direction that drawing takes place, and for which the subject of it is being trained, in order that the standard of attainment may be reached.” “But it is reserved for us of a later period to regard this as a training” O ápice da conveniência!

Ontem foi César. Hic salta (0-2021): “The state of feeling in question we find expressed most purely and beautifully in the Psalms of David, and in the Prophets; the chief burden of whose utterances is the thirst of the soul after God, its profound sorrow for its transgressions, and the desire for righteousness and holiness.”

DOS FATOS AOS FASTIOS: “Knowledge, as the disannulling of the unity of mere Nature, is the ‘Fall’, which is no casual conception, but the eternal history of Spirit.”

ZOOTOPIA: “Paradise is a park, where only brutes, not men, can remain.” O homem & seu cão

The Fall is therefore the eternal Mythus of Man — in fact, the very transition by which he becomes man.”

Gên.: “The serpent’s head shall be bruised” Bruised is but not enough: take it off by a bite! T-H-E bite…

But that mundane satisfaction in the Chosen Family, and its possession of Canaan, was taken from the Jewish people in the chastisement inflicted by the Roman Empire. The Syrian kings did indeed oppress it, but it was left for the Romans to annul its individuality. The Temple of Zion is destroyed; the God-serving nation is scattered to the winds. Here every source of satisfaction is taken away, and the nation is driven back to the standpoint of that primeval mythus”

But what are you talking about? Get back to the Romans NOW!

All that remains to be done is that this fundamental idea should be expanded to an objective universal sense, and be taken as the concrete existence of man — as the completion of his nature.” “The Oriental antithesis of Light and Darkness is transferred to Spirit, and the Darkness becomes Sin.” “Sin is the discerning of Good and Evil as separation; but this discerning likewise heals the ancient hurt, and is the fountain of infinite reconciliation.” “The infinite loss is counterbalanced only by its infinity, and thereby becomes infinite gain. The recognition of the identity of the Subject and God was introduced into the World when the fulness of Time was come: the consciousness of this identity is the recognition of God in his true essence.” Haja metafísica!

But what is Spirit? It is the one immutably homogeneous infinite — pure Identity — which in its second phase separates itself from itself and makes this second aspect its own polar opposite, viz. as existence for-and-in-itself as contrasted with the Universal.”

Pregarão os que foram pregados, sem o perdão da redundância, que não há.

Christ has appeared — a Man who is God — God who is Man; and thereby peace and reconciliation have accrued to the World.”

The appearance of the Christian God involves further its being unique in its kind; it can occur only once, for God is realized as Subject, and as manifested Subjectivity is exclusively One Individual. The Lamas are ever and anon chosen anew; because God is known in the East as Substance, whose infinity of form is recognized merely in an unlimited multiplicity of outward and particular manifestations.” “Moreover the sensuous existence in which Spirit is embodied is only a transitional phase. Christ dies; only as dead, is he exalted to Heaven and sits at the right hand of God; only thus is he Spirit.” “What are we to make of his birth, his Father and Mother, his early domestic relations, his miracles, etc.? — i.e., What is he unspiritually regarded? Considered only in respect of his talents, character and morality — as a Teacher and so forth — we place him in the same category with Socrates and others, though his morality may be ranked higher.”

If Christ is to be looked upon only as an excellent, even impeccable individual, and nothing more, the conception of the Speculative Idea, of Absolute Truth is ignored.” And this would be asking too much already!

But this is the desideratum, the point from which we have to start. Make of Christ what you will, exegetically, critically, historically — demonstrate as you please, how the doctrines of the Church were […acho que a merda do PDF comeu 1 ou 2 linhas!…] and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For he that doeth the will of my Father in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister and mother.”

We may say that nowhere are to be found such revolutionary utterances as in the Gospels; for everything that had been respected is treated as a matter of indifference — as worthy of no regard.”

Christ — man as man — in whom the unity of God and man has appeared, has in his death, and his history generally, himself presented the eternal history of Spirit — a history which every man has to accomplish in himself, in order to exist as Spirit, or to become a child of God, a citizen of his kingdom.” Essa tortura é no mínimo equivalente à de um Nero.

A Bíblia como um condutor química e fisicamente perfeito de niilismo…

Many will say to me at that day: Lord, Lord! have we not prophesied in thy name, have we not cast out devils in thy name, have we not in thy name done many wonderful deeds? Then will I profess unto them: I never knew you, depart from me all ye workers of iniquity.”

In the Roman World, the union of the East and West had taken place in the first instance by means of conquest: it took place now inwardly, psychologically, also — the Spirit of the East spreading over the West. The worship of Isis and that of Mithra had been extended through the whole Roman World; Spirit, lost in the outward and in limited aims, yearned after an Infinite.”

Whether a Christian doctrine stands exactly thus or thus in the Bible — the point to which the exegetical scholars of modern times devote all their attention — is not the only question. The Letter kills, the Spirit makes alive: this they say themselves, yet pervert the sentiment by taking the Understanding for the Spirit.” “It is thus adapted to every grade of culture, and yet satisfies the highest requirements.”

CRITICAL MASS

critical m@ss

E agora Hegel PULA para o Império Bizantino! Para dar tempo de chegar ao presente até a página 487, é lógico…

the ancient Byzantium, which received the name of Constantinople.”

The Roman Empire was divided between the 2 sons of Theodosius. The elder, Arcadius, received the Eastern Empire: — Ancient Greece, with Thrace, Asia Minor, Syria, Egypt; the younger, Honorius, the Western: — Italy, Africa, Spain, Gaul, Britain. Immediately after the death of Theodosius, confusion entered, and the Roman provinces were overwhelmed by alien peoples. Already, under the Emperor Valens, the Visigoths, pressed by the Huns, had solicited a domicile on the hither side of the Danube. This was granted them, on the condition that they should defend the border provinces of the empire. But maltreatment roused them to revolt. Valens was beaten and fell on the field. The later emperors paid court to the leader of these Goths. Alaric, the bold Gothic Chief, turned his arms against Italy. (…) Alaric now attacked Gaul and Spain, and on the fall of Stilicho [general romano] returned to Italy. Rome was stormed and plundered by him A.D. 410. Afterwards Attila advanced on it with the terrible might of the Huns — one of those purely Oriental phenomena, which, like a mere storm-torrent, rise to a furious height and bear down everything in their course, but in a brief space are so completely spent, that nothing is seen of them but the traces they have left in the ruins which they have occasioned. (…) Attila subsequently marched upon Italy and died in the year 453. Soon afterwards however Rome was taken and plundered by the Vandals under Genseric.” Ataques concertados não surtiriam melhor efeito que essa séria aleatória de investidas de diferentes etnias que acabou por derrubar o Império e realizar as Escrituras (apud Hegel!). “Finally, the dignity of the Western Emperors became a farce, and their empty title was abolished by Odoacer, King of the Heruli. § The Eastern Empire long survived, and in the West a new Christian population was formed from the invading barbarian hordes.”

the corpus juris compiled at the instance of the Emperor Justinian, still excites the admiration of the world.”

Right must become Custom — Habit; practical activity must be elevated to rational action; the State must have a rational organization, and then at length does the will of individuals become a truly righteous one. Light shining in darkness may perhaps give color, but not a picture animated by Spirit.” Ora, essa descrição abstrata do Império Romano do Oriente ou Império Bizantino poderia muito bem ser a síntese da República platônica!

violent civil wars arose, and everywhere might be witnessed scenes of murder, conflagration and pillage, perpetrated in the cause of Christian dogmas.” “The words read: Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord God of Zebaoth. To this, one party, in honor of Christ, added — who was crucified for us. Another party rejected the addition, and sanguinary struggles ensued. In the contest on the question whether Christ were of the same or of similar nature with God [two different things] — one letter [in Greek] cost many thousands of lives. Especially notorious are the contentions about Images, in which it often happened, that the Emperor declared for the images and the Patriarch against, or conversely.”

This city (Constantinople) is full of handicraftsmen and slaves, who are all profound theologians, and preach in their workshops and in the streets. If you want a man to change a piece of silver, he instructs you in what consists the distinction between the Father and the Son: if you ask the price of a loaf of bread, you receive for answer — that the Son is inferior to the Father; and if you ask whether the bread is ready, the rejoinder is that the genesis of the Son was from Nothing.” Gregory Nazianzen

To all these religious contentions was added the interest in the gladiators and their combats, and in the parties of the blue and green color, which likewise occasioned the bloodiest encounters; a sign of the most fearful degradation, as proving that all feeling for what is serious and elevated is lost, and that the delirium of religious passion is quite consistent with an appetite for gross and barbarous spectacles.”

SOBRE A ICONOLATRIA NO CATOLICISMO: “The Christians of the Byzantine Empire remained sunk in the dream of superstition — persisting in blind obedience to the Patriarchs and the priesthood. Image-Worship, to which we alluded above, occasioned the most violent struggles and storms. The brave Emperor Leo the Isaurian in particular, persecuted images with the greatest obstinacy, and in the year 754, Image-Worship was declared by a Council to be an invention of the devil. Nevertheless, in the year 787 the Empress Irene had it restored under the authority of a Nicene Council, and the Empress Theodora definitively established it — proceeding against its enemies with energetic rigor. The iconoclastic Patriarch received 200 blows, the bishops trembled, the monks exulted, and the memory of this orthodox proceeding was celebrated by an annual ecclesiastical festival. The West, on the contrary, repudiated Image-Worship as late as the year 794, in the Council held at Frankfort; and, though retaining the images, blamed most severely the superstition of the Greeks. Not till the later Middle Ages did Image-Worship meet with universal adoption as the result of quiet and slow advances.”

Depois que os turcos tomam Constantinopla, H. inicia o Império Germânico propriamente dito, não sem seus típicos preâmbulos!

PART IV: THE GERMAN WORLD

The German Spirit is the Spirit of the new World. Its aim is the realization of absolute Truth as the unlimited self-determination of Freedom — that Freedom which has its own absolute form itself as its purport. The destiny of the German peoples is to be the bearers of the Christian principle. The principle of Spiritual Freedom — of Reconciliation, was introduced into the still simple, unformed minds of those peoples; and the part assigned them in the service of the World-Spirit was that of not merely possessing the Idea of Freedom as the substratum of their religious conceptions, but of producing it in free and spontaneous developments from their subjective self-consciousness.”

Thus their history presents an introversion — the attraction of alien forms of life and the bringing these to bear upon their own. In the Crusades, indeed, and in the discovery of America, the Western World directed its energies outwards. But it was not thus brought in contact with a World-Historical people that had preceded it; it did not dispossess a principle that had previously governed the world.”

For the Christian world is the world of completion; the grand principle of being is realized, consequently the end of days is fully come. The Idea can discover in Christianity no point in the aspirations of Spirit that is not satisfied. For its individual members, the Church is, it is true, a preparation for an eternal state as something future; since the units who compose it, in their isolated and several capacity, occupy a position of particularity: but the Church has also the Spirit of God actually present in it, it forgives the sinner and is a present kingdom of heaven. Thus the Christian World has no absolute existence outside its sphere, but only a relative one which is already implicitly vanquished, and in respect to which its only concern is to make it apparent that this conquest has taken place. Hence it follows that an external reference ceases to be the characteristic element determining the epochs of the modern world.”

The German World took up the Roman culture and religion in their completed form. There was indeed a German and Northern religion, but it had by no means taken deep root in the soul”

To the native tongue of the Germans, the Church likewise opposed one perfectly developed — the Latin.”

Gothic and other chiefs gave themselves the name of Roman Patricians, and at a later date the Roman Empire was restored. Thus the German world appears, superficially, to be only a continuation of the Roman.” ???

But there lived in it an entirely new Spirit, through which the World was to be regenerated”

Estamos cumulados de absurdos. Vou postar agora apenas o que tiver qualquer interesse – não passagens que colaborem com a dissolvência de nosso cérebro – ou que rivalizem com a verdura da Floresta Amazônica!

This third period of the German World extends from the Reformation to our own times.” “It is the time in which the world becomes clear and manifest to itself (Discovery of America).” Será que Hegel já ouviu falar da Oceania?

A great Visigothic kingdom was established, to which Spain, Portugal and a part of Southern France belonged. The second kingdom is that of the Franks — a name which, from the end of the 2nd century, was given in common to the Istaevonian races between the Rhine and the Weser.” “The third kingdom is that of the Ostrogoths in Italy, founded by Theodoric, and highly nourishing beneath his rule.” “But this Ostrogothic kingdom did not last long; it was destroyed by the Byzantines under Belisarius and Narses. In the 2nd half (568) of the 6th century, the Lombards invaded Italy and ruled for 200 years, till this kingdom also was subjected to the Frank sceptre by Charlemagne.” “Our attention is next claimed by the Burgundians, who were subjugated by the Franks, and whose kingdom forms a kind of partition wall between France and Germany. The Angles and Saxons entered Britain and reduced it under their sway. Subsequently, the Normans make their appearance here also.”

The whole mental and moral existence of such states exhibits a divided aspect; in their inmost being we have characteristics that point to an alien origin. This distinction strikes us even on the surface, in their language, which is an intermixture of the ancient Roman — already united with the vernacular — and the German. We may class these nations together as Romanic — comprehending thereby Italy, Spain, Portugal and France. Contrasted with these stand 3 others, more or less German-speaking nations, which have maintained a consistent tone of uninterrupted fidelity to native character — Germany itself, Scandinavia, and England. The last was, indeed, incorporated in the Roman empire, but was affected by Roman culture little more than superficially — like Germany itself — and was again Germanized by Angles and Saxons. Germany Proper kept itself pure from any admixture; only the southern and western border — on the Danube and the Rhine — had been subjugated by the Romans. The portion between the Rhine and the Elbe remained thoroughly national.” “Besides the Ripuarian Franks and those established by Clovis in the districts of the Maine, 4 leading tribes — the Alemanni, the Boioarians, the Thuringians, and the Saxons — must be mentioned. The Scandinavians retained in their fatherland a similar purity from intermixture; and also made themselves celebrated by their expeditions, under the name of Normans. They extended their chivalric enterprises over almost all parts of Europe. Part of them went to Russia, and there became the founders of the Russian Empire; part settled in Northern France and Britain; another established principalities in Lower Italy and Sicily. Thus a part of the Scandinavians founded States in foreign lands, another maintained its nationality by the ancestral hearth.” Me parece que os inferiores ficaram para trás! ‘Quem não se aventura não tem cultura’?

We find, moreover, in the East of Europe, the great Sclavonic nation,¹ whose settlements extended west of the Elbe to the Danube. The Magyars (Hungarians) settled in between them. In Moldavia, Wallachia and northern Greece appear the Bulgarians, Servians, and Albanians, likewise of Asiatic origin — left behind as broken barbarian remains in the shocks and counter-shocks of the advancing hordes.”

¹ Em algum momento, para nós, caiu o “c” de Sclavonic…

The Poles even liberated beleaguered Vienna from the Turks; and the Sclaves have to some extent been drawn within the sphere of Occidental Reason. Yet this entire body of peoples remains excluded from our consideration, because hitherto it has not appeared as an independent element in the series of phases that Reason has assumed in the World. Whether it will do so hereafter, is a question that does not concern us here; for in History we have to do with the Past.” Deus fecha 5 portões de aço e abre uma janelita.

The German Nation was characterized by the sense of Natural Totality — an idiosyncrasy which we may call Heart (Gemüth). Heart is that undeveloped, indeterminate totality of Spirit, in reference to the Will, in which satisfaction of soul is attained in a correspondingly general and indeterminate way.”

HEDONISTAS ORGANIZADOS?Character is a particular form of will and interest asserting itself; but the quality in question [Gemüthlichkeit] has no particular aim — riches, honor, or the like; in fact does not concern itself with any objective condition but with the entire condition of the soul — a general sense of enjoyment.”

PURA QUIMERA TEOLÓGICA, NEO-ADAMISMO MEDIEVO: “In the idiosyncrasy we term Heart, no such absorption of interest presents itself; it wears, on the whole, the appearance of ‘well-meaning’.” Os bárbaros ‘santinhos-do-pau-oco’.

Heart as purely abstract is dullness” Finalmente concorde. Os homens-massinha que receberão o Espírito Santo!

Of the Religion of the Germans we know little. — The Druids belonged to Gaul and were extirpated by the Romans. There was indeed, a peculiar northern mythology; but how slight a hold the religion of the Germans had upon their hearts, has been already remarked, and it is also evident from the fact that the Germans were easily converted to Christianity.” “Their religion had no profundity; and the same may be said of their ideas of law.” [!!]

Freedom has been the watchword in Germany down to the most recent times, and even the league of princes under Frederick II had its origin in the love of liberty.” Hegel não explica por que, então, o ‘vaso’ do ideal cristão não acabou sendo o caráter heleno, absolutamente idêntico a essa ‘intuída pureza’ de broncos…

for Fidelity is the second watchword of the Germans, as Freedom was the first.” Incompatibilidade absoluta.

This we find neither among the Greeks nor the Romans. The relation of Agamemnon and the princes who accompanied him was not that of feudal suit and service: it was a free association merely for a particular purpose — a Hegemony. But the German confederations have their being not in a relation to a mere external aim or cause, but in a relation to the spiritual self — the subjective inmost personality.” “The union of the 2 relations — of individual freedom in the community, and of the bond implied in association — is the main point in the formation of the State.” “But here we have the peculiarity of the German states, that contrary to the view thus presented, social relations do not assume the character of general definitions and laws, but are entirely split up into private rights and private obligations. They perhaps exhibit a social or communal mould or stamp, but nothing universal; the laws are absolutely particular, and the Rights are Privileges.”

Religion comes forward with a challenge to the violence of the passions, and rouses them to madness. The excess of passions is aggravated by evil conscience, and heightened to an insane rage; which perhaps would not have been the case, had that opposition been absent. We behold the terrible spectacle of the most fearful extravagance of passion in all the royal houses of that period. Clovis, the founder of the Frank Monarchy, is stained with the blackest crimes. Barbarous harshness and cruelty characterize all the succeeding Merovingians; the same spectacle is repeated in the Thuringian and other royal houses.” E que tem a ver as casas reais? Que tem elas a ver com o povo?

In short, while the West began to shelter itself in a political edifice of chance, entanglement and particularity, the very opposite direction necessarily made its appearance in the world, to produce the balance of the totality of spiritual manifestation. This took place in the Revolution of the East, which destroyed all particularity and dependence, and perfectly cleared up and purified the soul and disposition” “That speciality of relation was done away with in Mahometanism. In this spiritual universality, in this unlimited and indefinite purity and simplicity of conception, human personality has no other aim than the realization of this universality and simplicity. Allah has not the affirmative, limited aim of the Judaic God.” “Subjectivity is here living and unlimited — an energy which enters into secular life with a purely negative purpose, and busies itself and interferes with the world, only in such a way as shall promote the pure adoration of the One.” “To adore the One, to believe in him, to fast — to remove the sense of speciality and consequent separation from the Infinite, arising from corporeal limitation — and to give alms — that is, to get rid of particular private possession — these are the essence of Mahometan injunctions; but the highest meed is to die for the Faith. He who perishes for it in battle is sure of Paradise.”

in their deserts nothing can be brought into a firm consistent shape.”

They first came down upon Syria and conquered its capital Damascus in the year 634. They then passed the Euphrates and Tigris and turned their arms against Persia, which soon submitted to them. In the West they conquered Egypt, Northern Africa and Spain, and pressed into Southern France as far as the Loire, where they were defeated by Charles Martel near Tours, A.D. 732.” “Whoever became a convert to Islam gained a perfect equality of rights with all Mussulmans. Those who rejected it, were, during the earliest period, slaughtered. Subsequently, however, the Arabs behaved more leniently to the conquered; so that if they were unwilling to go over to Islam, they were only required to pay an annual poll-tax.” “It is the essence of fanaticism to bear only a desolating destructive relation to the concrete; but that of Mahometanism was, at the same time, capable of the greatest elevation — an elevation free from all petty interests, and united with all the virtues that appertain to magnanimity and valor. La religion et la terreur were the principles in this case, as with Robespierre la liberté et la terreur.” “But all this is only contingent and built on sand; it is today, and tomorrow is not.” “Whatever curls up into a form remains all the while transparent, and in that very instant glides away.”

PAUSA PARA A LOUCURA: “Never has enthusiasm, as such, performed greater deeds. Individuals may be enthusiastic for what is noble and exalted in various particular forms. The enthusiasm of a people for its independence, has also a definite aim. But abstract and therefore all-comprehensive enthusiasm — restrained by nothing, finding its limits nowhere, and absolutely indifferent to all beside — is that of the Mahometan East.”

At first we see the conquerors destroying everything connected with art and science. Omar is said to have caused the destruction of the noble Alexandrian library. ‘These books’, said he, ‘either contain what is in the Koran, or something else: in either case they are superfluous.’ But soon afterwards the Arabs became zealous in promoting the arts and spreading them everywhere. Their empire reached the summit of its glory under the Caliphs Al-Mansor and Haroun Al-Raschid. Large cities arose in all parts of the empire, where commerce and manufactures flourished, splendid palaces were built, and schools created. The learned men of the empire assembled at the Caliph’s court, which not merely shone outwardly with the pomp of the costliest jewels, furniture and palaces, but was resplendent with the glory of poetry and all the sciences. At first the Caliphs still maintained entire that simplicity and plainness which characterized the Arabs of the desert, (the Caliph Abubeker is particularly famous in this respect) and which acknowledged no distinction of station and culture. The meanest Saracen, the most insignificant old woman, approached the Caliph as an equal. Unreflecting naïveté does not stand in need of culture; and in virtue of the freedom of his Spirit, each one sustains a relation of quality to the ruler.”

The Osman race [Turkey] at last succeeded in establishing a firm dominion, by forming for themselves a firm centre in the Janizaries. Fanaticism having cooled down, no moral principle remained in men’s souls. In the struggle with the Saracens, European valor had idealized itself to a fair and noble chivalry.” Exceto o fanatismo de Dom Quixote: este é eterno!

The most hideous passions became dominant, and as sensual enjoyment was sanctioned in the first form which Mahometan doctrine assumed, and was exhibited as a reward of the faithful in Paradise, it took the place of fanaticism. At present, driven back into its Asiatic and African quarters, and tolerated only in one corner of Europe through the jealousy of Christian Powers, Islam has long vanished from the stage of history at large, and has retreated into Oriental ease and repose.”

At the head of the feudal array was the Major Domus. These Majores Domus [com certeza não sabiam declinar em latim, quem quer que tenha editado o livro] soon assumed the entire power and threw the royal authority into the shade, while the kings sank into a torpid condition and became mere puppets. From the former sprang the dynasty of the Carlovingians. Pepin le Bref, the son of Charles Martel, was in the year 752 raised to the dignity of King of the Franks. Pope Zacharias released the Franks from their oath of allegiance to the still living Childeric III — the last of the Merovingians — who received the tonsure, i.e. became a monk, and was thus deprived of the royal distinction of long hair. The last of the Merovingians were utter weaklings, who contented themselves with the name of royalty, and gave themselves up almost entirely to luxury — a phenomenon that is quite common in the dynasties of the East, and is also met with again among the last of the Carlovingians. The Majores Domus, on the contrary, were in the very vigor of ascendant fortunes, and were in such close alliance with the feudal nobility, that it became easy for them ultimately to secure the throne.” “The Roman Emperor was the born defender of the Roman Church, and this position of the Emperor towards the Pope seemed to declare that the Frank sovereignty was only a continuation of the Roman Empire.” “This great empire Charlemagne formed into a systematically organized State, and gave the Frank dominion settled institutions adapted to impart to it strength and consistency. This must however not be understood as if he first introduced the Constitution of his empire in its whole extent, but as implying that institutions, partly already in existence, were developed under his guidance, and attained a more decided and unobstructed efficiency.”

Not less remarkable is the management of the revenues of the State. There were no direct taxes, and few tolls on rivers and roads, of which several were farmed out to the higher officers of the empire. Into the treasury flowed on the one hand judicial fines, on the other hand the pecuniary satisfactions made for not serving in the army at the emperor’s summons. Those who enjoyed beneficia, lost them on neglecting this duty. The chief revenue was derived from the crown-lands, of which the emperor had a great number, on which royal palaces (Pfalzen) were erected. It had been long the custom for the kings to make progresses through the chief provinces, and to remain for a time in each palatinate; the due preparations for the maintenance of the court having been already made by Marshals, Chamberlains, etc.”

Moreover the clergy contrived subsequently to free themselves from the burdens of the State, and opened the churches and monasteries as asylums — that is, inviolable sanctuaries for all offenders. This institution was on the one hand very beneficial as a protection in cases of violence and oppression; but it was perverted on the other hand into a means of impunity for the grossest crimes.” “The universality of the power of the State disappeared through this reaction: individuals sought protection with the powerful, and the latter became oppressors. Thus was gradually introduced a condition of universal dependence, and this protecting relation is then systematized into the Feudal System.”

the culminating point of this period is the Crusades; for with them arises a universal instability, but one through which the states of Christendom first attain internal and external independence.” Absolutemente irrelevante na História Universal!

The First Reaction [against who or what?] is that of particular nationality against the universal sovereignty of the Franks. It appears indeed, at first sight, as if the Frank empire was divided by the mere choice of its sovereigns; but another consideration deserves attention, viz. that this division was popular, and was accordingly maintained by the peoples.”

Quanto mais se lê sobre os teutônicos e a Europa, mais parece que o papel de antagonista da humanidade desempenhado pela Alemanha há coisa de um século estava sendo preparado há mais de um milênio…

The western Franks had already identified themselves with the Gauls, and with them originated a reaction against the German Franks, as also at a later epoch one on the part of Italy against the Germans. By the treaty of Verdun, A.D. 843, a division of the empire among Charlemagne’s descendants took place; the whole Frank empire, some provinces excepted, was for a moment again united under Charles the Gross. It was, however, only for a short time that this weak prince was able to hold the vast empire together”

These were the Kingdom of Italy, which was itself divided, the 2 Burgundian sovereignties

Upper Burgundy, of which the chief centres were Geneva and the convent of St. Maurice in Valaise, and Lower Burgundy between the Jura, the Mediterranean and the Rhone — Lorraine, between the Rhine and the Meuse, Normandy, and Brittany. France Proper was shut in between these sovereignties; and thus limited did Hugh Capet find it when he ascended the throne. Eastern Franconia, Saxony, Thuringia, Bavaria, Swabia, remained parts of the German Empire. Thus did the unity of the Frank monarchy fall to pieces.”

In England 7 dynasties of Anglo-Saxon Kings were originally established, but in the year 827 Egbert united these sovereignties into a single kingdom. In the reign of his successor the Danes made very frequent invasions and pillaged the country. In Alfred the Great’s time they met with vigorous resistance, but subsequently the Danish King Canute conquered all England.”

Through Bavaria, Swabia, and Switzerland they penetrated into the interior of France and reached Italy. The Saracens pressed forward from the South. Sicily had been long in their hands: they thence obtained a firm footing in Italy, menaced Rome — which diverted their attack by a composition — and were the terror of Piedmont and Provence.”

France was devastated by the Normans as far as the Jura; the Hungarians reached Switzerland, and the Saracens Valaise. Calling to mind that organization of the arrière-ban, and considering it in juxtaposition with this miserable state of things, we cannot fail to be struck with the inefficiency of all those far-famed institutions, which at such a juncture ought to have shown themselves most effective. We might be inclined to regard the picture of the noble and rational constitution of the Frank monarchy under Charlemagne — exhibiting itself as strong, comprehensive, and well ordered, internally and externally — as a baseless figment. (…) It was superficially induced — an a priori constitution like that which Napoleon gave to Spain, and which disappeared with the physical power that sustained it.” “The brilliant administration of Charlemagne had vanished without leaving a trace, and the immediate consequence was the general defencelessness of individuals. The need of protection is sure to be felt in some degree in every well-organized State: each citizen knows his rights and also knows that for the security of possession the social State is absolutely necessary. Barbarians have not yet attained this sense of need — the want of protection from others. They look upon it as a limitation of their freedom if their rights must be guaranteed them by others. Thus, therefore, the impulse towards a firm organization did not exist: men must first be placed in a defenceless condition, before they were sensible of the necessity of the organization of a State.” Fala como se já não tivessem se passado milhares de anos de interações sociais sem o Estado-nação… Faz parecer, contrariamente a seu progresso linear e ininterrupto do Espírito do Mundo, que todos os desenvolvimentos greco-latinos foram desperdiçados…

Universal injustice, universal lawlessness is reduced to a system of dependence on and obligation to individuals, so that the mere formal side of the matter, the mere fact of compact constitutes its sole connection with the principle of Right.” Novamente: descrição atemporal de todos os sistemas de governo.

With these exceptions the free communities entirely disappeared, and became subject to the prelates or to the Counts and Dukes, thenceforth known as seigneurs and princes.” “The powerful Hugh Capet, Duke of France, was proclaimed king. The title of King, however, gave him no real power; his authority was based on his territorial possessions alone.” “France was divided into many sovereignties: the Duchy of Guienne, the Earldom of Flanders, the Duchy of Gascony, the Earldom of Toulouse, the Duchy of Burgundy, the Earldom of Vermandois; Lorraine too had belonged to France for some time. Normandy had been ceded to the Normans by the kings of France, in order to secure a temporary repose from their incursions. From Normandy Duke William passed over into England and conquered it in the year 1066.”

Germany was composed of the great duchies of Saxony, Swabia, Bavaria, Carinthia, Lorraine and Burgundy, the Margraviate of Thuringia, etc. with several bishoprics and archbishoprics. Each of those duchies again was divided into several fiefs, enjoying more or less independence.” “Germany was radically a free nation, and had not, as France had, any dominant family as a central authority; it continued an elective empire. Its princes refused to surrender the privilege of choosing their sovereign for themselves; and at every new election they introduced new restrictive conditions, so that the imperial power was degraded to an empty shadow.”

Italy was, like Germany, divided into many larger and smaller dukedoms, earldoms, bishoprics and seigneuries. The Pope had very little power, either in the North or in the South; which latter was long divided between the Lombards and the Greeks, until both were overcome by the Normans.”

Spain maintained a contest with the Saracens, either defensive or victorious, through the whole mediaeval period, till the latter finally succumbed to the more matured power of Christian civilization.”

Italy, the centre of Christendom, presented the most revolting aspect. Every virtue was alien to the times in question; consequently virtus had lost its proper meaning: in common use it denoted only violence and oppression, sometimes even libidinous outrage.” “Only bishops and abbots maintained themselves in possession, being able to protect themselves partly by their own power, partly by means of their retainers; since they were, for the most part, of noble families.” “Usurers who had lent money to the sovereign, received compensation by the bestowal of the dignities in question; the worst of men thus came into possession of spiritual offices.”

The Emperor Henry III put an end to the strife of factions, by nominating the Popes himself, and supporting them by his authority in defiance of the opposition of the Roman nobility. Pope Nicholas II decided that the Popes should be chosen by the Cardinals; but as the latter partly belonged to dominant families, similar contests of factions continued to accompany their election. Gregory VII (already famous as Cardinal Hildebrand) sought to secure the independence of the church in this frightful condition of things, by 2 measures especially. First, he enforced the celibacy of the clergy. From the earliest times, it must be observed, the opinion had prevailed that it was commendable and desirable for the clergy to remain unmarried. Yet the annalists and chroniclers inform us that this requirement was but indifferently complied with. Nicholas II had indeed pronounced the married clergy to be a new sect; but Gregory VII proceeded to enforce the restriction with extraordinary energy, excommunicating all the married clergy and all laymen who should hear mass when they officiated. In this way the ecclesiastical body was shut up within itself and excluded from the morality of the State. — His second measure was directed against simony, i.e. the sale of or arbitrary appointment to bishoprics and to the Papal See itself.” “The Church as a divinely constituted power, laid claim to supremacy over secular authority — founding that claim on the abstract principle that the Divine is superior to the Secular. The Emperor at his coronation — a ceremony which only the Pope could perform — was obliged to promise upon oath that he would always be obedient to the Pope and the Church. Whole countries and States, such as Naples, Portugal, England and Ireland came into a formal relation of vassalage to the Papal chair.”

It frequently happened that princes wished to be divorced from their wives; but for such a step they needed the permission of the Church. The latter did not let slip the opportunity of insisting upon the fulfilment of demands that might have been otherwise urged in vain, and thence advanced till it had obtained universal influence.” “Italy was the country where the authority of the Popes was least respected; and the worst usage they experienced was from the Romans themselves.” “This is the absolute schism in which the Church in the Middle Ages was involved: it arose from the recognition of the Holy as something external.” “Thus originated the adoration of the Saints, and with it that conglomerate of fables and falsities with which the Saints and their biographies have been invested.”

The individual has to confess — is bound to expose all the particulars of his life and conduct to the view of the Confessor — and then is informed what course he has to pursue to attain spiritual safety. Thus the Church took the place of Conscience: it put men in leading strings like children, and told them that man could not be freed from the torments which his sins had merited, by any amendment of his own moral condition, but by outward actions, opera operata — actions which were not the promptings of his own good-will, but performed by command of the ministers of the church; e.g., hearing mass, doing penance, going through a certain number of prayers, undertaking pilgrimages — actions which are unspiritual, stupefy the soul, and which are not only mere external ceremonies, but are such as can be even vicariously performed.” “In this way the 3 vows of Chastity, Poverty, and Obedience turned out the very opposite of what they assumed to be, and in them all social morality was degraded.”

But the highest purity of soul defiled by the most horrible barbarity; the Truth, of which a knowledge has been acquired, degraded to a mere tool by falsehood and self-seeking; that which is most irrational, coarse and vile, established and strengthened by the religious sentiment — this is the most disgusting and revolting spectacle that was ever witnessed, and which only Philosophy can comprehend and so justify.” “We have then contemplated the Church as the reaction of the Spiritual against the secular life of the time; but this reaction is so conditioned, that it only subjects to itself that against which it reacts — does not reform it.”

The inhabitants of various districts began to build enormous churches — Cathedrals, erected to contain the whole community. Architecture is always the first art, forming the inorganic phase, the domiciliation of the divinity; not till this is accomplished does Art attempt to exhibit to the worshippers the divinity himself — the Objective.”

Such centres of safety were castles (Burgen), churches and monasteries, round which were collected those who needed protection. These now became burghers (Burger), and entered into a cliental relation to the lords of such castles or to monastic bodies. Thus a firmly established community was formed in many places. Many cities and fortified places (Castelle) still existed in Italy, in the South of France, and in Germany on the Rhine, which dated their existence from the ancient Roman times, and which originally possessed municipal rights, but subsequently lost them under the rule of feudal governors (Vögte).”

Formerly artisans had been obliged to get permission from their liege lords to sell their work, and thus earn something for themselves: they were obliged to pay them a certain sum for this privilege of market, besides contributing a portion of their gains to the baronial exchequer. Those who had houses of their own were obliged to pay a considerable quit-rent for them; on all that was imported and exported, the nobility imposed large tolls, and for the security afforded to travelers they exacted safe-conduct money. When at a later date these communities became stronger, all such feudal rights were purchased from the nobles, or the cession of them compulsorily extorted: by degrees the towns secured an independent jurisdiction and likewise freed themselves from all taxes, tolls and rents. The burden which continued the longest was the obligation the towns were under to make provision for the Emperor and his whole retinue during his stay within their precincts, as also for seigneurs of inferior rank under the same circumstances. The trading class subsequently divided itself into guilds, to each of which were attached particular rights and obligations.”

Cologne threw off the yoke of its bishop; Mayence on the other hand remained subject. By degrees cities grew to be independent republics: first and foremost in Italy, then in the Netherlands, Germany, and France.”

But in the same way as the party of the nobility was divided into factions — especially those of Ghibellines and Guelfs, of which the former favored the Emperor, the latter the Pope — that of the citizens also was rent in sunder by intestine strife.”

The patrician nobility which supplanted the feudal aristocracy, deprived the common people of all share in the conduct of the state, and thus proved itself no less oppressive than the original noblesse. The history of the cities presents us with a continual change of constitutions, according as one party among the citizens or the other — this faction or that, got the upper hand.¹ Originally a select body of citizens chose the magistrates; but as in such elections the victorious faction always had the greatest influence, no other means of securing impartial functionaries was left, but the election of foreigners to the office of judge and podesta.”

¹ Gente, chega de polarização! Parem de brigar!! HAHAHAHA!!!

On the one hand, in individual characters marked by the most terrible or the most admirable features, an astonishingly interesting picture; on the other hand it repels us by assuming, as it unavoidably does, the aspect of mere chronicles.”

As, on the one hand, the German emperors sought to realize their title in Italy, so, on the other hand, Italy had its political centre in Germany. The interests of the 2 countries were thus linked together, and neither could gain political consolidation within itself. In the brilliant period of the Hohenstaufen dynasty, individuals of commanding character sustained the dignity of the throne; sovereigns like Frederick Barbarossa, in whom the imperial power manifested itself in its greatest majesty, and who by his personal qualities succeeded in attaching the subject princes to his interests. Yet brilliant as the history of the Hohenstaufen dynasty may appear, and stirring as might have been the contest with the Church, the former presents on the whole nothing more than the tragedy of this house itself, and the latter had no important result in the sphere of Spirit.”

The contest between the Emperors and the Popes regarding investitures was settled at the close of 1122 by Henry V and Pope Calixtus II on these terms: the Emperor was to invest with the sceptre; the Pope with the ring and crosier; the chapter were to elect the Bishops in the presence of the Emperor or of imperial commissioners; then the Emperor was to invest the Bishop as a secular feudatory with the temper alia, while the ecclesiastical investiture was reserved for the Pope. Thus the protracted contest between the secular and spiritual powers was at length set at rest.”

A LOW POINT: “The Church gained the victory in the struggle referred to in the previous chapter; and in this way secured as decided a supremacy in Germany, as she did in the other states of Europe by a calmer process. She made herself mistress of all the relations of life, and of science and art; and she was the permanent repository of spiritual treasures.”

but the approach to the hallowed localities is in the hands of the Infidels, and it is a reproach to Christendom that the Holy Places and the Sepulchre of Christ in particular are not in possession of the Church. In this feeling Christendom was united; consequently the Crusades were undertaken, whose object was not the furtherance of any special interests on the part of the several states that engaged in them, but simply and solely the conquest of the Holy Land.” “As in the expedition of the Greeks against Troy, so here the invading hosts were entirely composed of independent feudal lords and knights; though they were not united under a real individuality, as were the Greeks under Agamemnon or Alexander. Christendom, on the contrary, was engaged in an undertaking whose object was the securing of the definite and present existence of Deity — the real culmination of Individuality. This object impelled the West against the East, and this is the essential interest of the Crusades.” E uma coisa tão imbecil e asinina foi ter seu “desfecho” apenas no século XX com a torpe fundação de Israel, sobre e no fulcro da milenar Palestina, e o início de novas guerras infinitas!

The first and immediate commencement of the Crusades was made in the West itself. Many thousands of Jews were massacred, and their property seized; and after this terrible prelude Christendom began its march. The monk, Peter the Hermit of Amiens, led the way with an immense troop of rabble. This host passed in the greatest disorder through Hungary, and robbed and plundered as they went; but their numbers dwindled away, and only a few reached Constantinople. For rational considerations were out of the question; the mass of them believed that God would be their immediate guide and protector. The most striking proof that enthusiasm almost robbed the nations of Europe of their senses is supplied by the fact that at a later time troops of children ran away from their parents, and went to Marseilles, there to take ship for the Holy Land. Few reached it; the rest were sold by the merchants to the Saracens as slaves.”

At last, with much trouble and immense loss, more regular armies attained the desired object; they beheld themselves in possession of all the Holy Places of note — Bethlehem, Gethsemane, Golgotha, and even the Holy Sepulchre.” E o que tem de mais essa merda?

Still dripping with the blood of the slaughtered inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Christians fell down on their faces at the tomb of the Redeemer, and directed their fervent supplications to him.” “Jerusalem was made a kingdom, and the entire feudal system was introduced there — a constitution which, in presence of the Saracens, was certainly the worst that could be adopted. Another crusade in the year 1204 resulted in the conquest of Constantinople and the establishment of a Latin Empire there. Christendom, therefore, had appeased its religious craving; it could now veritably walk unobstructed in the footsteps of the Saviour. Whole shiploads of earth were brought from the Holy Land to Europe.”

the Sacred Handkerchief, the Cross, and lastly the Sepulchre, were the most venerated memorials.” Nenhuma chance de falsificações após 1200 anos, confia!

O MAIS PRÓXIMO DE UM ALTAR AO NADA QUE JÁ SE TENHA EDIFICADO SOBRE A TERRA: “there all is seriousness. In the negation of that definite and present embodiment — i.e., of the Sensuous — it is that the turning-point in question is found, and those words have an application” “Christendom was not to find its ultimatum of truth in the grave.” Any doubt?

At this sepulchre the Christian world received a 2nd time the response given to the disciples when they sought the body of the Lord there” Pensando bem, a hóstia é algo infinitamente grave e reverente – no sentido de que não mais me causa risos! –, desde que me inteirei de que realmente fizeram cruzadas NÃO SÓ simbolicamente, para reaver a Terra Sagrada, mas LITERALMENTE para olhar o fundo de um túmulo – além do mais! – forjado!

The West bade an eternal farewell to the East at the Holy Sepulchre, and gained a comprehension of its own principle of subjective infinite Freedom.”

The Christians had been shut up in a corner by the Arabs; but they gained upon their adversaries in strength, because the Saracens in Spain and Africa were engaged in war in various directions, and were divided among themselves. The Spaniards, united with Frank knights, undertook frequent expeditions against the Saracens; and in this collision of the Christians with the chivalry of the East — with its freedom and perfect independence of soul — the former became also partakers in this freedom. Spain gives us the fairest picture of the knighthood of the Middle Ages, and its hero is the Cid.”

Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar (Burgos, Espanha, 1043 – Valência, 10 de julho de 1099) mais conhecido por El Cid (do mourisco sidi, ‘senhor’) e de Campeador (Campidoctor, Campeão), foi um nobre guerreiro castelhano que viveu no século XI, época em que a Hispânia estava dividida entre reinos rivais de cristãos e mouros (muçulmanos). Sua vida e feitos se tornaram, com as cores da lenda, sobretudo devido a uma canção de gesta (a Canción de Mio Cid), datada de 1207, transcrita no século XIV pelo copista Pedro Abád, cujo manuscrito se encontra na Biblioteca Nacional da Espanha, um referencial para os cavaleiros da idade média.”

Several Crusades, the records of which excite our unmixed loathing and detestation, were undertaken against the South of France also. There an aesthetic culture had developed itself: the Troubadours had introduced a freedom of manners similar to that which prevailed under the Hohenstaufen Emperors in Germany; but with this difference, that the former had in it something affected, while the latter was of a more genuine kind.” Claro, o alemão sempre mais autêntico!

But as in Upper Italy, so also in the South of France fanatical ideas of purity had been introduced; a Crusade was therefore preached against that country by Papal authority. St. Dominic entered it with a vast host of invaders, who, in the most barbarous manner, pillaged and murdered the innocent and the guilty indiscriminately, and utterly laid waste the fair region which they inhabited.” É evidente que o próximo passo seria a intra-cruzada contra as mulheres (levaria um pouco de tempo, nestas exposições de H.)…

Não me espanta a forma como o poder secular da Igreja Católica tombou, mas como raios isso levou tanto tempo: “In the Crusades the Pope stood at the head of the secular power: the Emperor appeared only in a subordinate position, like the other princes, and was obliged to commit both the initiative and the executive to the Pope, as the manifest generalissimo of the expedition.”

To counteract these evils, new monastic orders were founded, the chief of which was that of the Franciscans, or Mendicant Friars, whose founder, St. Francis of Assisi — a man possessed by an enthusiasm and ecstatic passion that passed all bounds — spent his life in continually striving for the loftiest purity.” “Contemporaneously with it arose the Dominican order, founded by St. Dominic; its special business was preaching. The mendicant friars were diffused through Christendom to an incredible extent; they were, on the one hand, the standing apostolic army of the Pope, while, on the other hand, they strongly protested against his worldliness. The Franciscans were powerful allies of Louis of Bavaria in his resistance of the Papal assumptions, and they are said to have been the authors of the position that a General Council was higher authority than the Pope; but subsequently they too sank down into a torpid and unintelligent condition.” Isso é falta de proteína na dieta!

In the same way the ecclesiastical Orders of Knighthood contemplated the attainment of purity of Spirit. (…) The Orders of Knighthood were divided into 3: that of St. John, that of the Temple, and the Teutonic Order.” “But their members sank down to the level of vulgar interests, and the Orders became in the sequel a provisional institute for the nobility generally, rather than anything else. The Order of the Temple was even accused of forming a religion of its own, and of having renounced Christ in the creed which, under the influence of the Oriental Spirit, it had adopted.”

When we have arrived at Faith, it is a piece of negligence to stop short of convincing ourselves, by the aid of Thought, of that to which we have given credence.” Anselmo

O que nasce errado termina errado. No que penso quando o digo? Na monarquia absoluta e na monarquia constitucional…

Germany had always embraced a great variety of stocks: — Swabians, Bavarians, Franks, Thuringians, Saxons, Burgundians: to these must be added the Sclaves of Bohemia, Germanized Sclaves in Mecklenburg, in Brandenburg, and in a part of Saxony and Austria; so that no such combination as took place in France was possible.” “After the interregnum the Count of Hapsburg was elected Emperor, and the House of Hapsburg continued to fill the imperial throne with but little interruption.”

IN THE HORIZON, THERE SHE IS, ALWAYS – CHINA! “The aim of all these confederations was resistance to the feudal lords; and even princes united with the cities, with a view to the subversion of the feudal condition and the restoration of a peaceful state of things throughout the country. What the state of society was under feudal sovereignty is evident from the notorious association formed for executing criminal justice: it was a private tribunal, which, under the name of the Vehmgericht, held secret sittings; its chief seat was the northwest of Germany. A peculiar peasant association was also formed. In Germany the peasants were bondmen; many of them took refuge in the towns, or settled down as freemen in the neighborhood of the towns (Pfahlbürger); but in Switzerland a peasant fraternity was established. The peasants of Uri, Schwyz, and Unterwalden were under imperial governors; for the Swiss governments were not the property of private possessors, but were official appointments of the Empire. These the sovereigns of the Hapsburg line wished to secure to their own house. The peasants, with club and iron-studded mace (Morgenstern), returned victorious from a contest with the haughty steel-clad nobles, armed with spear and sword, and practised in the chivalric encounters of the tournament. Another invention also tended to deprive the nobility of the ascendancy which they owed to their accoutrements — that of gunpowder.”

In that country, warfare in the hand of the Condottieri became a regular business.”

This book [O Príncipe] has often been thrown aside in disgust, as replete with the maxims of the most revolting tyranny; but nothing worse can be urged against it than that the writer, having the profound consciousness of the necessity for the formation of a State, has here exhibited the principles on which alone States could be founded in the circumstances of the times.”

MARX É MERAMENTE O MAQUIAVEL DOS NOVOS TEMPOS: “we must nevertheless confess that the feudal nobility, whose power was to be subdued, were assailable in no other way, since an indomitable contempt for principle, and an utter depravity of morals, were thoroughly engrained in them.”

In France we find the converse of that which occurred in Germany and Italy. For many centuries the Kings of France possessed only a very small domain, so that many of their vassals were more powerful than themselves: but it was a great advantage to the royal dignity in France that the principle of hereditary monarchy was firmly established there.”

—“The Dukes of Normandy had, however, become Kings of England; and thus a formidable power confronted France, whose interior lay open to it by way of Normandy. Besides this there were powerful Duchies still remaining; nevertheless, the King was not a mere feudal suzerain (Lehnsherr) like the German Emperors, but had become a territorial possessor (Landesherr): he had a number of barons and cities under him, who were subject to his immediate jurisdiction; and Louis IX succeeded in rendering appeals to the royal tribunal common throughout his kingdom. The towns attained a position of greater importance in the State. For when the king needed money, and all his usual resources — such as taxes and forced contributions of all kinds — were exhausted, he made application to the towns and entered into separate negotiations with them. It was Philip the Fair who, in the year 1302, first convoked the deputies of the towns as a Third Estate in conjunction with the clergy and the barons.” poderes espiritual + secular + da massa (burgos)

In the way we have indicated the kings of France very soon attained great power; while the flourishing state of the poetic art in the hands of the Troubadours, and the growth of the scholastic theology, whose especial centre was Paris, gave France a culture superior to that of the other European States”

When the oppressive rule and fiscal exactions of the Kings became intolerable, contentions and even war ensued: the barons compelled King John to swear to Magna Charta, the basis of English liberty, i.e., more particularly of the privileges of the nobility. [Second State]” Hegel foi um bom leitor de Montesquieu, i.e., fez o dever de casa.

The towns, also, favored by the Kings in opposition to the barons, soon elevated themselves into a Third Estate and to representation in the Commons’ House of Parliament.”

NÃO MAIS SENHORES DO QUE JÁ SÃO SERÃO: “We shall not pursue the minute and specifically historic details that concern the incorporation of principalities with States, or the dissensions and contests that accompanied such incorporations. We have only to add that the kings, when by weakening the feudal constitution, they had attained a higher degree of power, began to use that power against each other in the undisguised interest of their own dominion. Thus France and England carried on wars with each other for a century.”

AWOKE FROM THE LONG SLUMBER: “Princes and peoples were indifferent to papal clamor urging them to new crusades. The Emperor Louis set to work to deduce from Aristotle, the Bible, and the Roman Law a refutation of the assumptions of the Papal See; and the electors declared at the Diet held at Rense in 1338, and afterwards still more decidedly at the Imperial Diet held at Frankfort, that they would defend the liberties and hereditary rights of the Empire, and that to make the choice of a Roman Emperor or King valid, no papal confirmation was needed. So, at an earlier date, 1302, on occasion of a contest between Pope Boniface and Philip the Fair, the Assembly of the States convoked by the latter had offered opposition to the Pope.”

It was not so much from slavery as through slavery that humanity was emancipated. For barbarism, lust, injustice constitute evil: man, bound fast in its fetters, is unfit for morality and religiousness; and it is from this intemperate and ungovernable state of volition that the discipline in question emancipated him.”

Virgil was thought to be a great magician (in Dante he appears as the guide in Hell and Purgatory).”

We have now arrived at the 3rd period of the German World, and thus enter upon the period of Spirit conscious that it is free” “First, we have to consider the Reformation in itself — the all-enlightening Sun, following on that blush of dawn which we observed at the termination of the mediaeval period; next, the unfolding of that state of things which succeeded the Reformation; and lastly, the Modern Times, dating from the end of the last century.”

PELO MENOS, EM HEGEL, GANHA-SE JÁ EM IMORALIDADE” (reconhecer o mal no mundo contemporâneo como sintoma necessário do êxito do Cristianismo, e não a causa de sua ruína): “The Reformation resulted from the corruption of the Church. That corruption was not an accidental phenomenon; it was not the mere abuse of power and dominion. A corrupt state of things is very frequently represented as an ‘abuse’; it is taken for granted that the foundation was good — the system, the institution itself faultless — but that the passion, the subjective interest, in short the arbitrary volition of men has made use of that which in itself was good to further its own selfish ends, and that all that is required to be done is to remove these adventitious elements. On this showing the institute in question escapes obloquy, and the evil that disfigures it appears something foreign to it. But when accidental abuse of a good thing really occurs, it is limited to particularity. A great and general corruption affecting a body of such large and comprehensive scope as a Church, is quite another thing. — The corruption of the Church was a native growth; the principle of that corruption is to be looked for in the fact that the specific and definite embodiment of Deity which it recognizes, is sensuous“The element in question which is innate in the Ecclesiastical principle only reveals itself as a corrupting one when the Church has no longer any opposition to contend with” [TRIUNFOU, E POR ISSO MORREU] “Thus it is that externality in the Church itself which becomes evil and corruption, and develops itself as a negative principle in its own bosom. — The forms which this corruption assumes are coextensive with the relations which the Church itself sustains, into which consequently this vitiating element enters.”

a credulity of the most absurd and childish character in regard to Miracles, for the Divine is supposed to manifest itself in a perfectly disconnected and limited way, for purely finite and particular purposes”

But as that paragon of works of art, the Athene and her temple-citadel at Athens, was built with the money of the allies and issued in the loss of both allies and power; so the completion of this Church of St. Peter and Michael Angelo’s Last Judgment in the Sistine Chapel, were the Doomsday and the ruin of this proud spiritual edifice.”

Nor could Luther concede to the Calvinistic Church that Christ is a mere commemoration, a mere reminiscence”

At its commencement, the Reformation concerned itself only with particular aspects of the Catholic Church: Luther wished to act in union with the whole Catholic world, and expressed a desire that Councils should be convened. His theses found supporters in every country. In answer to the charge brought against Luther and the Protestants, of exaggeration — nay, even of calumnious misrepresentation in their descriptions of the corruption of the Church, we may refer to the statements of Catholics themselves, bearing upon this point, and particularly to those contained in the official documents of Ecclesiastical Councils. But Luther’s onslaught, which was at first limited to particular points, was soon extended to the doctrines of the Church; and leaving individuals, he attacked institutions at large — conventual life, the secular lordships of the bishops, etc. His writings now controverted not merely isolated dicta of the Pope and the Councils, but the very principle on which such a mode of deciding points in dispute was based — in fact, the Authority of the Church. Luther repudiated that authority, and set up in its stead the Bible and the testimony of the Human Spirit.”

the existence of a People’s Book presupposes as its primary condition an ability to read on the part of the People; an ability which in Catholic countries is not very commonly to be met with.” HAHAHAHAHA

Leibniz at a later time discussed with bishop Bossuet the question of the union of the Churches; but the Council of Trent remains the insurmountable obstacle.”

the fasts and holy days were abolished. Thus there was also a secular reform — a change affecting the state of things outside the sphere of ecclesiastical relations: in many places a rebellion was raised against the temporal authorities.” “But the world was not yet ripe for a transformation of its political condition as a consequence of ecclesiastical reformation.”

JESUÍTICAS CASUÍSTICAS: “Education was entrusted to the Jesuits. Thus does the Spirit of the Catholic world in general sink behind the Spirit of the Age.”

TUDO SE EXPLICA, EM HEGEL, POR UM PROFUNDO C[H]AUVINISMO: “The Reformation originated in Germany, and struck firm root only in the purely German nations; outside of Germany it established itself in Scandinavia and England.”

In Swabia, Franconia, and the Rhine countries there were many convents and bishoprics, as also many free imperial towns; and the reception or rejection of the Reformation very much depended on the influences which these ecclesiastical and civil bodies respectively exercised” “In Austria, in Bavaria, in Bohemia, the Reformation had already made great progress; and though it is commonly said that when truth has once penetrated men’s souls, it cannot be rooted out again, it was indisputably stifled in the countries in question, by force of arms, by stratagem or persuasion.”

The French call the Germans entiers, entire — i.e., stubborn”

the Psalms of David which exhibit a similar character were then introduced as hymns into the ritual of Protestant Churches. Protestantism took this turn of minute and painful introspection, possessed with the conviction of the importance of the exercise, and was for a long time characterized by a self-tormenting disposition and an aspect of spiritual wretchedness; which in the present day has induced many persons to enter the Catholic pale, that they might exchange this inward uncertainty for a formal broad certainty based on the imposing totality of the Church.” Para isso hoje existe a filosofia – para o auto-exame, quero dizer –; já para a Igreja temos sua gêmea, a Academia (aquela que dá uma segurança formal).

The Jesuits analyzed the first rudiments of volition (velleitas) with as painful minuteness as was displayed in the pious exercises of Protestantism; but they had a science of casuistry which enabled them to discover a good reason for everything, and so get rid of the burden of guilt which this rigid investigation seemed to aggravate.” Não muito distante do seu próprio panteísmo, H.!

Thus arose that famous legend of Faust, who in disgust at the unsatisfactory character of speculative science, is said to have plunged into the world and purchased all its glory at the expense of his salvation.” Realmente um católico faria o contrário!

Faust, if we may trust the poet, had the enjoyment of all that the world could give, in exchange for his soul’s weal; but those poor women who were called Witches were reputed to get nothing more by the bargain than the gratification of a petty revenge by making a neighbor’s cow go dry or giving a child the measles.”

OS DOIS SÃO UMA MERDA (SPOILER DO FINAL): “The belief in this abstract, special power whose dominion is the world — in the Devil and his devices — occasioned an incalculable number of trials for witchcraft both in Catholic and Protestant countries

The main impulse was suspicion. The principle of suspicion assumes a similarly terrible shape during the sway of the Roman Emperors, and under Robespierre’s Reign of Terror; when mere disposition, unaccompanied by any overt act or expression, was made an object of punishment.”

Among the Catholics, it was the Dominicans to whom (as was the Inquisition in all its branches) the trials for witchcraft were entrusted. Father Spee/Spec [o livro cita o nome duas vezes, uma delas é erro tipográfico], a noble Jesuit, wrote a treatise against them (he is also the author of a collection of fine poems bearing the title of Trutznachtigall)”

If the accused fainted under the torture it was averred that the Devil was giving them sleep: if convulsions supervened, it was said that the Devil was laughing in them; if they held out steadfastly, the Devil was supposed to give them power.” “But it was Thomasius, a Professor of Halle, who first opposed this prevalent superstition with very decided success. The entire phenomenon is in itself most remarkable when we reflect that we have not long been quit of this frightful barbarity (even as late as the year 1780 a witch was publicly burned at Glarus in Switzerland).” Ah, se os bolsominions pudessem erigir fogueiras e escapar a devidos processos legais… Muito homem – eu! – estaria condenado como bruxo!

[In Spain] The Grandees were no longer allowed to maintain troops of their own, and were also withdrawn from the command of the armies; destitute of power they had to content themselves as private persons with an empty title.”

Thus the Inquisition confirmed the despotic power of the King: it claimed supremacy even over bishops and archbishops, and could cite them before its tribunal. The frequent confiscation of property — one of the most customary penalties — tended to enrich the treasury of the State. Moreover, the Inquisition was a tribunal which took cognizance of mere suspicion; and while it consequently exercised a fearful authority over the clergy, it had a peculiar support in the national pride. For every Spaniard wished to be considered Christian by descent, and this species of vanity fell in with the views and tendency of the Inquisition. Particular provinces of the Spanish monarchy, as e.g., Aragon, still retained many peculiar rights and privileges; but the Spanish Kings from Philip II downwards proceeded to suppress them altogether.”

Polish Liberty too, meant nothing more than the freedom of the barons in contraposition to the King, the nation being reduced to a state of absolute serfdom.”

Italy especially had become such an object of desire, and was a prey to the rapacity of the French, the Spaniards, and at a later date, of the Austrians. In fact absolute disintegration and dismemberment has always been an essential feature in the national character of the inhabitants of Italy, in ancient as well as in modern times.”

But we have to observe also that the wars in which Germany engaged were not particularly honorable to it: it allowed Burgundy, Lorraine, Alsace, and other parts of the empire to be wrested from it.”

When this combination of States was just commencing, Charles V was aiming at universal monarchy; for he was Emperor of Germany and King of Spain to boot: the Netherlands and Italy acknowledged his sway, and the whole wealth of America flowed into his coffers. With this enormous power, which, like the contingencies of fortune in the case of private property, had been accumulated by the most felicitous combinations of political dexterity — among other things by marriage, — but which was destitute of an internal and reliable bond, he was nevertheless unable to gain any advantage over France, or even over the German princes; nay, he was even compelled to a peace by Maurice of Saxony.” “The balance of power in Europe was similarly threatened by Louis XIV.” “France, too, had the consciousness of its intellectual superiority in a refinement of culture surpassing anything of which the rest of Europe could boast. The pretensions of Louis were founded not on extent of dominion, (as was the case with Charles V) so much as on that culture which distinguished his people, and which at that time made its way everywhere with the language that embodied it, and was the object of universal admiration: they could therefore plead a higher justification than those of the German Emperor. But the very rock on which the vast military resources of Philip II had already foundered — the heroic resistance of the Dutch — proved fatal also to the ambitious schemes of Louis.”

An external relation in which the States of Europe had an interest in common was that sustained to the Turks — the terrible power which threatened to overwhelm Europe from the East. The Turks of that day had still a sound and vigorous nationality, whose power was based on conquest, and which was therefore engaged in constant warfare, or at least admitted only a temporary suspension of arms. As was the case among the Franks, the conquered territories were divided among their warriors as personal, not heritable possessions; when in later times the principle of hereditary succession was adopted, the national vigor was shattered. The flower of the Osman force, the Janizaries, were the terror of the Europeans. Their ranks were recruited from a body of Christian boys of handsome and vigorous proportions, brought together chiefly by means of annual conscriptions among the Greek subjects of the Porte, strictly educated in the Moslem faith, and exercised in arms from early youth. Without parents, without brothers or sisters, without wives, they were, like the monks, an altogether isolated and terrible corps. The Eastern European powers were obliged to make common cause against the Turks — viz.: Austria, Hungary, Venice and Poland. The battle of Lepanto saved Italy, and perhaps all Europe, from a barbarian inundation.”

in the State there must be government, and Cromwell knew what governing is. He, therefore, made himself ruler, and sent that praying parliament about their business.”

Through the Peace of Westphalia the Protestant Church had been acknowledged as an independent one — to the great confusion and humiliation of Catholicism.”

Bogislav Philipp von Chemnitz, Hippolytus à lapide

QUANTA MÁGOA, H.! “This constitution, which completely terminated the career of Germany as an Empire, was chiefly the work of Richelieu, by whose assistance — Romish Cardinal though he was — religious freedom in Germany was preserved. (…) His fate has consequently resembled that of many great statesmen, inasmuch as he has been cursed by his countrymen, while his enemies have looked upon the work by which he ruined them as the most sacred goal of their desires — the consummation of their rights and liberties.” Censura Richelieu porque, apesar de ter sido esta carta garantidora de uma liberdade civil importante, ela enfraqueceu politicamente a Alemanha, que seguiu por muito tempo ainda separada do Império Austro-Húngaro. A esse respeito, a propósito, procurar a biografia do Père Joseph, o braço direito de R., livro recomendado por Zizek como exemplificando a personalidade que mais parece ter antecipado, espiritualmente, Hitler (o cume da tirania e arbitrariedade). Porém, ao simples cidadão que só queria direitos individuais, o que lhe interessava que se ele “pensasse a longo prazo” seus netos poderiam viver num “grande império” (hipoteticamente)?! Reflexão hegeliana completamente disparatada.

Frederick II demonstrated the independent vigor of his power by resisting that of almost all Europe — the union of its leading states. He appeared as the hero of Protestantism, and that not individually merely, like Gustavus Adolphus, but as the ruler of a State. The Seven Years’ War was indeed in itself not a war of religion; but it was so in view of its ultimate issues, and in the disposition of the soldiers as well as of the potentates under whose banner they fought.” Não à toa um monarca detonado por Nietzsche.

It seemed to men as if God had but just created the moon and stars, plants and animals, as if the laws of the universe were now established for the first time; for only then did they feel a real interest in the universe”

What the nations acknowledge as international Right was deduced empirically from observation (as in the work of Grotius); then the source of the existing civil and political law was looked for, after Cicero’s fashion, in those instincts of men which Nature has planted in their hearts — e.g., the social instinct; next the principle of security for the person and property of the citizens, and of the advantage of the commonwealth — that which belongs to the class of <reasons of State>.”

The results of thought are thus posited as finite, and the Éclaircissement utterly banished and extirpated all that was speculative from things human and divine.” Já H. pecou pelo lado oposto…

O HOMEM-ESTANQUE: “we must know what the Will is in itself.” “What the Will is in itself can be known only when these specific and contradictory forms of volition have been eliminated. Then Will appears as Will, in its abstract essence.” “This is absolute Will — the volition to be free. Will making itself its own object is the basis of all Right and Obligation — consequently of all statutory determinations of Right, categorical imperatives, and enjoined obligations.” “nay, it is even that by which Man becomes Man, and is therefore the fundamental principle of Spirit. But the next question is: How does Will assume a definite form?” “But the metaphysical process by which this abstract Will develops itself, so as to attain a definite form of Freedom, and how Rights and Duties are evolved therefrom, this is not the place to discuss. It may however be remarked that the same principle obtained speculative recognition in Germany, in the Kantian Philosophy.” “Right purely for the sake of Right, Duty purely for the sake of Duty.” “Why did this principle of Freedom remain merely formal? and why did the French alone, and not the Germans, set about realizing it?” “As yet, nothing further is developed from it, for it still maintains an adverse position to Religion, i.e. to the concrete absolute substance of the Universe.” “the French are hot-headed”¹ HAHAHAHAHAA!

¹ Em francês essa expressão é traduzida literalmente assim: eles têm a cabeça muito perto do chapéu!

Cada século é um cavalo de pau que se dá!

TOCQUEVILLE NÃO DIRIA MELHOR: “Before the French Revolution, it must be allowed, the power of the Grandees had been diminished by Richelieu, and they had been deprived of privileges; but, like the clergy, they retained all the prerogatives which gave them an advantage over the lower class. The political condition of France at that time presents nothing but a confused mass of privileges altogether contravening Thought and Reason — an utterly irrational state of things, and one with which the greatest corruption of morals, of Spirit was associated — an empire characterized by Destitution of Right, and which, when its real state begins to be recognized, becomes shameless destitution of Right.”

a spiritual enthusiasm thrilled through the world, as if the reconciliation between the Divine and the Secular was now first accomplished.”

Plato in his Republic makes everything depend upon the Government, and makes Disposition the principle of the State; on which account he lays the chief stress on Education. The modern theory is diametrically opposed to this, referring everything to the individual will. But here we have no guarantee that the will in question has that right disposition which is essential to the stability of the State.”

The budget however is in its nature something diverse from law, for it is annually renewed, and the power to which it properly belongs is that of the Government. (…) The government was thus transferred to the Legislative Chamber, as in England to the Parliament. This constitution was also vitiated by the existence of absolute mistrust; the dynasty lay under suspicion, because it had lost the power it formerly enjoyed, and the priests refused the oath. Neither government nor constitution could be maintained on this footing, and the ruin of both was the result.”

This Virtue has now to conduct the government in opposition to the Many, whom their corruption and attachment to old interests, or a liberty that has degenerated into license, and the violence of their passions, render unfaithful to virtue. Virtue is here a simple abstract principle and distinguishes the citizens into 2 classes only — those who are favorably disposed and those who are not. But disposition can only be recognized and judged of by disposition. Suspicion therefore is in the ascendant; but virtue, as soon as it becomes liable to suspicion, is already condemned. Suspicion attained a terrible power and brought to the scaffold the Monarch, whose subjective will was in fact the religious conscience of a Catholic. Robespierre set up the principle of Virtue as supreme, and it may be said that with this man Virtue was an earnest matter. Virtue and Terror are the order of the day; for Subjective Virtue, whose sway is based on disposition only, brings with it the most fearful tyranny. It exercises its power without legal formalities, and the punishment it inflicts is equally simple — Death.

An organized government is introduced, analogous to the one that had been displaced; only that its chief and monarch is now a mutable Directory of Five, who may form a moral, but have not an individual unity (…) this constitution therefore experienced the same fate as its predecessor, for it had proved to itself the absolute necessity of a governmental power. Napoleon restored it as a military power, and followed up this step by establishing himself as an individual will at the head of the State: he knew how to rule, and soon settled the internal affairs of France.” Em momentos assim, basta alguém que saiba como governar. Situação análoga à nossa. O problema é quando o líder morre. Nós, por outro lado, não estamos aproveitando este potencial nem durante a curta vida de nosso maior político.

the sway of mistrust was exchanged for that of respect and fear. He then, with the vast might of his character turned his attention to foreign relations, subjected all Europe, and diffused his liberal institutions in every quarter. Greater victories were never gained, expeditions displaying greater genius were never conducted: but never was the powerlessness of Victory exhibited in a clearer light than then.” “and in France constitutional monarchy, with the Charte as its basis, was restored. But here again the antithesis of Disposition (good feeling) and Mistrust made its appearance.” “A 15 years’ farce was played. For although the Charte was the standard under which all were enrolled, and though both parties had sworn to it, yet on the one side the ruling disposition was a Catholic one, which regarded it as a matter of conscience to destroy the existing institutions.” O problema do rei: católico demais! Hahaha! Napoleão, com efeito, era muito mais realista: um überprotestante!

At length, after 40 years of war and confusion indescribable, [1780-1820?] a weary heart might fain congratulate itself on seeing a termination and tranquillization of all these disturbances.” “The will of the Many expels the Ministry from power, and those who had formed the Opposition fill the vacant places; but the latter having now become the Government, meet with hostility from the Many, and share the same fate. Thus agitation and unrest are perpetuated. This collision, this nodus, this problem is that with which history is now occupied, and whose solution it has to work out in the future.” Achava que esta aula iria desembocar direto no XVIII Brumário!

PELO MENOS ENSINA AO SÉC. XXI TODA A ILUSÃO DA CONCEPÇÃO ‘LIBERTÁRIA’ DO HOMEM MÉDIO: “Not satisfied with the establishment of rational rights, with freedom of person and property, with the existence of a political organization in which are to be found various circles of civil life each having its own functions to perform, and with that influence over the people which is exercised by the intelligent members of the community, and the confidence that is felt in them, <Liberalism> sets up in opposition to all this the atomistic principle, that which insists upon the sway of individual wills; maintaining that all government should emanate from their express power, and have their express sanction. Asserting this formal side of Freedom — this abstraction — the party in question allows no political organization to be firmly established. The particular arrangements of the government are forthwith opposed by the advocates of Liberty as the mandates of a particular will, and branded as displays of arbitrary power.”

ALWAYS HAS BEEN: “Particularly all the Romanic nations, and the Roman Catholic World in special — France, Italy, Spain — were subjected to the dominion of Liberalism.” Aqui, sem aspas, no sentido de Iluminismo ou Revolução Francesa, apenas! Política laica não-bávara, para os leigos em H.. Ou simplesmente quando o homem decide governar a si próprio, i.e., arranca a Coroa da cabeça de um dos seus: todos os países hoje, na prática – ah, como é difícil! –; muitos e muitos países hoje, nominalmente.

For it is a false principle that the fetters which bind Right and Freedom can be broken without the emancipation of conscience — that there can be a Revolution without a Reformation.” “Venice and Genoa, those ancient aristocracies, which could at least boast of legitimacy, vanished as rotten despotisms. Material superiority in power can achieve no enduring results: Napoleon could not coerce Spain into freedom any more than Philip II could force Holland into slavery.”

Austria and England were not drawn within the vortex of internal agitation, and exhibited great, immense proofs of their internal solidity. Austria is not a Kingdom, but an Empire, i.e., an aggregate of many political organizations. The inhabitants of its chief provinces are not German in origin and character, and have remained unaffected by ‘ideas’. Elevated neither by education nor religion, the lower classes in some districts have remained in a condition of serfdom, and the nobility have been kept down, as in Bohemia; in other quarters, while the former have continued the same, the barons have maintained their despotism, as in Hungary. Austria has surrendered that more intimate connection with Germany which was derived from the imperial dignity, and renounced its numerous possessions and rights in Germany and the Netherlands. It now takes its place in Europe as a distinct power, involved with no other.” A Áustria foi um verdadeiro Jurassic Park até o fim da II Guerra.

A OPACIDADE DA TRANSPARÊNCIA EXCESSIVA: “the English Constitution kept its ground amid the general convulsion, though it seemed so much the more liable to be affected by it, as a public Parliament, that habit of assembling in public meeting which was common to all orders of the State, and a free press, offered singular facilities for introducing the French principles of Liberty and Equality among all classes of the people.” Creio que Hegel, se é que não o fez em algum lugar, deveria ter chamado os ingleses, para manter os seus critérios, de criptoliberais, i.e., liberais inconscientes, já que, para ele, o Liberalismo foi uma invenção francesa. Os liberais políticos à revelia de si próprios calcados na mais elevada tirania despótica econômica (de si mesma sobre o mundo).

ANY FREEDOM, EXCEPT YOURS! “Or was the English constitution so entirely a Free Constitution — had those principles been already so completely realized in it, that they could no longer excite opposition or even interest? The English nation may be said to have approved of the emancipation of France; but it was proudly reliant on its own constitution and freedom, and instead of imitating the example of the foreigner it displayed its ancient hostility to its rival, and was soon involved in a popular war with France.”

the Government is essentially administrative — that is, conservative of the interests of all particular orders and classes; and each particular Church, parochial district, county, society, takes care of itself, so that the Government, strictly speaking, has nowhere less to do than in

England.” “Nowhere can people less tolerate free action on the part of others than in France: there the Ministry combines in itself all administrative power, to which, on the other hand, the Chamber of Deputies lays claim.”

By an inconsistency of the most startling kind, we find them contravening equity most grossly; and of institutions characterized by real freedom there are nowhere fewer than in England. In point of private right and freedom of possession they present an incredible deficiency: sufficient proof of which is afforded in the rights of primogeniture, involving the necessity of purchasing or otherwise providing military or ecclesiastical appointments for the younger sons of the aristocracy.

The Parliament governs, although Englishmen are unwilling to allow that such is the case. It is worthy of remark, that what has been always regarded as the period of the corruption of a republican people presents itself here; viz. election to seats in parliament by means of bribery. But this also they call freedom — the power to sell one’s vote, and to purchase a seat in parliament.

But this utterly inconsistent and corrupt state of things has nevertheless one advantage, that it provides for the possibility of a government — that it introduces a majority of men into parliament who are statesmen, who from their very youth have devoted themselves to political business and have worked and lived in it.” No new politics here, ma’am.

This is quite opposed to the appreciation of principles and abstract views which everyone can understand at once, and which are besides to be found in all Constitutions and Charters. It is a question whether the Reform in Parliament now on the tapis, consistently carried out, will leave the possibility of a Government.” Nada temesse, ó H.: a prosperidade britânica ainda duraria um século inteiro!

The material existence of England is based on commerce and industry, and the English have undertaken the weighty responsibility of being the missionaries of civilization to the world” Agora eles são nulidades mesmo em pautas consensuais como o aquecimento global.

A RODA COMEÇOU A GIRAR NA ALEMANHA LOGO QUE H. MORREU, QUE IRONIA! “The fiction of an Empire has utterly vanished. It is broken up into sovereign States. Feudal obligations are abolished, for freedom of property and of person have been recognized as fundamental principles. Offices of State are open to every citizen, talent and adaptation being of course the necessary conditions.”

It is certainly a very fortunate circumstance for a nation when a sovereign of noble character falls to its lot; yet in a great State even this is of small moment, since its strength lies in the Reason incorporated in it. Minor States have their existence and tranquility secured to them more or less by their neighbors: they are therefore, properly speaking, not independent, and have not the fiery trial of war to endure. [a Suíça é a prova viva] As has been remarked, a share in the government may be obtained by everyone who has a competent knowledge, experience, and a morally regulated will.”

BASICAMENTE UM EPÍLOGO: “We have confined ourselves to the consideration of that progress of the Idea (which has led to this consummation), and have been obliged to forego the pleasure of giving a detailed picture of the prosperity, the periods of glory that have distinguished the career of peoples, the beauty and grandeur of the character of individuals, and the interest attaching to their fate in weal or woe. Philosophy concerns itself only with the glory of the Idea mirroring itself in the History of the World. Philosophy escapes from the weary strife of passions that agitate the surface of society into the calm region of contemplation; that which interests it is the recognition of the process of development which the Idea has passed through in realizing itself”

Notas dos extravagantes editores e do tradutor

An incapacity for conspiracy has been remarked as a characteristic feature of the Teutonic portion of the inhabitants of the British Isles, as compared with their Celtic countrymen.”

The term CATHARI (grego). Purists [puritanos, hoje generalizado para todos os crentes] was one of the most general designations of the dissident sects in question. The German word Ketzer = heretic is by some derived from it.”

The primary meaning of the word IDEA and of the related terms EIDOS and species is <form>.”

There is no current term in English denoting that great intellectual movement which dates from the first quarter of the 18th century, [!!!] and which, if not the chief cause, was certainly the guiding genius of the French Revolution. The word Illuminati (signifying the members of an imaginary confederacy for propagating the open secret of the day), [HAHA] might suggest Illumination, as an equivalent for the German Aufklärung; but the French Éclaircissement conveys a more specific idea.” J. Sibree

The sensational conclusions of the ‘materialistic’ school of the 18th century are reached by the ‘axiom of Contradiction and Identity’, as applied in this simple dilemma: ‘In cognition, Man is either active or passive; he is not active (unless he is grossly deceiving himself), therefore he is passive; therefore all knowledge is derived ab extra. What this external objective being is of which this knowledge is the cognition, remains an eternal mystery — i.e., as Hegel says: ‘The results of thought are posited as finite.’ — J.S.

Language, the faithful conservator of metaphysical genealogies” J.S.

The radical correspondence of Gleichheit and Vergleichung is attempted to be rendered in English by the terms parity and comparison, and perhaps etymology may justify the expedient. The meaning of the derivative comparatio seems to point to the connection of its root paro with par.”

LECCIONES SOBRE LA HISTORIA DE LA FILOSOFÍA Vol. III/III – Hegel (trad. Wenceslao Roces ed. Elsa Cecilia Frost), Fondo de Cultura Económica (1833, 1955, México) /ePub r1.0 Titivillus 22.09.16

En este último tomo de las Lecciones sobre la historia de la filosofía se concentra el final de la filosofía griega, que unida a la revolución operada en el mundo por el cristianismo abre una época totalmente nueva, la filosofía medieval —cuyo espíritu, hay que reconocerlo, no fue comprendido por Hegel— [HAHAHA] y, por último, la filosofía moderna, que cierran las magníficas exposiciones¹ de Kant, Fichte y Schelling.

[¹ Assim espero – não me desaponte!…]

De acuerdo con la idea hegeliana que rige estas Lecciones, todos los milenios transcurridos desde el inicio de la filosofía con Tales de Mileto hasta el momento mismo en que Hegel dicta su curso, han sido necesarios para que pudiera llegar a producirse la filosofía alemana de esta época, pues el Espíritu del Mundo marcha siempre con paso lento y perezoso hacia su meta.”

PRIMERA PARTE:

LA FILOSOFÍA GRIEGA (cont.)

SECCIÓN TERCERA:

TERCER PERÍODO: LOS NEOPLATÓNICOS

La última fase con que nos habíamos encontrado —la que representaba el abandono de todo lo firme y objetivo, la huida a la abstracción pura e infinita de suyo, la absoluta pobreza de contenido determinado, con la consiguiente satisfacción subjetiva y el retorno a sí misma de la conciencia de sí— había encontrado su coronación y remate en el escepticismo, aunque ya el sistema estoico y el epicúreo marchasen hacia la misma meta.”

Esta idea inculcada en el hombre de que la esencia absoluta no es nada extraño para la conciencia de sí, de que para él no significa nada la esencia en que no vive su conciencia de sí inmediata, este principio se revela ahora como el principio general del Espíritu del Mundo, como la creencia y el saber generales de todos los hombres; con él se transforma de golpe todo el aspecto del universo, se destruye todo lo anterior y se produce un renacimiento del mundo.”

Cicerón pone de manifiesto como pocos filósofos un desconocimiento completo acerca de la naturaleza de su Estado y de la situación en que se encontraba”

El poder romano es el escepticismo verdadero. Pues bien, este carácter de la generalidad abstracta como despotismo absoluto, que va directamente unido en la desaparición de la vida del pueblo a la individualización de la atomística, como el retraimiento a los fines e intereses de la vida privada, es el que vemos llevarse a cabo con una correspondencia perfecta en el campo del pensamiento.”

En el mundo griego, sobre todo, vemos cómo se esfuma la alegría de la vida espiritual para dejar paso al dolor y la angustia producidos por esta ruptura.”

Esta fe en el milagro, que es al mismo tiempo la falta de fe en la naturaleza presente, lleva aparejada asimismo la incredulidad en cuanto al pasado o en cuanto al hecho de que la historia sólo haya sido lo que realmente fue. Toda la historia y la mitología verdaderas de los romanos, los griegos y los judíos, y hasta las palabras y las letras sueltas, cobran ahora otra significación: son algo roto de suyo, encierran un sentido interior que es su esencia y se manifiesta en forma de letras y signos vacíos de contenido, que son su fenómeno.” Não está exagerando?

Dios, el ser simple de los judíos, vivía para ellos fuera de la conciencia de sí; semejante Dios piensa, indudablemente, pero no es el pensamiento; se halla más allá de la realidad, es solamente la alteridad del mundo intuido a través de los sentidos.”

La idea en el pensamiento puro —la idea de que Dios no hace esto exteriormente como un sujeto, de que todo esto, por tanto, no acaece como una resolución casual de Dios y como producto de una ocurrencia suya, sino de que Dios produce este movimiento como una sucesión de momentos de su esencia que se manifiestan así como su eterna necesidad en sí mismo, que no forma parte para nada de las condiciones del acaecer— la encontramos expresada en algunos judíos filosofantes o platónicos determinados.”

Ya en la filosofía pitagórica se manifestaba la diferencia en forma de tríada; en Platón veíamos, después, la idea simple del espíritu como la unidad de la sustancia indivisible y de la alteridad, aunque solamente como una mezcla de ambas.”

FOSSILIZAÇÃO DO MUNDO-VERDADE CUJO AUGE SE DEU EM PLATÃO: “El punto de vista general de la filosofía neoplatónica o alejandrina consiste, por tanto, en crearse a base de la pérdida del universo un universo que sea, dentro de su exterioridad, un mundo interior y, por tanto, un mundo reconciliado; y este mundo es el de la espiritualidad, que comienza aquí.”

La misma libertad, bienaventuranza, imperturbabilidad que perseguían como fin el epicureísmo, el estoicismo y el escepticismo, sigue siendo ahora, es verdad, una aspiración para el sujeto; pero facilitadas esencialmente por la orientación hacia Dios, del interés por lo verdadero en y para sí, y no de la evasión de lo objetivo” Eis o maior erro: pressupor que as massas podem cumprir esse designio sábio imanente!

Ahora bien, en cuanto que la voluntad humana se determina como algo negativo frente a lo objetivo, surge el mal por oposición a lo afirmativo absoluto.”

La desventura del mundo romano estaba en abstraerse de aquello en que el hombre venía encontrando su satisfacción; esta satisfacción nacía precisamente de aquel panteísmo por virtud del cual el hombre veía la verdad y lo supremo en las cosas naturales, en el aire, el fuego, el agua, etc., y en sus propios deberes, en la vida política del Estado. Ahora, en cambio, sobreviene la desesperación en el dolor del mundo acerca de su presente, aparece la falta de fe en estas formas y manifestaciones del mundo natural finito y en el mundo moral de la vida del Estado”

Es falso lo que suele decirse de que no es necesario conocer a Dios para concebir esta relación. Por cuanto que Dios es lo primero, es Él quien determina la relación; por tanto, para llegar a saber qué es lo verdadero de la relación es necesario conocer a Dios.” Supondo que isso estivesse correto, também estaria correto que matar Deus é igualmente necessário ao final do processo…

diremos algunas palabras acerca de Filón, el judío, y señalaremos algunos momentos interesantes que se presentan en la historia de la Iglesia.”

Bajo el reinado de Calígula, Apión atacó duramente por escrito a los judíos, y Filón fue enviado a Roma como embajador de su pueblo, con la misión de inculcar a los romanos un concepto mejor del que de él tenían.”

Filón compuso una larga serie de obras, de las cuales se conservan todavía muchas, por ejemplo las que llevan por título Sobre la estructura del universo, Sobre las recompensas y los castigos, Sobre los sacrificios, Sobre la ley de las alegorías, Sobre los sueños, Sobre la inmutabilidad de Dios; las obras que de Filón se han conservado aparecieron en folio en 1691, en Francfort, y reeditadas más tarde por Pfeiffer en Erlangen. Filón era famoso por su multifacético saber y se hallaba muy familiarizado con los filósofos griegos.

Los dos rasgos que caracterizan a este pensador son: la asimilación de la filosofía platónica y su esfuerzo por poner de manifiesto la filosofía de las Sagradas Escrituras judaicas. Los relatos y descripciones de su historia del pueblo judío se distinguen porque en ellas el autor pierde todo el sentido inmediato de la realidad. A todo atribuye un significado mítico y alegórico, empeñándose por descubrir a Platón en Moisés.”

El espíritu de la filosofía obliga a los judíos a buscar en sus libros sagrados, como obligó a los paganos a buscar en Homero y en la religión popular, un profundo significado especulativo, y a presentar sus escritos religiosos como un sistema perfecto de sabiduría divina.”

En la historia, en el arte, en la filosofía, etc., lo importante es siempre que aparezca expresado lo que se quiere expresar”

Lo prosaico ha desaparecido; por eso, en los autores del siguiente período los milagros son algo usual y corriente”

Filón, De mundi opificio

como cuando decimos: «Dios Padre», es decir, este Uno no revelado, indeterminado de suyo, que aún no ha creado nada; lo otro es la determinación y la distinción con respecto a sí mismo, la creación. Lo creado es su otro, lo que a un tiempo es en él, lo que también le pertenece como suyo y es, por tanto, un momento de sí mismo, siempre y cuando concibamos a Dios como concreto y vivo”

La palabra ha sido considerada siempre como una manifestación de Dios, porque no es corporal; en cuanto sonido, desaparece inmediatamente; su existencia es pues inmaterial.” A música e a palavra como símiles eternos de Hegel para a transitoriedade e o efêmero, como a chave para entender, ao menos, sua Estética.

en realidad, cuando establecemos el ser, la nada del ser es el pensamiento, algo muy positivo.”Por mais boba e trivial que soe, esta frase é fundamental para compreender H..

Llámase cábala a la sabiduría secreta de los judíos, en la que se deslizan, sin embargo, muchos elementos turbios; y también sus orígenes aparecen envueltos entre nubes de fábula. Dícese que esta sabiduría se contenía en dos libros: el Jezirah (Creación) y el Zohar (Resplandor). El primero de estos dos libros, considerado como el principal y atribuido a un rabí llamado Akiba, espera en la actualidad una edición más completa que prepara el Sr. v. Mayer, en Francfort.(*)

(*) Apareció en 1894, traducido y anotado por Goldschmidt [E.].” E no entanto é basicamente só o segundo (e falo de pequenos trechos) que se encontra por aí hoje.

La cábala no tiene evidentemente un origen tan antiguo como el que sus adoradores le atribuyen, pues según ellos este libro divino le fue entregado a Adán para consolarlo del pecado original. Es una mescolanza de preceptos de astronomía, de magia, de medicina y de profecía. El rastro histórico revela que estas ciencias y estas prácticas eran cultivadas en Egipto. Akiba vivió poco después de la destrucción de Jerusalén y tomó parte en la revuelta de los judíos contra el emperador Adriano, en la que aquéllos lograron levantar un ejército de 200 mil hombres para proclamar como Mesías a Barcoquebas; pero la rebelión fue sofocada y el rabino desollado vivo. El segundo libro fue compuesto, al parecer, por un discípulo suyo, el rabí Simeón Ben Joachi, llamado la Gran Luz, la chispa de Moisés. (Brucker) Ambos libros fueron traducidos al latín en el siglo XVII. Un israelita especulativo, el rabí Abraham Cohen Irira, escribió también un libro titulado La puerta del cielo (Porta coelorum), pero éste es posterior, del siglo XV, y denota ya relaciones con los árabes y los escolásticos.”

Antiguamente, no se encontraba en los judíos nada que guarde relación con esas ideas en que se representa a Dios como una luz, en perpetua lucha con un ser hecho de sombra y que encarna el mal, nada de ángeles buenos y malos, de la caída de los ángeles malos, de su condenación, de su estancia en los infiernos, del juicio final en que habrán de ser juzgados los buenos y los malos y de la corrupción de la carne. En estos libros, los judíos empiezan a remontar sus pensamientos por encima de la realidad. Empieza a abrirse ante ellos un mundo espiritual o, por lo menos, un mundo de espíritus, ya que hasta ahora estos judíos no veían más allá de los horizontes de su propia vida, hundidos en la basura y las pretensiones de su existencia y entregados por entero a la conservación de su pueblo y de sus generaciones.

La cábala viene a ser, sobre poco más o menos, lo siguiente. Lo Uno aparece proclamado como el principio de todas las cosas, es también la fuente primigenia de todos los números. Pero, así como la unidad no es un número de tantos, otro tanto acontece con Dios, fundamento de todas las cosas, el Ensoph. La emanación relacionada con ello es el efecto de la primera causa, logrado mediante la restricción de aquel primer fundamento infinito al que aquélla sirve de límite.” “Primeramente se producen 10 emanaciones de éstas, Sephiroth, que forman el mundo puro, azilútico, a cuyo ser es ajeno todo cambio. Viene después el mundo briáhtico, sujeto a mudanzas. El tercer mundo es el mundo formado o jezirático (…) Viene, en cuarto lugar, el mundo hecho o asiáhtico, que es el mundo más bajo de todos, el mundo sensible y vegetativo.” Somos todos Asiáhticos!

Los gnósticos, que aparecen divididos en muchas sectas, tienen como fundamento determinaciones semejantes a las que ya hemos expuesto. El profesor Neander las ha reunido con gran acopio de erudición y las ha estudiado en detalle; algunas formas corresponden a las que hemos señalado más arriba. Su orientación era el conocimiento (γνῶσις), de donde esta corriente toma, además, el nombre.” TAL, Neander. Conhecimento primitivo, 120.000.000 a.C..

Uno de los gnósticos más destacados es Basílides. También él considera como lo primero al Dios indecible (θεὸἄς άρρητος), que es el Ensoph de la cábala”

Neander, Genetische Entwicklung der vornehmsten gnostischen Systeme «Evolución genética de los sistemas gnósticos más importantes»

La ciudad de Alejandría habíase convertido, en efecto, desde hacía mucho tiempo, sobre todo gracias a los Tolomeos, en la sede principal de las ciencias. Aquí entraban en contacto, se influían mutuamente y se entremezclaban, como en su verdadero centro, todas las religiones y mitologías de los pueblos de Oriente y Occidente, lo mismo que su historia, bajo las más diversas formas y manifestaciones. Las religiones eran comparadas las unas con las otras: en cada una de ellas se buscaba y acoplaba lo que contenían las otras; y, sobre todo, se atribuía a las representaciones religiosas un profundo significado y un sentido alegórico general.

Estas tendencias engendraron y tenían, evidentemente, que engendrar oscuros abortos, el más puro de los cuales es la filosofía alejandrina, ya que la fusión de las filosofías tenía que resultar más fácil que aquellas otras combinaciones de tipo religioso que no son sino turbios engendros de una razón que aún no ha llegado a comprenderse a sí misma.”

La modalidad de la filosofía cultivada en Alejandría no seguía, por tanto, las huellas de ninguna escuela filosófica anterior determinada, sino que en sus manifestaciones reconocía como una unidad los diversos sistemas de la filosofía, principalmente el pitagórico, el platónico y el aristotélico, lo cual hace que se la presente, muchas veces, como eclecticismo. Brucker (Hist. crit. phil. t. II, p. 193) es, según lo que yo he podido ver, el primero que ha emitido este juicio; le dio pie para ello, sin embargo, Diógenes Laercio” “Por otra parte, Diógenes es anterior a la escuela de Alejandría, y Pótamo fue, según Suidas (s.v. Ποταμών, t. III, p. 161), preceptor de los hijastros de Augusto: para un maestro de príncipes, hay que reconocer que el eclecticismo es una doctrina muy adecuada. [ironia?] Y como este Pótamo era alejandrino, Brucker se cree autorizado a extender la calificación de ecléctica a la filosofía alejandrina en su conjunto, lo cual ni es justo en cuanto a la cosa misma, ni refleja tampoco la verdad histórica.

El eclecticismo es algo muy malo si se le toma en el sentido de una mescolanza que se forma inconsecuentemente, tomando unas cosas de una filosofía y otras de otra, como esos vestidos hechos con retazos de distintas telas y diversos colores.” “las gentes listas que proceden así conscientemente, creen lograr lo mejor tomando lo bueno de cada sistema, como lo llaman, para formarse de este modo un acervo con los mejores pensamientos; con lo que reúnen indudablemente todo lo bueno, pero nunca la consecuencia del pensamiento ni, por tanto, el pensamiento mismo.” “En este sentido, también fue ecléctico Platón, ya que en su filosofía se unifican los principios de Pitágoras, Heráclito y Parménides; como son eclécticos los filósofos de Alejandría, en cuanto que tienen tanto de pitagóricos como de platónicos y aristotélicos. Lo que ocurre es que este calificativo de «ecléctico» lleva siempre consigo la idea de la mescolanza y la selección.”

La filosofía neoplatónica no formaba, pues, una escuela filosófica propia y especial como las anteriores, sino que las reunía y unificaba todas, aunque consagrándose de un modo muy especial al estudio de Platón, Aristóteles y los pitagóricos.” “Estos comentarios de los filósofos antiguos se ofrecían en forma de cursos o por escrito; se han conservado muchos de ellos, algunos de los cuales son, hay que reconocerlo, excelentes.” “Los mejores comentarios proceden de esta época; la mayoría de las obras de Proclo son comentarios acerca de diálogos sueltos de Platón”

Ammonio Saccas, que quiere decir «cargador de sacos», aparece citado como uno de los primeros o más famosos maestros de esta escuela; murió el año 243 d.C.. Pero no poseemos ninguna obra de él, ni ha llegado tampoco a nosotros la menor noticia acerca de su filosofía. Entre los numerosos discípulos de Ammonio figuraban muchos hombres famosos en otras ciencias, por ejemplo Longino y más tarde Orígenes, aunque no se sabe con seguridad si sería éste, realmente, el famoso Padre de la Iglesia. Pero el más célebre de los discípulos de Ammonio, como filósofo, fue Plotino, cuyas obras son las que más han contribuido a dar a conocer la filosofía neoplatónica. La posteridad atribuye a Plotino, en realidad, todo el conjunto coherente de esta filosofía, considerándola, en rigor, como suya.

Los discípulos de Ammonio juramentábanse, según los deseos de su maestro, para no poner por escrito su filosofía en ninguna clase de obras; así se explica por qué Plotino no empezó a escribir hasta muy tarde; en realidad, las obras que de él se han conservado no fueron editadas sino hasta después de su muerte por uno de sus discípulos, Porfirio.”

Plotino era egipcio y nació hacia el año 205 d.C., en Licópolis, bajo el gobierno de Septimio Severo. Después de haber estudiado con muchos maestros filosóficos, fue formándose en él un carácter melancólico y cavilador; a los 28 años, conoció a Ammonio, en cuya enseñanza encontró, por fin, su espíritu la paz y la satisfacción que buscaba, habiendo permanecido por espacio de 11 años al lado del nuevo maestro.

Como por aquel entonces estaba en gran predicamento la sabiduría india y brahmánica, Plotino se enroló en el ejército del emperador Gordiano que había de tomar parte en la campaña de Persia, pero el fracaso de esta expedición hizo que se frustrase el propósito de Plotino, el cual sólo a duras penas logró salvar la vida. Cumplidos ya los 40 años, se trasladó a Roma, donde permaneció por espacio de 26, hasta que le sorprendió la muerte.” Nada acontecia, porcada (antes de inventarem a feijoada!).

POR FALAR EM CARNE, ALIÁS: “En Roma llevó una vida bastante singular, absteniéndose de comer carne, a la manera de los pitagóricos, sometiéndose a frecuentes ayunos y vistiendo, además, el traje de los pitagóricos antiguos.” Por isso morreu antes dos 70, tsc.

El emperador Galiano que ocupaba a la sazón el trono y que le tenía en gran estima, lo mismo que la emperatriz, estaba inclinado, según se cuenta, a conceder al filósofo una ciudad de la Campania para que instaurase en ella la república platónica. Los ministros impidieron, sin embargo, la realización de este plan y no cabe duda de que obraron muy cuerdamente, pues dada la situación exterior del imperio romano y el completo cambio operado en el espíritu de los hombres desde los tiempos de Platón, es indudable que una empresa como ésta, de haber llegado a realizarse, no habría servido, ni mucho menos, para honrar a la república platónica — menos aún que en tiempos del propio Platón. Y suponiendo que semejante plan hubiese sido concebido por el mismo Plotino, no dice mucho ciertamente en su favor; sin embargo, no es posible saber a ciencia cierta si su plan se refería exclusivamente a la república platónica o contenía ciertas ampliaciones o modificaciones. La implantación de un verdadero estado platónico habría sido ciertamente, en tales circunstancias, contrario a la naturaleza de las cosas, ya que la república imaginada por Platón era un Estado libre e independiente, cosa que en modo alguno podía ser evidentemente la república que se proyectaba instaurar dentro del marco del imperio romano.”

Las obras de Plotino fueron reunidas bajo el título general de Enéadas, 6 en total, cada una de las cuales contiene 9 estudios sueltos. Poseemos, por tanto, en conjunto, 54 estudios o libros de éstos, cada uno de los cuales se divide, a su vez, en numerosos capítulos; trátase, pues, de una obra muy extensa y ramificada. Sin embargo, el conjunto de estos libros no forma un todo coherente, sino que, realmente, cada uno de ellos aborda y trata filosóficamente una materia distinta, lo que hace que sean verdaderamente fatigosos la lectura o el estudio de toda la obra.” Como se Aristóteles tivesse decidido deixar por escrito o que fôra o Platonismo, portanto…

hay algunos libros en los que pueden captarse bastante bien sus ideas, sin que la lectura de los demás represente un gran progreso. En Plotino predominan especialmente las ideas y las expresiones de Platón, aunque nos encontramos también en él con muchas prolijas exposiciones al modo aristotélico: las formas de la dínamis, la energía, etc., señaladas por Aristóteles son muy familiares a Plotino y su exposición y sus combinaciones constituyen uno de los temas predilectos de su estudio.”

Ahora bien, si entramos a examinar más de cerca lo que esta filosofía es, vemos que en ella no se habla ya para nada de criterio, como en los estoicos y los epicúreos, sino que la tendencia de Plotino es a situarse en el centro, en la pura intuición, en el pensamiento puro. Por tanto, lo que constituye la meta para los estoicos y los epicúreos, la unidad del alma consigo misma en la ataraxia, es aquí el punto de partida: Plotino se coloca en el punto de vista que consiste en provocar este estado dentro de sí mismo como un estado de arrobamiento (ἔκστασις), así lo llama, como un estado de entusiasmo. Basándose, en parte, en este nombre mismo y, en parte, en la propia cosa se ha encontrado la razón para calificar a Plotino de místico y de estrafalario; y tal es en efecto la fama general de que aparece rodeada esta filosofía, con lo que, por otra parte, no deja de contrastar bastante el hecho de que cifre la verdad única y exclusivamente en la razón y en la comprensión.

Por lo que se refiere, en primer lugar, al nombre mismo de éxtasis, quienes califican a Plotino de místico ven en esto algo muy semejante al estado a que se transportan en su espíritu los indios, los brahmanes y los monjes y monjas locos que, para recogerse por entero dentro de sí mismos, se esfuerzan por sustraerse a todas las representaciones y a todas las sensaciones de la realidad que los rodea, hundiéndose en este estado de arrobamiento de un modo permanente y entregándose por entero a esta contemplación del vacío, ya vean en él una claridad o un reino de sombras, y sobreponiéndose a todo movimiento, a toda diferencia y, en general, a todo pensamiento. La mística cifra la verdad en un ser que ocupa un lugar intermedio entre la realidad y el concepto, en algo que no es realidad, pero que tampoco puede ser concebido, que no es, por tanto, sino un ente de la imaginación. Pues bien, Plotino se halla extraordinariamente alejado de todo esto.

Sin embargo, lo que le ha dado esta fama, por lo que se refiere a la cosa misma es, en parte, el hecho de que se rienda frecuentemente a llamar misticismo a todo aquello que trasciende la conciencia sensible o los conceptos determinados del entendimiento, considerados en su limitación como esencias; y, en parte, también su manera que consiste en hablar en general de conceptos, de momentos espirituales como si se tratase de verdaderas sustancias.”

en las biografías de los grandes maestros de esta escuela, de un Plotino, un Porfirio y un Jámblico, encontramos, lo mismo que en la de Pitágoras, algunos rasgos de magia y milagrería. Y como, además, seguían conservando la fe en los dioses paganos, afirmaban con respecto a la adoración de las imágenes de los dioses que éstas se hallaban llenas, en efecto, de virtud y presencia divinas. (…) respecto a las imágenes de los dioses, no encontramos en las obras de Plotino nada semejante.”

Es evidente que si llamamos misticismo a todo lo que sea elevarse al plano de las verdades especulativas que se hallan en contradicción con las categorías del entendimiento finito, tendremos que acusar también a los alejandrinos de esta culpa; pero con la misma razón podríamos, entonces, llamar mística a la filosofía de Platón o de Aristóteles. Es indudable que Plotino habla con entusiasmo de la exaltación del espíritu en el pensamiento; pero éste es, en realidad, el auténtico entusiasmo platónico, el elevarse a la órbita del movimiento del pensamiento.”

Así concebido, es evidente que Dios es un más allá de la conciencia individual de sí mismo: de una parte, en cuanto esencia o pensamiento puro; de otra parte, en cuanto que Dios, como algo real y concreto, es la naturaleza misma, la cual se halla más allá del pensamiento. Pero precisamente esta modalidad objetiva retorna por sí misma a la esencia; o, dicho de otro modo, la individualidad de la conciencia es superada.” “La idea de la filosofía de Plotino es, por tanto, un intelectualismo o un elevado idealismo, el cual, sin embargo, por el lado del concepto, no es aún un idealismo acabado: pero aquello de que Plotino cobra conciencia en su éxtasis son, en realidad, pensamientos filosóficos, conceptos e ideas de carácter especulativo.”

La revelación de lo infinito cabe representarse, en efecto, de muy diversos modos, y en los tiempos modernos se ha hablado mucho de lo que se produce partiendo de Dios, pero esto es siempre una representación sensible o algo inmediato. No se expresa con ello la necesidad del revelarse a sí mismo, sino que se establece simplemente un acaecer. Para la representación basta con que el Padre engendre al Hijo eterno; como aquella Trinidad aparece certeramente concebida la idea en lo que se refiere también al contenido, lo cual merece tenerse en alta estima. Pero el que estas determinaciones sean verdaderas no quiere decir que sea suficiente y satisfactoria, por ese solo hecho, la forma de la inmediatidad del movimiento para el concepto. Sino que, como el devenir de la unidad simple, en cuanto aquel levantamiento de todos los predicados, es precisamente esta misma negatividad absoluta que es en sí el producirse mismo, resulta que no se debe partir de la unidad para pasar luego a la dualidad, sino concebir ambas cosas como una sola.”

la luz de la luz”

«La materia es un verdadero no-ser, como el movimiento que se destruye a sí mismo: la inquietud absoluta, pero quieta de suyo, es decir, lo contrario de lo que en sí misma es; es lo grande pequeño, lo pequeño grande, lo más que es menos y lo menos que es más. Así determinada, la materia es más bien lo contrario de lo que es; en efecto, intuida o establecida es como algo que huye; o no establecida, es algo establecido, lo simplemente engañoso.»

También el mal, como lo contrapuesto al bien, comienza a ser ahora objeto de consideración, pues el problema del origen del mal necesariamente tiene que interesar a la conciencia del hombre de un modo general. Lo negativo frente al pensar es estatuido por los filósofos alejandrinos como materia; ahora bien, en cuanto que se presenta la conciencia del espíritu concreto, también lo negativo abstracto es concebido de este modo concreto como dentro del espíritu mismo y, por tanto, como lo espiritual negativo.”

«Ahora bien, ¿cómo se conoce el mal? En cuanto que el pensar se vuelve de espaldas a sí mismo, nace la materia; ésta sólo nace mediante la abstracción de lo otro. Lo que queda cuando retiramos las ideas es, decimos, la materia; el pensamiento se convierte, por tanto, en otra cosa, en un no-pensamiento, en cuanto que se atreve a proyectarse sobre lo que no es lo suyo. Así como el ojo se desvía de la luz para mirar a las tinieblas, en las que no puede ver —he aquí, precisamente, un ver que es un no-ver—, así también el pensamiento sufre lo contrario de lo que es para poder ver lo contrario a él.»

No existiría el mal si no existiese la materia; la naturaleza del universo es una mezcla hecha de νοῦς y de necesidad. Ser entre los dioses quiere decir ser en el pensamiento, pues los dioses son inmortales. También podríamos concebir la necesidad del mal del modo siguiente: como el bien no puede existir solo, la materia es necesaria como contrapartida de él. O cabría decir, asimismo, que el mal es lo extremo mediante la continua degradación y la caída, lo que por este camino no puede llegar ya a ser; de todos modos, es necesario que exista algo después de lo primero, como lo extremo. Y esto es, en efecto, la materia, que no tiene ya nada de ello; en esto reside precisamente la necesidad del mal.»

Los gnósticos convierten lo espiritual, lo intelectual, en lo único verdadero; pues bien, Plotino se declara rotundamente contrario a esta pura intelectualidad y mantiene como esencial la coordinación de lo real con lo inteligible. Plotino honraba a los dioses paganos, atribuyéndoles un sentido profundo y una profunda efectividad. Y así vemos que dice, en el mismo estudio (cap. 16): «No es despreciando al mundo y a los dioses en él y a las demás cosas bellas como puede el hombre alcanzar el bien. El malo desprecia a los dioses, y cuando lo hace es verdaderamente malo. La supuesta adoración de los dioses inteligibles (νοητοὺς θεούς) por los gnósticos no envuelve nada semejante (ἀσυμπαθὴς ἂν γένοιτο)», es decir, no puede darse una armonía en los pensamientos y en el mundo real, cuando el espíritu se mantiene exclusivamente dentro de lo pensado.”

Desdoblamiento, emanación, producción, alumbramiento, desprendimiento: son todas palabras muy empleadas también en los tiempos modernos, pero que no dicen nada. El escepticismo y el dogmatismo, como conciencia, como conocimiento, entrañan la contraposición de subjetividad y objetividad. Plotino desecha este antagonismo y se lanza a la región más alta, al pensamiento del pensamiento aristotélico; toma mucho más de Aristóteles que de Platón y, al hacerlo así, no procede dialécticamente, ni trascendiendo de sí mismo, ni retrotrayéndose de sí a sí mismo como conciencia.”

De Porfirio se ha conservado también, entre otras obras, una «Introducción» al Organon de Aristóteles acerca de los géneros, las especies y los juicios, que son los momentos fundamentales en que el discípulo de Plotino expone la lógica del Estagirita. Esta obra ha sido utilizada en todos los tiempos como manual para exponer la lógica de Aristóteles y una de las fuentes de que disponemos para estudiar su forma; en realidad, nuestros tratados usuales de lógica contienen sólo poco más de lo que nos ofrece esta exposición de Porfirio.”

Con Jámblico, desciende el pensamiento al rango de lo imaginativo y el universo intelectual se convierte en un mundo de ángeles y demonios, perfectamente clasificados, al paso que la especulación degenera en magia. Los neoplatónicos llamaban a esto teurgia (θεουργία)” “No se sabe con seguridad si la obra De mysteriis Aegyptiorum, atribuida a Jámblico, es realmente suya. Proclo habrá de asignar a esta obra, más tarde, una gran importancia, asegurando que de ella procede su idea fundamental.”

Proclo marca la culminación de la filosofía neoplatónica; ahora bien, esta filosofía sigue manifestándose hasta una época muy tardía, incluso a través de toda la Edad Media.” Período nulo em termos de filosofia. Não perder nenhum segundo com estes autores.

La Academia, el año 529 d.C., fue ordenada a la clausura junto con la escuela, por el emperador Justiniano, quien, además, expulsó de su reino a todos los filósofos paganos; entre ellos se encontraba Simplicio, famoso comentador de Aristóteles de cuyos comentarios hay algunos que no han sido publicados aún.”

Se ha dicho: «lo que tenemos entre nosotros cuando, en nuestro gabinete, vemos cómo los filósofos disputan y se van a las manos, llegando a tales o cuales soluciones, no son más que abstracciones hechas de palabras». Pero esto es falso; completamente falso. No son tales abstracciones, sino hechos del Espíritu del Mundo y, por tanto, del destino.”

Um paradoxo: chama os gregos de incompletos e ingênuos, mas a primeira parte ocupa 75% de sua obra… Agora a marcha do Espírito mal tem o que fazer (e veremos que rodopia ainda muito vanamente quando o assunto é Filosofia Alemã!)…

SEGUNDA PARTE:

LA FILOSOFÍA DE LA EDAD MEDIA

INTRODUCCIÓN

El segundo período llega hasta el siglo XVI, abarcando, por tanto, otros mil años, que procuraremos recorrer aquí con botas de 7 leguas.”

Se ha llamado al conocimiento de esta necesidad una construcción de la historia a priori; pero de nada sirve tratar de desacreditar este método como inadmisible e incluso como un alarde de soberbia. Unos se empeñan en ver en la historia una evolución puramente contingente. Otros, tomando más en serio la providencia y el gobierno universal de Dios, se representan la cosa como si el cristianismo fuese algo ya preexistente y perfecto dentro de la cabeza de Dios, siendo lo contingente únicamente el momento en que aparece en el mundo.”

Lo que se dice del hombre como tal, lo que es en general cada hombre en sí, es lo que aquí se representa bajo la forma del primer hombre, de Adán”

MÁ-FEZES: “Pues la idea filosófica es la idea de Dios, y el pensamiento tiene un derecho absoluto a ser reconciliado o, para decirlo de otro modo, a que el principio cristiano corresponda al pensamiento.”

Y lo que la Reforma hace no es levantar un edificio doctrinal nuevo, sino limpiar el antiguo de sus aditamentos posteriores.” O lerdo Espírito do Mundo vacilou 1500 anos… Isso se tomarmos o ponto de vista protestante!!

Con ello se abandona el desarrollo de los conceptos que forman la doctrina del cristianismo basada en la idea y obtenida a través de ella, para volver a la modalidad de su primera manifestación (…) de tal modo que hoy [NA ALEMANHA] sólo se considera como base del cristianismo lo que las fuentes narran acerca de su primera manifestación.”

Claro está que, cuando del espíritu se trata, será necesario ver qué clase de espíritu es, pues los espíritus no son todos iguales, ni mucho menos.” HAHAHAHA!

Se encuentra lo que se busca” HM

Casi podría decirse que, de este modo, se ha querido hacer de la Biblia una especie de molde: el uno encuentra en ella esto y el otro aquello, y es que lo firme pierde en seguida su firmeza cuando se lo enfoca con espíritu subjetivo.”

Jesus, o primeiro teleólogo da Terra.

Los gnósticos eran, pues, contrarios a la Iglesia de Occidente y ésta, al igual que Plotino y los neoplatónicos, combatió muchas veces y desde distintos puntos de vista al gnosticismo, precisamente porque estas doctrinas se atenían exclusivamente a lo general, concebían la representación bajo la forma de la capacidad imaginativa y oponían estas representaciones al Cristo encarnado (Χριστὸς ἐν σαρκί).”

Esta alma prisionera es llamada también por Manes el «hijo del hombre», o sea del hombre primigenio, del hombre celestial, de Adán Cadmón.” Prisioneira da matéria. Da carne e do pecado.

los seres luminosos prisioneros hubieron de elevarse del ciclo de la metempsicosis a la unión directa y restaurada con el reino de la luz.” Tudo isso está na bíblia? Mas então temos que ter olhos de águia para ler essa porra e tirar algum proveito!

Los arrianos consideran a Cristo como un hombre, lo exaltan al plano de una naturaleza superior, pero sin ver en Él un momento de Dios, un momento del Espíritu mismo. Es cierto que los arrianos no van tan allá como los socinianos, quienes ven en Cristo simplemente a un hombre extraordinario, a un maestro, etc., razón por la cual esta secta no formaba parte de la Iglesia, sino que se hallaba aún dentro del paganismo.” A descrição que se faz da crença arriana já dá a impressão de que eles afirmam isso que os socinianos afirmam… Bom, tanto faz, todos esses sectários eram queimados na fogueira igual nos tempos inquisitoriais! Eu sou a metempsicose destes meus pais azarados…

De este modo, la Iglesia se halla gobernada por el Espíritu para poder atenerse a las determinaciones de la idea, pero siempre de un modo histórico. Tal es la filosofía de los Padres de la Iglesia” Em outras palabras: os Padres da Igreja estavam certos até serem abandonados pelo Espírito, que se alojou em Luteros e Calvinos! Pra onde ele foi? Onde está agora?!

y no puede imaginase nada más torpe que la aspiración o el anhelo de algunos modernos de retrotraer la Iglesia a su forma primitiva.” Quem te viu, quem te vê! Já se olhou no espelho?

Lo judaico se halla formado desde el primer momento por este sentimiento de su propia nulidad: es una miseria, una vileza, en que no hay nada que tenga vida y conciencia. Este punto concreto cobrará más tarde, en su tiempo, valor histórico-universal; y en este elemento de la nada de la realidad se eleva el universo entero, partiendo precisamente de este principio, al reino del pensamiento, en cuanto que aquella nada se trueca en lo positivo reconciliado.”

sólo el nórdico ser-dentro-de-sí constituye el principio inmediato de esta nueva conciencia del mundo.” “Es como si tratase de apagar el sol para alumbrarse con bujías y arreglarse simplemente con imágenes; se reconcilia simplemente en sí, en su interior, y no para la conciencia: para la conciencia de sí existe solamente un mundo malo, pecaminoso.” “El Espíritu del Mundo había confiado a las naciones germánicas la misión de desarrollar el embrión, convirtiéndolo en la forma del hombre pensante.” Isso adquire cada vez mais os ares de uma saga d’Os Cavaleiros do Zodíaco em Asgard

Digamos, en líneas generales, algo acerca de estos fenómenos que no es posible calificar ciertamente de agradables.” Fala do mundo-verdade divorciado.

La filosofía, al igual que las ciencias y las artes, obligadas a enmudecer en el Occidente bajo el imperio de los bárbaros germánicos, van a refugiarse entre los árabes, donde acusan un espléndido florecimiento; y de aquí refluyen luego al Occidente.” A solução mundial deveria consistir em vedar qualquer trânsito e comunicação entre ocidente e oriente. Cultural ou de ogivas nucleares. Tudo que for cultura ocidental e bomba atômica fica do lado do Tio Sam. A nós, orientalistas, nossos nirvanas sutis, mil odores de rosas que aprendemos a distinguir… E então chega-se à Unidade do Mundo verdadeira, já que o Ocidente – para lá – é só um além, nem é mais mundo

Dentro de este período habremos de estudiar primeramente, por tanto, la filosofía oriental, y en segundo lugar, la filosofía occidental; es decir, primero la filosofía de los árabes y después la filosofía escolástica. Los escolásticos son los principales personajes de este período en que ahora entramos: la escolástica es la filosofía europea de la Europa medieval. La tercera fase nos revela la disolución de los resultados establecidos por la filosofía escolástica”

SECCIÓN PRIMERA:

LA FILOSOFÍA DE LOS ÁRABES

En Siria, que era un reino griego, en las ciudades de Antioquía y especialmente en las de Berito y Edesa, funcionaban importantes centros de enseñanza; de este modo, los sirios vinieron a ser el puente entre los árabes y la filosofía griega. El sirio era lengua popular incluso en Bagdad.”

Una descripción especial de la filosofía árabe ofrece poco interés y, por otra parte, resultaría superflua, ya que lo fundamental de ella es común también a la filosofía escolástica.”

Este panteísmo o, si se quiere, spinozismo es, así, la concepción general de los poetas, historiadores y filósofos orientales.”

Por tanto, la actividad de Dios se representa como algo perfectamente irracional. Esta negatividad abstracta, combinada con lo uno que permanece, es uno de los conceptos fundamentales de la manera oriental de concebir el universo.”

Alfarabi (…) De él se cuenta que había leído 40x el tratado Del oído, de Aristóteles, y 200x su Retórica, sin llegar a cansarse nunca; se ve que tenía un buen estómago.”

Durante mucho tiempo, los occidentales no conocieron otra cosa de Aristóteles que estas retraducciones de sus obras y las traducciones de los comentarios de los árabes en torno a ellas.”

Tras los árabes vienen los filósofos judíos, entre los que se destaca Moisés Maimónides. Maimónides nació en Córdoba de España el año 1131 (año del mundo de 4891 y, según otros, el 4895) y vivió en Egipto.” “En la filosofía de estos autores penetra, en gran parte, lo cabalístico en la astrología, la geomancia, etc.; en cambio, en las obras de Maimónides se toma como base la historia, lo mismo que en los escritos de los Padres de la Iglesia; el método seguido es el de una metafísica rigurosamente abstracta, entrelazada, al modo de los escritos de Filón, con los libros mosaicos y su explicación.”

SECCIÓN SEGUNDA:

LA FILOSOFÍA ESCOLÁSTICA

Primeiro grande equívoco: veremos que H. sequer cita Cidade de Deus.

De categoriis, atribuidos a San Agustín (…) es una paráfrasis de la obra de Aristóteles sobre las categorías.”

La filosofía escolástica presenta, en su conjunto, una apariencia unicolor. En vano se han esforzado hasta ahora algunos autores en introducir algunas diferencias y gradaciones en la dominación de esta teología, durante el período que va desde el siglo VIII y hasta desde el VI hasta casi el XVI. La filosofía escolástica, al igual que la arábiga, se desarrolla al margen del tiempo y, aunque así no fuera, la naturaleza misma de la cosa no permite clasificarla en diversos sistemas o manifestaciones, sino simplemente dar una caracterización y una indicación fundamental de los momentos que acusa realmente en la trayectoria del pensamiento.

Esta filosofía no es interesante por su contenido, ya que no es posible detenerse en él. No es en rigor tal filosofía; este nombre designa aquí en realidad más bien una manera general que un sistema, si es que cabe hablar, propiamente, de sistemas filosóficos. La escolástica no es una doctrina fija, al modo como lo es, por ejemplo, la filosofía platónica o la escéptica, sino un nombre muy vago, muy impreciso, que agrupa las diversas corrientes filosóficas producidas en el seno del cristianismo durante casi un milenio.”

El estudio de la filosofía escolástica es difícil, ya por el lenguaje mismo. Las expresiones empleadas por los escolásticos son evidentemente un latín bárbaro; sin embargo, ésta no es una falta imputable a los escolásticos mismos, sino más bien a la cultura latina de su tiempo. El latín es indudablemente un instrumento de expresión poco adecuado para estas categorías filosóficas, ya que los criterios de la nueva dirección espiritual sólo podían ser expresados por medio del lenguaje a costa de violentarlo; el bello latín ciceroniano no se presta tampoco para hundirse en profundas especulaciones. Pues bien, a nadie se le puede pedir que conozca directamente esta filosofía de la Edad Media, tan extensa y voluminosa como pobre y aterradora por el modo como se hallan escritas las obras que la contienen.

Poseemos aún muchas obras de los grandes escolásticos, obras casi todas ellas muy extensas y prolijas, lo que hace de su estudio una faena nada fácil; además, estas obras son más formales cuanto más posteriores. Los escolásticos no se limitaron, ni mucho menos, a escribir compendios; las obras de Duns Escoto, por ejemplo, forman 12 infolios y las de Tomás de Aquino 18. Se encuentran extractos de ellas en diversos lugares.”

Kramer, su continuación de la Historia universal de Bossuet, en los 2 últimos volúmenes

El nombre de escolasticismo proviene del hecho de que, desde los tiempos de Carlomagno, se daba el nombre de scholasticus, en las grandes escuelas anejas a las grandes iglesias-catedrales y a los monasterios importantes, al canónigo a quien estaba encomendada la inspección de los profesores (informatores) y que probablemente pronunciaba también, personalmente, lecciones acerca de la ciencia más importante de la época, que era la teología.”

la teología es, en rigor, la ciencia de los conceptos doctrinales que todo cristiano, sea campesino o lo que fuere, debe abrigar. A veces, con frecuencia, la cientificidad de la teología se cifra en el contenido histórico externo, en lo crítico: en el hecho, por ejemplo, de que existan tantos o cuantos códices del Nuevo Testamento, en que estos códices aparezcan escritos sobre pergamino, sobre tela o sobre papel, en que presenten el tipo uncial de escritura, procedente de tal o cual siglo, etc.; y además en lo que se refiere a la historia de los judíos, a la historia de los papas, de los obispos y Padres de la Iglesia, a lo ocurrido en los concilios y asambleas eclesiásticas, etc.” “El tema esencial y único de la teología, como teoría de lo divino, es la naturaleza de Dios; y este contenido es, por su naturaleza, esencialmente especulativo, por lo cual los teólogos que de él se ocupen tienen que ser necesariamente filósofos.”

La naturaleza, aquí, ya no es lo bueno, sino solamente lo negativo; la conciencia de sí, el pensamiento del hombre, su «sí mismo» puro: todo esto ocupa una posición puramente negativa, dentro del cristianismo.” “En esta ausencia de la racionalidad de lo real o de la racionalidad que tiene su realidad en la existencia misma consistía la barbarie de un pensamiento como éste, que se aferraba a otro mundo y se empeñaba en no poseer el concepto de la razón, es decir, el concepto de que la certeza de sí mismo es toda la verdad.”

De aquí que los escolásticos se hayan hecho célebres por sus interminables distinciones. En función de estas determinaciones por medio del concepto abstracto seguía imperando la filosofía aristotélica, pero no en toda su extensión, sino solamente en la parte recogida en el Organon, y tanto en cuanto a sus leyes del pensamiento como en lo tocante a los conceptos metafísicos, a las categorías.”

Así como los sofistas griegos, en función de la realidad, daban vueltas y más vueltas a los conceptos abstractos, los escolásticos hacían lo mismo en función de su mundo intelectual. § La forma general de la filosofía escolástica consiste, pues, en sentar una tesis, en alegar una serie de objeciones contra ella y en ir refutando estas objeciones por medio de distinciones y contra-silogismos. El escolasticismo, por tanto, no separa la filosofía de la teología”

los individuos cristianos, en el mundo, eran simplemente mártires o renunciaban a él. Pero la Iglesia acabó imponiéndose; los emperadores romanos de Oriente y Occidente se hicieron cristianos y la Iglesia conquistó, así, una existencia pública y una autoridad sin menoscabo, que acabó influyendo extraordinariamente sobre las cosas del mundo.”

Vemos a pueblos que dominaron en una etapa anterior, vemos a un mundo perteneciente ya al pasado, pero que ha legado, como patrimonio vivo, su lengua, sus artes y sus ciencias; y sobre el suelo de esta cultura extraña a ellas se asientan las nuevas naciones, que aparecen así ante la historia, en el momento mismo de nacer, con una vida rota y precaria. Esta historia no nos revela, pues, la trayectoria de una nación que se desarrolle a base de sí misma, sino la de una nación que parte, en cierto modo, de su propia negación y que nace llevando esta contradicción en su entraña y con la misión de asimilársela o superarla.”

Por eso, aun habiendo llegado a triunfar el cristianismo como Iglesia lo mismo en el mundo romano que en el bizantino, nos encontramos con que ninguno de estos 2 mundos fue capaz de desarrollar en su seno la nueva religión y de crear un nuevo mundo a base de este principio. La razón de ello está en que en ambos existía ya, cuando el cristianismo apareció, un carácter fijo y plasmado: costumbres, leyes, estado jurídico, organización del Estado (si es que a aquello se le puede llamar organización), estructura política, dotes y habilidades, arte, ciencia, cultura espiritual: todo se hallaba ya hecho. Y la naturaleza del espíritu lleva inherente, por el contrario, el que este mundo así formado se engendre de su propio seno y el que esta creación se desarrolle por la fuerza de la reacción, por medio de la asimilación de lo que le precede. De aquí que los nuevos conquistadores se asentasen e hiciesen fuertes sobre un terreno extraño, llegando a imponerse a él; pero, al mismo tiempo, caían bajo el poder de un nuevo espíritu a cuya imposición no podían escapar. Dominadores por una parte, convirtiéronse en dominados por lo espiritual, ya que se mantuvieron en una actitud pasiva ante estas fuerzas.”

se enciende así en estos bárbaros un tormento infinito, una pasión interminable, que hace de ellos figuras parecidas a la de Cristo crucificado. Fue esta la lucha que los bárbaros vencedores tuvieron que afrontar” “La cultura arranca, aquí, de la más monstruosa contradicción, que se ve obligada a resolver. Pero estos tormentos son los del purgatorio, pues el ser atormentado es el espíritu y no un animal: y el espíritu no muere, sino que emerge de su tumba.” “Lo general consiste, pues, en la contradicción en la que lo uno sólo puede imponerse y conquistar el poder mediante la sumisión de lo otro, pero una contradicción que lleva ya dentro de sí el principio para poder resolverse, el cual no es otro que el imperio del espíritu; por eso, la trayectoria que aquí se abre tiende, en efecto, a que el espíritu se imponga como la reconciliación.” Esse módulo do curso de H. é puro engodo.

Así, en la revolución francesa vemos cómo se abre paso el postulado del imperio del pensamiento abstracto: a él deben ajustarse la organización del Estado y las leyes y él, el pensamiento abstracto, debe servir de unión entre los hombres.” Estar falando disso antes de sequer mencionar Descartes significa que não tinha o que dizer!

Las doctrinas de la religión cristiana ocupan así, igualmente, la posición de algo ajeno a nosotros, de algo perteneciente a un determinado tiempo y en torno a lo cual se han esforzado aquellos hombres. Lo de que la idea es concreta en y para sí y guarda, en cuanto espíritu, una relación de contradicción con el sujeto ha desaparecido y se manifiesta sólo como algo pasado. En este sentido, lo que hemos dicho acerca del principio del concepto de la doctrina cristiana y lo que aún diremos con respecto a los escolásticos sólo ofrece interés desde el punto de vista señalado por nosotros, en que la idea interesa en su determinación concreta”

LA SANTA IGLESIA: “Todas las pasiones, el afán de poder, la codicia, la violencia, el engaño, el robo, el asesinato, la envidia, el odio: todos estos vicios de la brutalidad arraigarán en ella, pasando a formar parte integrante de su régimen.”

Por eso vemos cómo los más valerosos y nobles emperadores son excomulgados y anatematizados por los papas, los cardenales, los legados pontificios y hasta por los arzobispos y los obispos, sin que esté en sus manos sustraerse a la acción de este otro poder exterior, siendo siempre los vencidos y los obligados a ceder.”

vemos, de una parte, cómo la religión, en este estado de cosas, sólo presenta su faz verdaderamente noble y bella en unos cuantos individuos aislados, que son precisamente aquellos espíritus que han muerto para el mundo y se separan de él para retraerse a un pequeño círculo de hombres y vivir allí entregados a los afanes religiosos”

Los individuos caen de un extremo en otro, del extremo del más brutal desenfreno y barbarie, de la obstinación y la terquedad, en el extremo de la renuncia a todo, del triunfo sobre todos los apetitos, etc.” “Ningún ejemplo más patente de esto que decimos que el del ejército de las Cruzadas. Estos soldados de la Cruz se pusieron en marcha atraídos por los fines más nobles y más sagrados, pero en el transcurso de su expedición se dejaron arrastrar a todas las pasiones humanas, siendo precisamente los jefes los que daban el ejemplo; imposible describir los extremos de violencia y brutalidad a que llegaron aquellas gentes. Después de haber conducido la expedición del modo más irracional que imaginarse pueda, absurdamente, habiendo sacrificado sin necesidad alguna a miles de hombres, llegaron por fin a las puertas de Jerusalén. Fue un espectáculo muy bello el de aquellos hombres que, a la vista de la ciudad sagrada, se entregaron devotamente a la oración y a la penitencia, sintiendo desgarrarse sus corazones, tocando el suelo con la frente y dando toda clase de pruebas de piedad y de unción. Pero esto no fue más que un momento después de largos meses de locuras, de necedades, de vilezas y de horrores, que fueron sembrando el camino de la Cruzada. Sintiéndose animados por un entusiasmo y una valentía sin límites, toman por asalto la ciudad santa y la conquistan; y, una vez dentro, se bañan en ríos de sangre, dan pruebas de una crueldad infinita y de una furia verdaderamente bestial. Y nuevamente sobreviene una reacción de arrepentimiento y penitencia; se postran de hinojos, sintiéndose reconciliados con Dios, y en seguida se entregan de nuevo a todas las mezquindades e infamias de las más míseras pasiones; del egoísmo y de la envidia, de la codicia y la avaricia: dan rienda suelta a toda su lujuria y echan a perder así la conquista lograda por su heroísmo. La explicación de todo esto está en que el principio sólo vivía en ellos, en su interior, como principio abstracto, sin que llegara a conformar espiritualmente la realidad del hombre.”

ABOLIÇÃO DA HÓSTIA: “Lutero cambió este rito: mantuvo en la llamada Cena el punto místico consistente en que el sujeto reciba dentro de sí lo divino, pero afirmando que esto sólo es divino en cuanto se disfrute en esta espiritualidad subjetiva de la fe y deje de ser un objeto externo.”

Pero en la Iglesia de la Edad Media y en la Iglesia católica en general la hostia es adorada también como un objeto puramente externo, de tal modo que cuando una hostia consagrada sea devorada por un ratón deberá adorarse a éste y a sus excrementos” HAHAHAHA!

Pues a la brutalidad y al espantoso salvajismo de esos pueblos sólo podía oponerse la servidumbre, llevándose a cabo la educación por esta vía. Bajo este yugo sirve la humanidad; no tuvo más remedio que pasar por esta cruel disciplina para elevar al plano del espíritu a las naciones germánicas.” “También los hindúes se hallan sujetos a esta servidumbre, pero ellos están irremisiblemente perdidos, sujetos a la naturaleza, identificados con la naturaleza, pero contrarios a ella de suyo.”

Generalmente, se hace arrancar la filosofía escolástica de la figura de Juan Escoto Erigena, que floreció hacia el año 860 y que no debe confundirse con Duns Escoto, que es posterior. No ha sido posible determinar con certeza la patria de Erigena: no se sabe si nació en Escocia o en Irlanda, pues si el nombre de Escoto es característico del primer país el de Erigena señala hacia el segundo. Es el primer pensador con quien se inicia ahora una verdadera filosofía, basada principalmente en las ideas de los neoplatónicos.”

En Escoto, la teología no aparece aún basada en la exégesis y la autoridad de los Padres de la Iglesia; por eso la Iglesia rechazó muchas veces sus obras. Así, un concilio eclesiástico en Lyon puso el veto a las doctrinas de Erigena, diciendo: «Han llegado a nosotros las obras de un hombre charlatán y jactancioso que disputa acerca de la Providencia divina y la predestinación de una manera humana o, según él mismo se vanagloria, con argumentos filosóficos, sin apoyarse en las Sagradas Escrituras ni invocar la autoridad de los Padres de la Iglesia, sino atreviérndose a defender sus doctrinas por sí mismo y a fundamentarlas en sus propias leyes, sin someterse a los libros divinos ni a la autoridad de los Padres.» (Buleo)

De aquí que ya Escoto Erigena dijese: «La verdadera filosofía es la verdadera religión, y la verdadera religión la verdadera filosofía.»” É desses despeitados que eu gosto!

Anselmo. Se trata de una figura muy honrada y prestigiosa entre quienes creen que las doctrinas de la Iglesia deben ser demostradas también en el campo del pensamiento. Nació en Aosta (Piamonte) hacia 1034, profesó como fraile en Bec, en 1060 y ya en 1093 lo vemos convertido en arzobispo de Cantorbery; murió en 1109. (Tennemann)”

El cristiano debe llegar a la razón por la fe, y no a la fe por la razón; y menos aún si no acierta a comprender que la fe debe ser su punto de partida. Si acierta a penetrar en el conocimiento, se alegrará con ello; en otro caso, no hará sino adorar.” Grande BUESTA!

Nos referimos a la llamada prueba ontológica de la existencia de Dios, establecida por Anselmo y que tan famoso había de hacerle. Esta prueba era mencionada hasta los tiempos de Kant en la serie de las pruebas, y lo es todavía hoy por parte de quienes no han llegado a situarse aún en el punto de vista kantiano.” “Sin embargo, mientras que hasta él se consideraba a Dios como el ser absoluto, atribuyéndosele lo general como un predicado, con Anselmo comienza la trayectoria contraria: la del ser como predicado, en que la idea absoluta empieza estableciéndose como el sujeto, pero como el sujeto del pensamiento.”

Kant, por el contrario, combate y rechaza la prueba anselmiana de la existencia de Dios —y el mundo entero ha acabado siguiendo sus huellas, en esto— por partir de la premisa de que la unidad del ser y el pensar es lo más perfecto.” “Por tanto, a la prueba que Kant critica y que, por su modo de ser, sigue siendo usual todavía hoy, sólo le falta una cosa: esta conciencia de la unidad del pensar y el ser en lo infinito, la cual tiene necesariamente que constituir el punto de partida.”

Pedro Abelardo [s]e hizo famoso por su erudición, pero alcanzó todavía mayor celebridad en el mundo sentimental por sus amores con Eloísa y las vicisitudes de su vida. (Tiedemann)”

Como Bolonia para los juristas, París era, en aquel tiempo, el centro de las ciencias y de los estudios para los teólogos, la sede de la teología filosofante de la época. Abelardo llegó a ver en su aula más de mil oyentes. La ciencia teológica y las especulaciones filosóficas en torno a ella era, en Francia (como la jurisprudencia en Italia), un momento fundamental de extraordinaria importancia para el desarrollo espiritual del país y que, hasta ahora, no ha sido tenido en cuenta como se merece.”

Al establecerse en 1270, en la universidad de París, la separación de las 4 facultades, desglosando la filosofía de la teología, se ordenó a los maestros universitarios, al mismo tiempo, que se abstuvieran de poner en tela de juicio o de someter a sus disputas los principios teológicos de la fe.”

la teología se convierte en un sistema científico.” “Pedro Lombardo. Los hombres que llevaron a cabo esta obra fueron, en primer lugar, Pedro de Novara, en Lombardía, que vivió a mediados del siglo XII y a quien podemos considerar como el fundador de este método (…) Pedro Lombardo levantó un edificio sistemático de teología escolástica que se mantuvo en pie durante varios siglos, sirviendo de fundamento a la dogmática de la Iglesia.”

Pedro Lombardo compiló las determinaciones fundamentales de la doctrina eclesiástica tomándolas de los concilios y los Padres de la Iglesia, y añadiendo una serie de preguntas y discusiones sutiles en torno a circunstancias particulares que ocupaban a la escuela y eran, por aquel entonces, objeto de polémicas y disputas. Él mismo se ocupaba de dar respuesta a estas preguntas, pero oponiendo otros fundamentos en contrario; y sus respuestas dejan, con frecuencia, la cosa envuelta en las nubes de lo problemático, sin disipar las dudas, en realidad.” “Estos doctores a que nos referimos gozaban de gran autoridad, celebraban sínodos, criticaban y condenaban como heréticas éstas y aquellas doctrinas, éstos y aquellos libros, etc., en dichos sínodos o en la Sorbona, una sociedad que, integrada por doctores de éstos, funcionaba en la universidad de París.”

El segundo de los autores de este grupo, tan famoso por lo menos como Pedro Lombardo, es Tomás de Aquino, descendiente de la familia condal de los Aquinos y que nació en 1224, en el castillo paterno de Roccasecca, del reino de Ñapóles. Ingresó en la orden de los dominicos y murió en 1274, durante un viaje para asistir a un concilio en Lyon. Poseía un conocimiento extensísimo de la teología y de Aristóteles y se le conocía con los nombres de Doctor angelicus y Doctor communis, considerándosele como a un segundo San Agustín.” “compuso también una Summa theologica (es decir, un estudio sistemático), que le dio una fama extraordinaria, al igual que sus otros escritos, convirtiéndose en un libro fundamental de toda la teología escolástica.” “Tomás de Aquino formula también preguntas, respuestas y dudas y señala el punto en torno al cual gira la solución de los problemas. En lo fundamental, la teología escolástica se dedica, desde entonces, a citar la Summa del Aquinatense.”

Juan Duns Escoto. El tercero de los pensadores a que nos referíamos más arriba, famoso por haber desarrollado de un modo formal la teología filosófica, es Duns Escoto, llamado el Doctor subtilis, miembro de la orden franciscana; había nacido en Dunston, condado de Northumberland, y llegó a tener, sucesivamente, hasta 30 mil oyentes. Se trasladó a París en 1304 y en 1308 cambió su residencia a Colonia, como doctor de la nueva universidad fundada allí. Fue recibido con gran solemnidad, pero murió en esta ciudad, a poco de instalarse en ella, de un ataque de apoplejía, sin embargo, según se refiere, fue enterrado vivo. Dícese que vivió solamente 34 años, según otros 43 y según algunos 63, pues no se conoce el año de su nacimiento.

Escribió algunos comentarios sobre el Magister sententiarum [Anselmo] que le valieron fama de sutilísimo pensador; comienza por la prueba de la necesidad de una revelación sobrenatural frente a la simple luz de la razón. Se le llegó a llamar, por razón de su sutileza, el deus inter philosophos.”

Llamábanse Quodlibeta a las colecciones de estudios mezclados sobre diversos temas sueltos, examinados por el procedimiento corriente de la disputa, que consiste en hablar acerca de todo, sin ningún orden sistemático y sin llegar a construir ningún todo armónico; los otros escribían, por el contrario, summas, es decir, estudios sistemáticos. El latín de Duns Escoto es muy bárbaro, pero se presta bastante bien para la claridad filosófica” El Doctor Mescolanza

Debemos señalar ahora una tercera tendencia, nacida de la circunstancia histórica puramente externa de que, a fines del siglo XII y comienzos del XIII, los teólogos occidentales empezaron a adquirir, de un modo más general, a través de las traducciones del arábigo al latín, el conocimiento de las obras de Aristóteles y de sus comentadores griegos y árabes, obras y comentarios que, a partir de ahora, utilizan desde muchos puntos de vista y comentan a su vez. La adoración, la admiración por Aristóteles y el prestigio de este pensador antiguo llegan ahora a su punto culminante.”

España, bajo los árabes, conoció un florecimiento extraordinario de las ciencias, y la universidad de Córdoba, sobre todo, se convirtió en el centro de la erudición de aquel tiempo; muchos estudiosos del Occidente hacían el viaje a aquella ciudad española”

La lógica y la metafísica aristotélicas fueron desarrolladas ahora hasta el máximo, en interminables distinciones, y reducidas a peculiares formas intelectivas silogísticas, que servían principalmente de base para el tratamiento de las materias estudiadas; esto contribuyó a que se acentuase todavía más la sutileza dialéctica, al paso que lo verdaderamente especulativo de Aristóteles era relegado a último plano por el espíritu de la exterioridad, que era también, por tanto, el de la ausencia de razón.”

Es cierto que, al principio, cuando aparecieron las obras de Aristóteles, la Iglesia opuso cierta resistencia; en un sínodo eclesiástico celebrado en París en 1209 fue prohibida la lectura de la Metafísica y la Física, así como de los extractos de estas obras, y toda lectura y explicación en torno a ellas.” “Pero más tarde, en 1366, nos encontramos con una manifestación de la tendencia contraria: con 2 cardenales que ordenan que nadie pueda llegar a ser magister sin haber estudiado los libros prescritos de Aristóteles, entre los que figura la Metafísica, y haber demostrado la capacidad necesaria para explicarlos.”

«Alberto dejó de ser un asno para convertirse rápidamente en un filósofo, y con la misma rapidez se convirtió de filósofo en asno.» Entre su ciencia se incluía especialmente la magia, pues, a pesar de ser completamente extraña a la verdadera escolástica, la cual se mantenía de espaldas a la naturaleza, Alberto Magno se ocupaba de las cosas naturales e inventó, entre otras cosas, una máquina parlante que infundía pavor a su discípulo Tomás de Aquino, quien intentó, incluso, destruirla, viendo en ella la mano del diablo.”

Entre los estoicos clasificaba Alberto, con un criterio ciertamente original, a pensadores como Espeusipo, Platón, Sócrates y Pitágoras. Estas anécdotas nos dan una idea bastante aproximada de cuál era el estado de la cultura en aquella época.”

Un cuarto aspecto que debe ser tenido en cuenta aquí es un punto de vista fundamental que interesó mucho a la Edad Media: el del peculiar problema filosófico cifrado en la polémica entre realistas y nominalistas y que llena casi toda la época del escolasticismo. En términos generales, podemos decir que esta disputa versa en torno a la antítesis metafísica de lo general y lo individual. Preocupó a la filosofía escolástica por espacio de varios siglos, y ello, hay que reconocerlo, honra mucho a estos pensadores. Se distingue entre los antiguos y los nuevos nominalistas y realistas, pero la historia de los realistas y los nominalistas es, por lo demás, bastante oscura”

El primer nominalista es Roscelino; y el famoso Abelardo, aunque aparezca como adversario suyo, puede ser considerado igualmente como nominalista. Roscelino escribió también en contra de la Trinidad y fue condenado por herético en una asamblea eclesiástica celebrada en Soissons en 1092; pero ya para aquel entonces era muy poca su influencia.

Trátase de lo general en términos absolutos (universale), del género, de la esencia de las cosas, de lo que Platón llamaba la idea, por ejemplo: el ser, la humanidad, el animal. Los sucesores de Platón afirmaban el ser de estos universales; aislando luego esto, se llegaba también, por ejemplo, al concepto o a la cualidad de mesa, como algo real.”

Pues bien, la disputa entre realistas y nominalistas giraba en torno a si estos universales eran, en efecto, algo real, algo en y para sí al margen del sujeto pensante e independientemente de las cosas aisladas existentes, de tal modo que existiesen en éstas independientemente de la individualidad de la cosa y de un modo sustantivo los unos con respecto a los otros, o si, por el contrario, lo universal era algo puramente nominal, algo que sólo existía en la representación subjetiva, un ente del pensamiento y nada más. § Quienes afirmaban que los universales eran, fuera del sujeto pensante y aparte de las cosas aisladas, un algo real y existente y que la esencia de las cosas era simplemente la idea, recibían el nombre de realistas, en una acepción que era, en rigor, la inversa de lo que hoy llamamos realismo.” “En cambio, los otros, los nominalistas o formalistas, afirmaban que los géneros, los universales, eran simples nombres, algo puramente formal, meras representaciones para nosotros, generalizaciones subjetivas nada más, un producto del espíritu pensante; según ellos, sólo lo individual era lo real.” “Contra esta afirmación se alegan razones por las que se ve hasta qué extremos de ridículo se llevaba a veces la polémica y cómo ésta giraba, en gran parte, en torno a las concepciones del cristianismo. Así vemos que Abelardo reprocha a Roscelino el que éste afirme que ninguna cosa tiene partes y que sólo las palabras que designan las cosas son divisibles. De donde Abelardo deduce que, según Roscelino, Cristo no ingirió una parte real del pez asado, sino solamente una parte de las palabras «pez asado»”

Gualterio de Montagne. Este filósofo (f. 1174) tendía a la combinación de lo individual y lo general: lo general, según él, tiene que ser individual, los universales tienen que aparecer unidos a los individuos, en cuanto a la esencia. Más tarde, ambos partidos se hicieron célebres bajo los nombres de tomistas, por el dominico Tomás de Aquino, y escotistas, por el franciscano Juan Duns Escoto.”

Suarez, Disputationes metaphysicae

La antítesis entre idealistas y realistas había surgido, sin duda alguna, ya muy temprano, pero sólo fue puesta de nuevo a la orden del día y desarrollada en el plano del interés general después de Abelardo, gracias al fraile franciscano Guillermo de Occam, de la aldea de este nombre, en el condado de Surrey (Inglaterra), conocido como el Doctor invincibilis, que florece en los primeros años del siglo XIV, sin que haya sido posible averiguar su año de nacimiento.”

La disputa entre nominalistas y realistas toma ahora caracteres de gran violencia y encono; todavía se conserva una cátedra que hubo de ser separada por un tabique de madera del sitio ocupado por el contrincante, para evitar que los adversarios, en el furor de la discusión, se fuesen a las manos.”

Además, las guerras intestinas que tenían dividida a Francia hacían que la política se insinuase también en las relaciones entre las órdenes monásticas, lo cual contribuía a acrecentar la importancia de esta disputa, avivada por los celos enconados de las partes contendientes. Occam y su orden apoyaban con la mayor energía las pretensiones de los príncipes, por ejemplo las del rey de Francia y las del emperador de Alemania Luis de Baviera, como lo hicieron en una reunión de su orden celebrada en 1322 y en otras partes, contra las extralimitaciones del papa. De Guillermo se cuenta que dijo una vez al emperador: «Defiéndeme tú con la espada, que yo te defenderé con la pluma.»

En 1340 se dictó este veto: «Ningún maestro deberá atreverse a declarar falsa cualquier tesis conocida de un escritor acerca del cual lea, ni de por sí ni en cuanto a su tenor literal, sino que deberá reconocerla o distinguir entre el sentido verdadero y el sentido falso que en ella se encierra, ya que de otro modo nos expondríamos a la peligrosa consecuencia de que también las verdades de la Biblia pudieran ser rechazadas del mismo modo. Ningún maestro debe afirmar que ninguna tesis pueda dejar margen a distinciones o ser investigada a fondo.»

Occam fue excomulgado en 1328 y murió en Munich, en 1343.” Sempre uma distinção no meu álbum.

Tennemann (t. VIII, secc. 2, p. 864) dice, a este propósito: «Una consecuencia de esta teoría fue el dar completamente de lado, como inútil, al principio de individuación, que tantos quebraderos de cabeza había costado a los escolásticos.»

HEGEL NÃO É, ESSENCIALMENTE (EM SI!) 1 FARSANTE, MAS 3 FARSANTES! “Pero como la religión cristiana es la religión revelada, tenemos que Dios, por una parte, no es ya lo inabordable, lo inefable, un algo recóndito, cerrado, sino que los distintos grados de lo que brota de él son su misma manifestación y lo Trino, por tanto, lo revelado, de tal modo que las tríadas y lo Uno no son algo distinto, sino que precisamente estas 3 personas distintas en Dios son los mismo y lo Uno, es decir, algo que es para lo otro, algo relativo de suyo.”

Buridán. Filósofo nominalista, que se inclina del lado de los deterministas (…) muere de hambre por no saber por cuál de los 2 lados decidirse.” ¿?!! AHAHAHA

Además, esta dialéctica puramente formal hace gala de una gran inventiva en la creación, para su tratamiento, de objetos, problemas y cuestiones carentes de todo interés religioso y filosófico.” A succubus realmente transa com o dorminhoco ou não?, etc.

Cabe, pues, afirmar que los escolásticos, de una parte, tratan de un modo profundo el concepto de la doctrina de la Iglesia, pero, por otra parte, lo secularizan por medio de relaciones externas totalmente inadecuadas, por donde se manifiesta aquí el peor de los sentidos que puede tener lo secular.” “Este aspecto fue captado por los escolásticos y tratado por ellos con una dialéctica finita; y en este aspecto habrá de hacerse, más tarde, hincapié para poner en ridículo incansablemente las doctrinas del escolasticismo. Aduciremos algunos ejemplos de este aspecto a que nos referimos.”

Así, vemos que Julián, Arzobispo de Toledo, trata de encontrar con la mayor seriedad, como si de ello dependiese la salvación del género humano, la respuesta a preguntas que parten de una premisa disparatada, incurriendo en una micrología por el estilo de la de los filólogos cuando se ponen a investigar los acentos, los metros y la división de los versos griegos. Tenemos, por ejemplo, una de estas preguntas acerca de los muertos. La doctrina de la Iglesia afirma que el hombre resucitará, pero si se añade que resucitará con el mismo cuerpo que tuvo, se entra en pleno mundo de los sentidos. He aquí algunas de las indagaciones hechas por los escolásticos en torno a la referida pregunta: «¿A qué edad resucitarán los muertos? ¿De niños, de jóvenes, de hombres adultos o de ancianos? ¿Y en qué forma? ¿Con qué constitución física? ¿Los flacos recobrarán su cuerpo de flacos y los gordos su cuerpo de gordos? ¿Persistirá en la otra vida la diferencia de sexos? ¿Recobrarán los muertos, al resucitar, la cantidad de uñas y de pelo que perdieron en esta vida?».”

una verdadera manía discutidora.” “La filosofía escolástica es, pues, exactamente lo contrario de la ciencia intelectiva empírica, que se caracteriza por una curiosidad proyectada simplemente sobre los hechos, sin relación alguna con el concepto.”

Pascasio Roberto compuso dos volúmenes con el título De partu beatae virginis, acerca de los cuales se escribió y disputó mucho. Llegó a hablarse, incluso, de un partero, y se formularon una serie de preguntas en las que hoy no se nos ocurriría ni siquiera pensar, a menos de querer entrar en los dominios de lo inconveniente.” A buceta da virgem era rosadinha?

He aquí otras preguntas formuladas por Pedro Lombardo: «¿Puede Dios saber más de lo que sabe?», como si, con respecto a Dios, pudiera distinguirse entre potencia y acto. «¿Puede Dios en todo tiempo todo lo que ha podido? ¿Dónde estaban los ángeles después de su creación? ¿Han existido siempre ángeles?»

«¿Qué edad tenía Adán cuando fue creado? ¿Por qué fue formada Eva de la costilla del hombre y no de otra parte cualquiera de su cuerpo? ¿Y por qué mientras el hombre dormía, y no estando despierto? ¿Por qué no se unió la primera pareja en el paraíso terrenal? ¿Cómo se habrían perpetuado los hombres, si no hubiesen pecado? Los niños en el paraíso, ¿habrían nacido con los miembros ya perfectamente desarrollados y con el pleno uso de los sentidos? ¿Por qué se convirtió en hombre el Hijo y no el Padre o el Espíritu Santo?» Isso que dá jejuar demais!

«¿Podrían existir en Cristo varias filiaciones (filiationes)? ¿Cabría afirmar que Dios Padre odia al Hijo? ¿Habría sido posible también suponer a Dios como mujer? ¿Habría podido Dios ocultarse en el cuerpo del demonio? ¿Habría podido revelarse en forma de asno o de calabaza [abóbora!]? ¿Y de qué modo habría predicado la calabaza? ¿Cómo habría obrado milagros? ¿Cómo se la habría crucificado?» Erasmo, ironicamente

Parece que H. nunca leu nenhum desses autores diretamente, mas só em citações dos historiadores da filosofia que ele tanto criticou no Vol. I!

Lo fundamental es saber que los escolásticos tomaban las cosas divinas como los bárbaros, reduciéndolas a criterios y relaciones propios de los sentidos. Una rigidez de concepción informada totalmente por los sentidos y estas formas totalmente externas de lo material se ven trasplantadas, así, a lo puramente espiritual, con lo cual esto aparece totalmente secularizado; es algo parecido a lo que hace Hans Sachs, cuando convierte la historia sagrada en la crónica local de Nuremberg.”

En estas exposiciones, como en la Biblia cuando habla de la cólera de Dios, de la historia de la creación, de que Dios ha hecho esto y aquello, vemos a Dios como a un ser humano, de carne y hueso. Y es cierto que a Dios no se le debe concebir como algo totalmente extraño a nosotros e inabordable, sino que hay que acercarse a él con el ánimo y con el corazón; pero una cosa es esto y otra cosa muy distinta introducirlo en los dominios del pensamiento y tomar en serio su conocimiento. Lo contrario a esto es aducir argumenta pro y contra, pues estos argumentos no resuelven nada ni ayudan en lo más mínimo; tampoco en cuanto premisas que son solamente determinaciones sensibles y finitas y que dan, por tanto, pie a infinitas distinciones. Esta barbarie intelectiva es completamente irracional; es algo así como si se quisiera adornar a los cerdos con collares de perlas. Lo Uno es la idea de la religión cristiana y, además, la filosofía del noble Aristóteles; no era posible haber pisoteado ambas cosas en el lodo más de lo que aquí se hace, ni los cristianos podían haber hecho caer más bajo su idea espiritual.”

Los místicos no participan tan de cerca ni tan de lleno en las disputas, las argumentaciones y las pruebas de los demás escolásticos, y procuran atenerse con la mayor pureza posible a la doctrina de la Iglesia y a la contemplación filosófica. Son, en parte, hombres piadosos y sutiles, que siguieron filosofando al modo de los neoplatónicos, como antes de ellos lo hiciera ya Escoto Erigena. Encontramos en ellos auténtica filosofía, aunque se presente bajo el nombre de misticismo; es una filosofía íntima y recatada, que guarda una gran semejanza con el spinozismo. Estos pensadores derivan, además, su ética, su religiosidad, de las verdaderas emociones, y en este sentido formulan sus consideraciones, sus preceptos, etc.”

Rogerio Bacon. Estudió principalmente cuestiones de física, pero sin llegar a alcanzar gran influencia; inventó la pólvora, el espejo y los anteojos de larga vista; murió en 1294.” É correto listá-lo como escolástico? Ou místico mesmo? Porque parece ter sido o ser humano ocidental mais útil daquele milênio…

wiki: “21st century re-evaluations emphasise that Bacon was essentially a medieval thinker, with much of his ‘experimental’ knowledge obtained from books in the scholastic tradition. He was, however, partially responsible for a revision of the medieval university curriculum, which saw the addition of optics to the traditional quadrivium.” “Although gunpowder was first invented and described in China, Bacon was the first in Europe to record its formula.”

O Bacon antes do Bacon (Rogério x Francisco)!

Raimundo Lulio. Llamado el Doctor illuminatus, llegó a ser muy famoso, sobre todo por el arte de pensar compuesto por él y al que dio el nombre de Ars magna. Nació en Mallorca, en 1234, y fue uno de esos hombres excéntricos e impulsivos que se meten en todo. Tenía marcada afición por la alquimia y un gran entusiasmo por las ciencias en general, así como una imaginación fogosa e inquieta. Llevó una juventud disipada y entregada a los placeres y las diversiones; más tarde, se retiró a un yermo y tuvo allí muchas visiones de Jesucristo. Llevado de su agitado temperamento, sintióse acuciado por el deseo de contribuir a la difusión de la doctrina cristiana entre los mahometanos de Asia y África, consagrando su vida a esta misión; para ello aprendió el árabe, viajó por toda Europa y Asia y buscó el apoyo del papa y de todos los monarcas de Europa, sin abandonar por ello el cultivo de su arte. Fue perseguido y hubo de soportar incontables penalidades, aventuras, peligros de muerte, prisiones y malos tratos. Vivió durante largo tiempo en París, a comienzos del siglo XIV, y compuso cerca de 400 escritos. Al cabo de una vida extraordinariamente agitada, murió venerado como santo y mártir, el año 1315, a consecuencia de los malos tratos sufridos en África. (Rixner, Lehrbuch der Geschichte der Philosophie; Tennemann)”

Raimundo Lulio es, pues, un pensador sistemático, aunque al mismo tiempo mecánico. Dejó trazada una tabla en círculos en los que se hallan inscritos triángulos cortados por otros círculos. Dentro de estos círculos ordenaba las determinaciones conceptuales, con pretensiones exhaustivas; una parte de los círculos es inmóvil, la otra tiene movimiento. Vemos, en efecto, 6 círculos, 2 de los cuales indican los sujetos, 3 los predicados y el 6º las posibles preguntas.”

el escolasticismo, visto en conjunto, es una bárbara filosofía del entendimiento sin ningún contenido real, una filosofía que no suscita en nosotros ningún interés verdadero y a la que, desde luego, no podemos retornar.”

La escolástica es ese extravío total del entendimiento escueto y seco en las rugosidades de la naturaleza nórdico-germánica. Ante nosotros se abren 2 mundos: el reino de la vida y el reino de la muerte. El reino intelectual, reino externo y situado en lo alto, aunque en la representación, se convierte de ese modo, aun siendo por su naturaleza algo puramente especulativo, en algo intelectivo y sensibilizado; pero no como en el arte, sino, por el contrario, como una relación de la realidad común.”

Es cierto que la existencia de la Iglesia, como el gobierno de Cristo sobre la tierra, se halla en un plano más elevado que la existencia exterior que con ella se enfrenta, pues la religión tiene necesariamente que imperar sobre lo temporal, y la sumisión del poder temporal convierte a la Iglesia en una teocracia.”

¿Para qué todo esto? Lo tenemos a nuestra espalda como un pasado, por sí mismo inútil para nosotros. Pero de nada sirve llamar a la Edad Media una época bárbara. Es, en realidad, un tipo muy peculiar de barbarie, no una barbarie espontánea y tosca, sino una barbarie a la que se llega por la vía del pensamiento, convirtiendo a la idea absoluta y a la suprema cultura en barbarie; lo que es, de una parte, la forma más atroz de ésta y de la perversión y, de otra parte, el punto infinito de que mana una más alta reconciliación.”

Un algo pensado cuyo contenido es el pensamiento mismo consiste precisamente en eso, en determinarse como ser. Tal es la intimidad, que es algo más que la consecuencia necesaria de las premisas de que se parte; pero aquí no es la naturaleza del pensamiento y del ser el objeto de la investigación, sino que se da por supuesto sencillamente lo que éstos son.”

Lo especulativo se halla presente, en Aristóteles, por el hecho de que tal pensamiento no se confía a la reflexión por sí misma, sino que tiene continuamente ante sí la naturaleza concreta del objeto; esta naturaleza es el concepto de la cosa, y esta esencia especulativa de la cosa el espíritu rector que no deja en libertad a las determinaciones reflexivas por sí mismas.

Pero los escolásticos plasman de un modo fijo las determinaciones intelectivas abstractas, siempre inadecuadas a su materia absoluta, y, al mismo tiempo, toman todos los ejemplos de la vida como materia; y como lo concreto contradice a su manera de pensar, sólo pueden retener estas determinaciones intelectivas por medio de precisiones, reservas y limitaciones, lo que los hace embrollarse en una serie interminable de distinciones, las cuales se mantienen también en el terreno de lo concreto y sólo de este modo salen a flote.

En estos manejos de la escolástica no hay, pues, ni asomo de sano sentido común; éste no debe mostrarse contrario a la especulación como tal, pero sí debe manifestarse en contra de todo lo que sea reflexión carente de base, en cuanto que encierra un substrato y una regla para las determinaciones intelectivas abstractas.”

La representación fija del mundo suprasensible, con sus ángeles, etc., era una materia que los escolásticos siguieron elaborando sin el menor juicio, de un modo bárbaro y con un entendimiento finito, enriqueciéndola y considerándola con los criterios finitos propios de este entendimiento. No existe en el pensamiento mismo ningún principio inmanente, sino que el entendimiento de los escolásticos recibe en sus manos una metafísica ya acabada, sin la necesidad de su proyección sobre lo concreto; esta metafísica fue muerta y sus partes descoyuntadas sin espíritu alguno. Podría decirse de los escolásticos que filosofaban sin representación, es decir, sin un algo concreto, convertían en sujetos el esse reale, el esse formale, el esse objetivum, la quidditas (τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι).”

En el caso de la manzana del paraíso, la inteligencia se pregunta a qué clase de manzanas pertenece.” HAHAHAHA

Entre los eruditos, manifestóse abiertamente la ignorancia acerca de lo racional, una ausencia de espíritu total y monstruosa; y esta misma ignorancia monstruosa y total se revelaba también en los demás, en los monjes. Esta corrupción del conocimiento hacía de la transición un cambio; y mientras que el cielo, lo divino, se degradaba de este modo, se levantaba sobre lo temporal la sublimidad y la superioridad espiritual de lo eclesiástico.” “Del mismo modo, la Iglesia existente, esta existencia del cielo sobre la tierra, veíase nivelada sobre el mismo plano de lo mundanal al abrazar el camino de la riqueza y de la posesión de territorios; de este modo, suprimíase la distinción entre los 2 poderes, pero no de un modo racional para la Iglesia, sino, al mismo tiempo, de un modo indignante, que supone una corrupción: era evidentemente una realidad, pero la realidad más bárbara y más cruel. Pues el Estado, el gobierno, el derecho, la propiedad, el orden civil: todo esto es lo religioso, en forma de diferencias racionales, es decir, de leyes fijas por sí mismas. La vigencia de los miembros, de los estamentos, de las secciones, sus distintas ocupaciones, las fases y los grados del mal, lo mismo que los del bien, representan una manifestación bajo la forma de la finitud, de la realidad, de la existencia de la voluntad subjetiva, mientras que lo religioso sólo se presenta bajo la forma de lo infinito.”

HEGEL PISTOLA: “El mal y sus penas se convierten ahora en algo infinito, y las opiniones discrepantes son castigadas incluso con la muerte, como ocurre con la herejía y con la heterodoxia contra las determinaciones más abstractas y más vacuas de una dogmática interminable. En el seno de la Iglesia se dan cita las costumbres más reprobables y las peores pasiones, la arbitrariedad desenfrenada, la voluptuosidad, la venalidad, la ociosidad, la codicia, los vicios más diversos, precisamente por no tropezar con el freno de ninguna ley; y en ella se instaura y prevalece el criterio de la dominación. (…) Esta ruina del mundo suprasensible, como representada en el conocer y como Iglesia presente, es la que necesariamente tenía que expulsar al hombre de semejante templo, es decir, del seno de lo más sagrado convertido en algo mundanal y finito.”

Impaciente por la realidad que echa de menos y por la carencia de lo sagrado, la cristiandad se echa a buscar la cabeza que le falta; no es otro, en efecto, el móvil determinante de las Cruzadas. La cristiandad busca la presencia exterior de Cristo en la tierra de Canaán, busca sus huellas, el monte en que oró y padeció, su tumba; conquista el Santo Sepulcro. Lo que se representa como algo real lo conquista también, en efecto, como algo real; pero la tumba es solamente eso, una tumba: lo único que encuentra es el Santo Sepulcro, que además le es arrebatado después. «Pero no le dejarás en su tumba, pues no quieres que un santo se pudra en su sepulcro.»” “Aquellos lugares sagrados, él Monte de los Olivos, el Jordán, Nazaret, como el presente sensible y exterior del espacio sin la presencia del tiempo, no son sino algo pasado, un simple recuerdo y no una contemplación del presente inmediato; lo único que los cruzados encontraron fue su pérdida, su tumba en este presente. Siendo como eran bárbaros, no buscaban lo general, la posición universal de Siria y de Egipto, este centro de la tierra, los nexos de unión para la libertad del comercio, como había de hacerlo Bonaparte, [¡!] cuando ya la humanidad hubo recobrado su razón.”

En cuanto que sus actos, sus fines y sus intereses, se convierten en algo jurídico y, por tanto, en algo general, el presente se torna racional.” “fundándose una independencia que no es ya meramente egoísta.” “Es cierto que el orden ahora vigente es el sistema feudal, con su secuela, la servidumbre de la gleba, pero todo dentro de él es, sin embargo, algo jurídicamente establecido. Y el derecho tiene su raíz en la libertad, por ser en ella donde el individuo cobra existencia y es reconocido como tal, aunque aquí aparezcan todavía convertidas en propiedad privada relaciones pertenecientes en realidad al Estado. § La monarquía feudal, que ahora se rebela contra el principio de la ausencia del «sí mismo» de la Iglesia determina los derechos esenciales del hombre, es verdad, con arreglo al nacimiento; pero los estamentos de la sociedad feudal no son castas, como en la India, sino que en la jerarquía eclesiástica cualquiera podía ascender desde las más bajas capas hasta los puestos más elevados. Por lo demás, también bajo el sistema feudal fueron manifestándose paulatinamente un derecho, un orden civil y una libertad amparada por la ley. En Italia y Alemania conquistaron su estatuto jurídico una serie de ciudades como repúblicas urbanas, siendo reconocidas por los poderes eclesiástico y temporal; la riqueza hizo su aparición en los Países Bajos, en Florencia y en las ciudades imperiales del Rin. Poco a poco y por estos caminos, los países empezaron a salir del régimen feudal, y una manifestación de ello la tenemos en los mismos capitani. Y también puede ser considerado como un levantamiento de la ausencia de «sí mismo» del espíritu el hecho de que la lengua de esta época se convierta en lingua volgare, por ejemplo en la Divina Comedia de Dante.” Hegel confunde atrozmente história puramente externa e filosofia…

THE LEAP OF THE CAT: “Mientras que la Iglesia creía hallarse antes en posesión de la verdad divina, ahora el régimen temporal, al cobrar dentro de sí orden y derecho y brotar de la dura disciplina del servicio, creíase fundado por Dios y, por tanto, considera presente en él lo divino y teníase por autorizado para manifestarse contra lo divino en la Iglesia, opuesto exclusivamente a todo lo laico.” “El poder de la Iglesia aparecía ahora como la tosquedad de la Iglesia, ya que no trataba de manifestarse en la realidad misma, sino de ser fuerte en el mundo del espíritu. Y surgía inmediatamente en la mundanidad la conciencia del llenarse los conceptos abstractos con la realidad del presente, de tal modo que éste dejaba de ser algo nulo de suyo, para adquirir también verdad.”

Las artes llevan consigo el que el hombre cree a partir de sí mismo lo divino; y como aquellos artistas eran lo suficientemente piadosos para abrazar como principio la ausencia de su «sí mismo», eran ellos los que con su capacidad subjetiva creaban estas representaciones. Con esto guarda una estrecha relación el que lo mundanal tenga dentro de sí la conciencia de ser tan legítimo como para retener las determinaciones basadas en la libertad subjetiva. En la industria, el individuo se ve obligado a atenerse a su propia actividad” “Así volvió el espíritu a sí mismo; así se recobró, y contempló como sus propias manos su propia razón.”

SECCIÓN TERCERA:

EL RENACIMIENTO DE LAS CIENCIAS

De aquí arrancan todas las aspiraciones e invenciones, de aquí parten el descubrimiento de América y de una ruta hacia las Indias orientales; y así se despertó principalmente el amor por las llamadas ciencias paganas de la antigüedad, ya que los eruditos de la época vuelven sus ojos a las obras de los antiguos, convertidas ahora en objeto de estudio, como studia humaniora, estudios en que el hombre es reconocido en su propio interés y en su propia actividad. Estos estudios, aunque aparezcan a primera vista como lo opuesto a lo divino, son más bien de suyo lo divino, pero lo divino que vive en la realidad del espíritu.”

De este modo, se generalizó la creencia de que el entendimiento podía reputar falso algo que la Iglesia afirmase como verdadero; y fue un paso de gran importancia éste que dio el entendimiento, al concebirse así, aun a trueque de encontrarse en oposición con todo lo positivo.”

El Occidente, por medio de las Cruzadas, e Italia en particular por medio del comercio mantenían frecuente trato con los griegos, aunque sin relaciones diplomáticas muy asiduas. Del Oriente vinieron, incluso, las leyes romanas, hasta que fue descubierto por casualidad un códice del Corpus iuris. Y el Occidente volvió a entrar en contacto con el Oriente griego, sobre todo, cuando la desdichada caída del imperio bizantino obligó a los más nobles y relevantes griegos a buscar refugio en Italia.” “Sería hacer demasiado honor a los monjes si aceptamos que fueron ellos quienes conservaron para nosotros los textos de la antigüedad; estas obras, por lo menos las griegas, vinieron de Constantinopla; las latinas conserváronse naturalmente en Occidente.”

Pomponacio [ao dizer simplesmente que a alma não é imortal] hubo de comparecer ante la Inquisición a responder de sus opiniones, aunque la protección que algunos cardenales le dispensaban le puso a cubierto de toda ulterior persecución. Había además muchos otros aristotélicos puros, y estas doctrinas se difundieron más tarde, sobre todo, entre los protestantes.”

Uno de los que más contribuyeron a la difusión de Platón en el Occidente fue el cardenal Bessarion de Trebisonda, que había sido Patriarca de Constantinopla. (Brucker)

Ficino, que nació en Florencia en 1433 y murió en 1499, se distinguió como traductor de Platón; fue él principalmente quien dio a conocer nuevamente la filosofía neoplatónica posterior a Proclo y a Plotino. Ficino escribió además una teología platónica.

Uno de los Médicis de Florencia, Cosme II, llegó incluso a fundar en el siglo XV una Academia platónica en aquella ciudad. Los miembros más relevantes de esta familia de los Médicis, los dos Cosmes, Lorenzo, León X y Clemente VII protegieron mucho el cultivo de las ciencias y las artes y atrajeron a sus cortes a los sabios clásicos griegos.”

Más tarde, fue resucitada la atomística epicúrea, principalmente por Gassendi contra Descartes, y de ella se conserva todavía en la física moderna la teoría de las moléculas.”

Reuchlin propúsose desarrollar de nuevo la auténtica filosofía pitagórica; pero todo aparece en él revuelto y turbio. En Alemania preparábase una orden imperial encaminada a destruir, como se había hecho en España, todos los libros hebraicos; hay que reconocer a Reuchlin el mérito de haber impedido que esta obra de destrucción fuese llevada a cabo. La total ausencia de diccionarios entorpecía tanto el estudio del griego, que Reuchlin tuvo que trasladarse a Viena para aprender allí esta lengua de labios de un griego de nacimiento.”

Todas estas filosofías eran cultivadas al lado de la fe eclesiástica y sin detrimento de ésta, pero no a la manera de los antiguos: surge así una abundante literatura que abarca una gran cantidad de nombres de filósofos, pero que pasa sin dejar huellas y que carece, desde luego, de la lozanía que sólo puede dar la originalidad y la profundidad de los elevados principios; y es que no se trata en rigor de una verdadera filosofía; por eso no es necesario que entremos en más detalles acerca de ella.”

También experimenta su renacimiento, en esta época, la manera ciceroniana de filosofar: es una filosofía eminentemente popular y superficial, sin ningún valor especulativo, pero que tiene, por lo menos, por lo que a la cultura general se refiere, el interés y la importancia de que el hombre en ella habla inspirándose en sí mismo como un todo, en su experiencia interior y exterior y en su presente, en general.” “Y a pesar de que la plétora de escritos filosóficos de esta clase, por ejemplo muchos de los de Erasmo, han caído en el olvido y tienen poco valor, no puede negarse que hicieron mucho bien después de la sequedad escolástica y de todos sus devaneos y abstracciones carentes de toda base” “También Petrarca escribía tomándose como fuente a sí mismo, sus estados de ánimo, como hombre pensante.”

El hombre sólo puede considerarse verdaderamente dueño de aquellos pensamientos que aparecen expresados en su lengua propia. Lutero y Melanchthon desecharon todo lo escolástico, tomando como pauta de juicio la Biblia, la fe, el ánimo del hombre. Melanchthon aporta una fría filosofía popular en la que el hombre quiere hacer acto de presencia y que, por tanto, contrasta enormemente con el seco y muerto escolasticismo.” “Muchos individuos se ven privados ahora del contenido, del objeto que venía siendo el punto de apoyo y el fundamento de su conciencia: de la fe de sus mayores. Por eso, al lado de aquellas serenas manifestaciones del renacimiento de la filosofía antigua, nos encontramos ahora, por otra parte, con muchas personalidades en las que se trasluce de un modo bastante violento el fogoso deseo de llegar a conocer por medio del pensamiento lo más profundo y lo concreto, aunque oscurecido y tergiversado por interminables fantasías, por una imaginación las más de las veces desbordada y calenturienta y por el afán de penetrar en los arcanos de la astrología, la geomancia y otros conocimientos misteriosos por el estilo.” “Las vicisitudes de su vida lo mismo que el contenido de sus obras, las cuales llenan con frecuencia muchos y grandes infolios, son el resultado de esta inseguridad de su modo de ser, del desgarramiento y la sublevación de su interior contra la existencia real a que se ven sujetos y del afán de encontrar en ella un fundamento firme.”

Las figuras más notables de este grupo a que nos referimos son las de Cardano, Giordano Bruno, Vanini, Campanella y Petrus Ramus; todos ellos son representantes del carácter de su época, de esta fase de transición, y caen ya dentro del período de la Reforma.”

[Cardano] mismo se encargó de trazar la historia de su vida y su carácter en un libro titulado De vita propria, en el que confiesa sus errores y sus defectos con la mayor dureza y sinceridad con que un hombre pueda hacerlo.” “Era el suyo un temperamento turbulento, que lo mismo fermentaba profundamente dentro de sí que estallaba en violentas explosiones y del modo más contradictorio; también su interior padecía de un tremendo desgarramiento. He aquí, extractada de su obra, la pintura de su carácter, trazada por él mismo: «La naturaleza me ha dotado de un espíritu filosófico y apto para el cultivo de las ciencias, soy ingenioso, elegante, decoroso, sensual, expeditivo, piadoso, fiel, amigo de la sabiduría, reflexivo, emprendedor, afanoso de saber, servicial, entusiasta, cavilador e inventivo, todo lo he aprendido por mí mismo, ardo en deseos de ver milagros, soy taimado, astuto, amargado, iniciado en el misterio, sobrio, trabajador, descuidado, charlatán, siento desprecio por la religión, soy vengativo, envidioso, triste, pérfido, traicionero, me gustan la magia y los encantamientos, me siento desdichado, soy cruel con los míos, retraído, antipático, severo, adivino, celoso, chismoso y amigo de pullas, calumniador, complaciente y voluble: tales son las grandes contradicciones de mi carácter y de mis costumbres.»

las turbiedades alejandrinas y cabalísticas alternan aquí con observaciones que acreditan una gran finura psicológica y una gran lucidez y claridad.”

Giordano Bruno fue uno de aquellos espíritus inquietos y atormentados a quienes vemos repudiar intrépidamente toda la autoridad y la fe de la Iglesia católica. En estos últimos tiempos, su recuerdo ha sido refrescado por Jacobi (Obras Completas, t. IV, secc. 2, pp. 5-46), en la edición de sus cartas sobre Spinoza, que añadió a un extracto de una obra de éste. Jacobi logró llamar, muy especialmente, la atención hacia este pensador al afirmar que la suma de su doctrina es la esencia del spinozismo y la cifra y compendio del panteísmo; este paralelismo dio a Giordano Bruno una fama que es evidentemente superior a sus verdaderos méritos. § Giordano Bruno tenía un temperamento más sereno y apacible que Cardano, pero tampoco él llegó a encontrar quietud sobre la tierra.” “Abandonó el suelo de Italia donde, siendo fraile dominico, se había permitido amargas observaciones acerca de ciertos dogmas católicos, por ejemplo el de la Transubstanciación y el de la Inmaculada Concepción de María y a propósito de la crasa ignorancia y la viciosa conducta de los frailes. Vivió luego en Ginebra, en 1582, pero se enemistó también con Calvino y con Beza, llegando a hacérsele imposible la convivencia con ellos; de allí pasó a otras ciudades francesas, entre ellas Lyon, y seguidamente se instaló en París, donde en 1585 se manifestó solemnemente en contra de los aristotélicos, sustentando según una costumbre muy extendida en la época —para que sirviesen de base a una discusión pública— una serie de tesis filosóficas dirigidas principalmente contra Aristóteles.” “En Helmstedt fue acogido con gran favor, en 1589, por los duques de Braunschweig-Lüneburg; de allí pasó a Francfort del Meno, donde dio a la imprenta algunas de sus obras. § Su vida fue como vemos la de un profesor y escritor ambulante, de incansable peregrinar. Por último retornó a Italia en 1592 y vivió durante algún tiempo en Padua sin que nadie le molestase, hasta que a la postre fue sorprendido por la Inquisición en Venecia, recluido en la cárcel y trasladado luego a Roma, donde en el año 1600, después de haberse negado a retractarse, fue condenado a morir en la hoguera como hereje; algunos testigos presenciales de su muerte, por ejemplo Scioppio, informan que soportó con gran fortaleza y serenidad la muerte por el fuego. § Las obras de Giordano Bruno fueron declaradas heréticas y ateas tanto por los católicos como por los protestantes y, por esta razón, quemadas, destruidas y mantenidas en secreto. Es, por ello, muy difícil encontrarlas reunidas, aunque la mayoría de ellas se hallan en la biblioteca de la universidad de Gotinga” “Dondequiera que se detenía por algún tiempo pronunciaba conferencias y componía y editaba obras; por eso es tan difícil llegar a reunir sus escritos completos. § Esto explica también el que muchas de sus obras se repitan en cuanto al contenido, aunque lo presenten bajo diversa forma. Y es natural que quien trabajaba de este modo no llegase nunca a desarrollar debidamente su pensamiento. El carácter fundamental que muchas de sus obras presentan es justo, de una parte, el que responde al hermoso entusiasmo de un alma noble que siente palpitar dentro de sí el espíritu y que sabe que la unidad de su ser y de todo ser constituye la vida íntegra del pensamiento. Hay algo de báquico en el modo como aborda los problemas esta profunda conciencia, que se desborda para convertirse en el verdadero objeto de sus especulaciones y expresar así su riqueza. (…) cuando no ha alcanzado aún esta formación científica, pasa continuamente de unas formas a otras, sin acertar a ordenarlas convenientemente.” “fanatismo místico”

El universo es, pues, como un animal infinito en el que todo vive y se mueve de las maneras más diversas. La inteligencia formal no se distingue así en nada de la causa final (del concepto de fin, de la entelequia o el principio inmóvil de Aristóteles); pero asimismo hay que ver en ella probablemente una inteligencia eficiente (causa efficiens), una causa intermedia, precisamente la que produce aquellos resultados.”

Si la materia fuese simplemente la potencia indeterminada, ¿cómo sería posible llegar a lo determinado? Esta simplicidad de la materia no es de suyo sino un momento de la forma; por tanto, al tratar de sustraer la materia a la forma, se la establece, al mismo tiempo, como una determinación de la forma misma, lo que equivale a establecer también y al mismo tiempo lo otro.”

Se representa el principio primigenio, lo que en otra parte llama la forma, bajo el concepto de lo más pequeño que es, al mismo tiempo, lo más grande, de lo uno que es, al propio tiempo, todo; el universo es este uno en todo. En el universo, dice este pensador, el cuerpo no se distingue del punto, ni el centro de la periferia, lo finito no se diferencia de lo infinito ni lo más grande de lo más pequeño. Todo es, aquí, centro o, dicho en otros términos, el centro del universo se halla en todas partes y en todo. Los antiguos expresaban esto diciendo que el padre de los dioses moraba esencialmente en todos y cada uno de los puntos del universo.”

La unidad de lo contrapuesto es explicada de este modo: la diferencia entre las sombras no es nunca verdadera pugna o contradicción. En el mismo concepto se encierran y conocen los contrarios, lo bello y lo feo, lo conveniente y lo inconveniente, lo perfecto y lo imperfecto, lo bueno y lo malo. Lo imperfecto, lo malo, lo feo, no descansan sobre ideas especiales propias; a estos conceptos se los conoce en otros, y no en uno peculiar suyo, que no es nada. Pues este algo peculiar es el no-ser en el ser, el d-efecto en el efecto. La inteligencia primera es la primera luz; derrama su luz desde lo más recóndito hasta lo más externo y la luz vuelve a condensarse desde lo más externo en sí misma. Toda esencia puede captar, con arreglo a su capacidad, algo de esta luz.” “Esta luz pura de las cosas es precisamente su cognoscibilidad, que parte de la inteligencia primera y se orienta hacia ella; lo que no es no puede ser conocido.” “Por medio de la idea que vive en la inteligencia se comprenden siempre las cosas mejor que por medio de la forma de las cosas naturales en sí mismas, precisamente porque esto es lo más material: pero la más alta comprensión se logra por medio de la idea del objeto tal y como vive en la inteligencia divina.” “Ahora bien, el arte de Giordano Bruno consiste en determinar el esquema general de la forma que todo lo comprende bajo sí y en poner de manifiesto cómo sus momentos se expresan en las diferentes órbitas de la existencia.” “La unidad es lo que sirve de hilo de reducción; y Giordano Bruno, al distinguir el mundo natural y el mundo metafísico, trata de establecer el sistema de aquellas determinaciones para poner de manifiesto, al mismo tiempo, cómo se manifiesta aquí de un modo natural lo que de otro modo se revela como lo pensado.”

Este arte del pensamiento interior y de la organización exterior con arreglo a él, y viceversa, arte que el alma humana posee, es puesto por Giordano Bruno en estrecha relación con el arte de la naturaleza del universo y con la acción del principio absoluto del universo en general, con arreglo a lo cual todo se forma y se plasma: es una forma única que se desarrolla; es el mismo principio universal que se plasma en los metales, las plantas y los animales y que en el hombre piensa y organiza fuera de sí, aunque se exprese, en sus efectos, de modo infinitamente diverso en el universo todo. Por consiguiente, es uno y el mismo desarrollo de uno y el mismo principio el que se proyecta sobre el interior y el exterior.”

Hasta aquí todo va bien en conjunto; es la ejecución del mismo esquema en todas direcciones. Y no cabe duda de que es digno de los mayores respetos este intento de exponer el sistema lógico del artista interior, del pensamiento productivo, de tal modo que a él correspondan las formas de la naturaleza exterior. Pero, a pesar de todo, las determinaciones del pensamiento, aun siendo de indiscutible grandeza el modo de proceder de Giordano Bruno, no pierden aquí su carácter superficial, el carácter de tipos inertes, muertos, como el de los esquemas de la filosofía natural de los tiempos modernos, ya que este pensador se limita a enumerar los momentos y las contradicciones del esquema, como los filósofos de la naturaleza desarrollan en cada esfera, considerándola como algo absoluto, la tríada. Giordano Bruno junta al buen tuntún los momentos más determinados; y cuando trata de expresarlos por medio de figuras y clasificaciones, todo es confusión. Las 12 formas que le sirven de base no son formas derivadas y reducidas a unidad en un gran sistema único, ni aparece tampoco como algo derivado la multiplicación de las formas posteriores. Giordano Bruno escribió diversas obras acerca de esto (De sigillis), y la exposición que hace de este punto varía en todas ellas; las cosas se manifiestan en forma de letras y de signos que corresponden a un pensamiento.” O mesmo problema do rodopio sem achar a saída dos conceitos finais nietzschianos para Heidegger: eterno retorno, super-homem, transmutação de todos os valores, vontade de potência.

EM CIMA DO MURO: “Vanini, como antes de él hicieran ya Pomponacio y otros opone la razón a la fe y a la doctrina de la Iglesia. Sin embargo, al probar por medio de la razón tales o cuales dogmas contradictorios con la doctrina cristiana, hacían constantemente protestas —como, andando el tiempo, y ya entre los reformados, haría Bayle— de que sus convicciones estaban sometidas en un todo a lo que la Iglesia enseñaba; o bien aducían todos los fundamentos y argumentos en contra de los dogmas teológicos como otras tantas dificultades y refutaciones insolubles puestas por la razón y que ellos, por su parte, sometían también gustosos a los dictados de la fe. Bayle dice, por ejemplo, en su Dictionnaire crítico, donde pasa revista a muchas ideas filosóficas, bajo la voz «Maniqueos», que la afirmación de que existen 2 principios no puede ser refutada, pero que esta opinión debe ser sometida a la autoridad de la Iglesia.” Em que pese tal postura, Vanini morreu na fogueira.

Pero además la Iglesia, al proceder así, caía en la peregrina contradicción de condenar a Vanini porque, aun no encontrando las doctrinas eclesiásticas conformes a razón, se sometía a ellas; por donde parecía exigir, y lo hacía valer por la fuerza de las hogueras inquisitoriales, no que sus doctrinas estuviesen por encima de la razón, sino que fuesen conformes a ella y la razón no tuviese más tarea formal que el hacer comprensible el contenido de la teología. La irritabilidad de la Iglesia peca de inconsecuencia y la arrastra a profundas contradicciones. Empezó reconociendo, es verdad, que la razón era incapaz de captar la verdad revelada, siendo por tanto indiferente como tal razón y hallándose las objeciones que de ella partiesen expuestas a verse refutadas y pulverizadas por sí mismas. Pero al no admitir, a partir de un determinado momento, que la contradicción entre la razón y la fe fuese tomada en serio y al condenar, precisamente por ello, a Vanini por ateísmo, venía a reconocer implícitamente que la doctrina de la Iglesia no podía contradecir a la razón, pero exigiendo al mismo tiempo que la razón fuese sometida a la Iglesia.”

Quienes, desde los antiguos hasta Voltaire, están considerados como enemigos del cristianismo y como ateos, hacen hincapié especialmente en las representaciones de orden externo. El empeño en atenerse literalmente a ellas conduce sin remedio a toda una serie de contradicciones.”

Los profesores reales, por ejemplo, habían mantenido en un Collège una controversia con los teólogos de la Sorbona sobre si debía pronunciarse quidam, quisquis, quoniam, o kidam, kiskis, koniam, y esta polémica tomó un sesgo tan violento que dio lugar a un proceso ante el parlamento, porque los doctores habían decidido retirar sus prebendas a un clérigo por defender la pronunciación de quisquis.”

Por último, Ramus logró una cátedra pública, siendo designado profesor en París, pero en varias ocasiones tuvo que abandonar este puesto en la enseñanza, por ser hugonote, al producirse disturbios intestinos en el país en torno a la cuestión religiosa; una de las veces hubo de viajar por Alemania. En la Noche de San Bartolomé, en 1572, pereció también Ramus a manos de sus enemigos” Que tempos merdões…

Ramus despertó un interés vivísimo con sus ataques, sobre todo contra la dialéctica aristotélica anterior, y contribuyó mucho a simplificar el formalismo de las reglas dialécticas. Ganó gran fama sobre todo por haber combatido tenazmente la lógica escolástica, erigiendo frente a ella una lógica nueva: la lógica rameana; esta polémica tuvo tan grande y profunda repercusión, que hasta en las historias de la literatura alemana aparecen mencionados los partidos de los ramistas, los antirramistas y los semirramistas.”

Los esfuerzos de hombres [Montaigne, Charron, Maquiavel] como éstos pertenecen evidentemente al campo de la filosofía en la medida en que extraen sus pensamientos de su conciencia, del círculo de la experiencia humana, de la observación de lo que sucede en el mundo y en el corazón del hombre. Es una filosofía de la vida, en la que se captan y exponen estos resultados de la experiencia; y sus resultados son en parte entretenidos y en parte instructivos.” “Pero no hacen girar sus investigaciones en torno al gran problema que interesa a la filosofía, ni razonan a base del pensamiento: por eso no pueden ser incluidos propiamente en la historia de la filosofía, sino que pertenecen más bien al panorama de la cultura general y se mueven dentro del marco del sano sentido común.” “El hombre vuelve ahora a mirar a su corazón y hace valer una vez más las razones de él: la esencia de las relaciones entre el individuo y la esencia absoluta se ve centrada de nuevo en el corazón, en el entendimiento y en la fe del propio individuo. Y aunque el corazón del hombre se halle todavía dividido, esta división, este conflicto, este anhelo es ya un desdoblamiento del hombre mismo”

Otra consecuencia de ello es la abolición de las oraciones en una lengua extranjera y el cultivo de las ciencias mediante el vehículo de este idioma extraño. El hombre es un elemento productor, creador, en el lenguaje: es ésta la primera exterioridad de que el hombre se reviste, la más simple forma de la existencia de que cobra conciencia; lo que el hombre se representa se lo representa también interiormente como hablado. Pues bien, esta primera forma aparece como algo roto y extraño cuando el hombre se ve obligado a expresar o sentir en una lengua extraña lo que toca a su supremo interés.”

La orientación fundamental que trae consigo la Reforma es el momento abstracto del ser dentro de sí del espíritu, del ser libre, del adentrarse en sí mismo; precisamente esta libertad es la vida misma del espíritu que lo lleva a replegarse sobre sí, con su contenido determinado, que aparece como otra cosa, mientras que el espíritu carece de libertad cuando deja subsistir dentro de sí esta alteridad como algo extraño a él, bien como algo no-asimilado, bien como algo muerto.”

TERCERA PARTE:

LA FILOSOFÍA MODERNA

INTRODUCCIÓN

Es un prejuicio pensar que la Reforma sólo trajo como resultado el separar del seno de la Iglesia católica a una parte de los cristianos: Lutero contribuyó también, muy eficazmente, a la reforma de la Iglesia católica misma, cuya corrupción está patentizada por sus propios documentos y por los mensajes de los emperadores y el Imperio al papa” Difícil imaginar que mesmo no tempo de Hegel (muito depois da própria Reforma!) alguém ainda não soubesse disso…

El principio de la reconciliación interior del espíritu, que era ya en sí la idea del cristianismo, se alejaba, pues, de nuevo y aparecía ahora como un desgarrón exterior e irreconciliable: un ejemplo más de la lentitud con que el Espíritu del Mundo se sobrepone a esta exterioridad.”

Con la invención de la pólvora desaparece la lucha animada por la cólera individual.” HAHAHAA!

El hombre descubre América, sus tesoros y sus pueblos, descubre la naturaleza, se descubre a sí mismo; la navegación es, ahora, el romanticismo superior del comercio.” sus tesoros y sus pueblos… Interessante!

La Iglesia perdió así todo poder contra él, pues el principio de la Iglesia residía, en verdad, en el espíritu mismo, y no en la ausencia de éste.”

A Igreja perdeu assim todo o poder contra ele, pois o princípio da Igreja residia, na realidade, no espírito mesmo, e não em sua ausência.” Quando foi que comecei a ler um livro de HISTÓRIA DA RELIGIÃO mesmo?!?

El otro lado del problema es que lo eterno, que es verdadero en y para sí, sea también conocido y comprendido por el mismo corazón puro; el espíritu propio se apropia para sí lo eterno. Tal es la fe luterana, simple y escueta, sin el aditamento de las obras, como se las llamaba. Nada tiene valor sino dentro del corazón, y no como cosa.”

INTERIORIZAÇÃO DO NIILISMO: “Dios sólo reside, por tanto, en el espíritu, no en el más allá, sino en lo más propio y más recóndito del individuo.”

El pensamiento conquista así su independencia, con lo cual abandonamos su unidad con la teología; se separa de ésta, como ya entre los griegos se había separado de la mitología, de la religión popular, para buscar de nuevo estas formas al final, en la época alejandrina, tratando de llenar las ideas mitológicas con la forma del pensamiento. Pero permanece por ello el nexo en sí: la teología no es otra cosa que la filosofía, ya que ésta piensa sobre sus problemas.”

Por tanto, cuando el pensamiento se manifiesta como una fuerza propia e independiente, nos separamos de la teología; estudiaremos, sin embargo, una figura en la que la teología y la filosofía forman aún una unidad. Nos referimos a Jacob Böhme, en quien el espíritu, aun moviéndose en su terreno propio y privativo, se halla encuadrado en parte dentro del mundo finito y natural, y en parte dentro del mundo interior, que es primordialmente el mundo cristiano.”

La primera dirección, o sea el realismo, es la experiencia. Filosofar es aquí o tiene como determinación fundamental el pensar por cuenta propia para asimilarse lo presente, [AS COISAS] como aquello en que reside la verdad y en que puede, por tanto, llegar a ser conocida; todo lo especulativo se achata para ser reducido a experiencia. Este algo presente que sirve de pauta es la naturaleza existente, externa, y la actividad espiritual en cuanto mundo político y actividad subjetiva. El camino hacia la verdad, para esta filosofía, consiste en partir de esta premisa, pero sin detenerse en su realidad externa y aislada, sino remontándose a lo general. [A IDÉIA]” H. insinua que falará imparcialmente da corrente que lhe é oposta; em poucos parágrafos estará refutando toda esta modalidade do pensar.

AQUILO CONTRA QUEM STEPHEN HAWKING FALAVA, E NÃO <FILÓSOFOS> NO TERMO ATUAL (ele estava 300 anos defasado): “la ciencia de la naturaleza sólo llega hasta la fase de la reflexión. Esta senda de la física experimental se llamó y sigue llamándose todavía hoy filosofía, como nos lo revelan los Principia philosophiae naturalis de Newton” “lo que hoy llaman los franceses sciences exactes.” “Aquí no es la idea misma, en su infinitud, el objeto del conocimiento” “las leyes de Keplero” “En la filosofía escolástica, por el contrario, era como si al hombre le hubiesen sacado los ojos, y todo lo que en aquel tiempo se discutía acerca de la naturaleza partía de una serie de premisas abstrusas.” Mais detalhes dessa fase da evolução espiritual e epistemológica em https://seclusao.art.blog/2021/08/05/o-que-aristoteles-e-stephen-hawking-tem-em-comum-um-pouco-sobre-a-contenda-edipiana-fisica-x-metafisica-mal-entendidos-comuns-entre-uma-e-outra-do-ponto-de-vista-filosofico-passando-por-figuras-il/.

En segundo lugar, se observaba lo espiritual tal y como, en su realización, forma el mundo espiritual de los Estados, con el fin de inquirir así por la experiencia cuáles eran los derechos de unos individuos con respecto a otros y frente al príncipe, y cuáles los de unos Estados para con otros.” A ciência exato-política, por assim dizer.

Antes (…) lo que a los reyes les era lícito y lo que les estaba vedado se tomaba de la historia de Saúl y de David; los derechos y prerrogativas de los sacerdotes tenían como fuente la historia de Samuel; en una palabra, el Antiguo Testamento era la fuente de todos los principios del derecho público, y todavía hoy vemos cómo en todas las bulas de los papas se refuerzan con referencias al Antiguo Testamento los ordenamientos de la Iglesia.”

Fueron compuestos, de este modo, libros que todavía hoy se citan con cierta frecuencia en el parlamento inglés.”

A segunda direção, o idealismo, parte sempre do interior; para ele, tudo reside no pensamento e o espírito mesmo é todo o conteúdo.¹ Aqui se toma por objeto da filosofia a idéia mesma, isto é, trata-se de pensá-la, a fim de chegar, partindo dela, ao determinado. [AS COISAS] O que ali [no realismo] extrai-se da experiência, extrai-se aqui do pensamento a priori, ou bem capta-se também o determinado, só que não para reduzi-lo ao geral, senão que para <reduzi-lo> à IDÉIA.”

¹ Tem razão, Hegel: tudo sempre parte do interior: do pensamento! Até mesmo “o espírito” é uma criação do eu.

Grifos em laranja: H. deixa claro – realismo e idealismo não são dois rios ou duas vias de mão única. Não há simetria. O realismo certamente só pode confluir num sentido – do particular (dados imediatos, que não deixam por isso de ser mentais), pois são fenômenos, para AS IDÉIAS; e ainda assim não A IDÉIA, isto é, a mais elevada de todas, o ABSOLUTO. Para H., a investigação empírica só funciona para descobrir leis da física ou uma ou outra lei política ou princípio ou axioma do Direito. Mas o idealismo conflui nos dois sentidos, é muito mais perfeito. Pelo pensamento (o único) se acessam as coisas; pelas coisas – o particular – se chega ao geral, ao pensamento do absoluto (A IDÉIA). Em síntese, a experiência é limitada, embora seja humana e, de qualquer forma, melhor do que a abstração vácua (escolástica). Veja que há “geral” e “geral” em H.: gerais e gerais; uns são apenas conceitos (o limite do realismo), outros são apenas uma fase intermediária do idealismo. O geral está sempre em contraposição ao determinado, que é o fenômeno puro, poder-se-ia dizer, carente da generalização sistemática – mas tem-se de perguntar: em qual contexto? De qual geral se está falando? Sempre que se ler H. isto tem sua importância.

1.1. As coisas são sempre meio, nunca fim.

1.2. Os fins, se determinados pela experiência, são apenas meios para os fins absolutos ideais.

Sin embargo, ambas direcciones vienen a converger en un punto común, ya que también la experiencia, por su parte, se esfuerza por derivar de las observaciones, principios y leyes generales; y a su vez el pensamiento, partiendo de lo general abstracto, necesita darse un contenido determinado, por donde lo apriorístico y lo aposteriorístico no forman dos campos absolutamente deslindados. En Francia, logró imponerse más bien lo general abstracto; en Inglaterra prevaleció, por el contrario, en general, el criterio de la experiencia, que todavía hoy goza de gran predicamento en aquel país; Alemania, en cambio, tomó como punto de partida la idea concreta, el interior del hombre, pleno de ánimo y espíritu.” Nonsense. Hegel quer dizer que em seu país se está no melhor dos mundos; que em sua filosofia se está no verdadeiro. No mais verdadeiro que os outros verdadeiros. O difícil para Hegel é ir além do a priori kantiano, que é um tipo muito especial de a priori, mais elevado que o a priori francês, se podemos assim dizer. Aqui não é o lugar para tratar do criticismo kantiano, que é, efetivamente, a síntese correta, e antes mesmo de Hegel aparecer. Hegel tem de recorrer a um suposto Espírito do Mundo para pretender estar um grau acima de Kant em objetividade. Uma objetividade divina (em si!)! Alega que não só a representação mental, mas o mundo como matéria viva, o em si kantiano, não-partícipe da experiência, é sinônimo com sua representação mental, mas se, e somente se, souber-se “rastreá-lo”, “sentir seu cheiro”, que é o que ele faz em seu Historicismo. Isso, no entanto, é o vulgar e depreciativo de sua filosofia. O em si só pode ser em si enquanto for inessencial no sentido hegeliano, i.e., o que se chama a partir de Schopenhauer de vontade, e que a terminologia existencialista abandonará, mas continuará usando implicitamente. O que é inessencial não tem “agenda própria”, não tem fim em vista, teleologia, apenas é, com-o-homem.

Ahora bien, la conciliación buscada y que se cree poder lograr también en el reino del pensamiento es el interés general de la ciencia. Esa conciliación se realiza en sí, pues el saber se considera capacitado para llevar a cabo este conocimiento de la conciliación dentro de sí. Por tanto, los sistemas filosóficos no son otra cosa que otras tantas modalidades de esta unidad absoluta, de tal modo que sólo en la unidad concreta de aquellas contraposiciones reside la verdad.”

La segunda fase es la de la conciliación metafísica; y es realmente aquí donde, con Descartes, comienza la filosofía de la época moderna como pensamiento abstracto.”

Descartes resumido como SUSPENSÃO ACEITAÇÃO.

Pseudo-suspensão, já que depois todo o fenomênico é automaticamente aceito, pois provém de Deus em última instância, i.e., provém imediatamente de mim, da consciência pensante, e Deus não pode dotar meu intelecto de um erro ou de uma fraude metafísica.

E no entanto isto já é suficiente, para H., para adentrar-se a modernidade: “Y así se plantea el problema de cómo es o puede ser el pensamiento idéntico a lo objetivo. Con ello, se destaca por sí mismo y se convierte en objeto lo interior, lo que sirve de base a esta metafísica; estamos ya plenamente dentro de la moderna filosofía.” “ahora los pensadores viven en condiciones completamente distintas de aquellas en que vivieron los filósofos de los tiempos antiguos”

De aquí que en Grecia y en Roma los filósofos viviesen de un modo muy propio y peculiar, rodeándose en lo externo de aquel ambiente y de aquellas condiciones de vida que mejor cuadraban a su ciencia y que más dignas parecían de ella; procuraban mantenerse, como particulares, independientes y al margen de las relaciones de la vida social, y en tal sentido podría comparárselos a los monjes, que renuncian a los bienes temporales.

En la Edad Media, la filosofía corre principalmente a cargo de clérigos y doctores en teología. En el período de transición, los filósofos libran una dura lucha interior consigo mismos y luchan exteriormente contra las circunstancias, debatiéndose en la vida en medio de grandes y agitadas vicisitudes.

Muy distinto es el panorama de la época moderna, donde no nos encontramos ya con individuos-filósofos que formen una clase aparte. Las murallas que los separaban del resto de la sociedad han caído por tierra; los filósofos ahora no son monjes, sino que viven dentro del mundo, asociados a él, y tomando parte, de un modo o de otro, en las actividades comunes. Viven sujetos a las condiciones de la vida civil, ocupando puestos o desempeñando cargos públicos; y cuando son simples particulares, su posición no los aísla tampoco del resto de la sociedad. Viven entregados al presente, al mundo, entrelazados con la marcha y el desarrollo de éste, y sólo se dedican a la filosofía por añadidura, como un lujo y una superabundancia.” Silêncio, pois Hegel está descobrindo as condições do modo de produção capitalista! Não há poços destapados no meio da cidade onde possamos tropeçar e cair por acidente…

En efecto, en la época moderna vemos cómo, al reconciliarse el principio mundanal consigo mismo, se aquieta y encauza dentro del orden el mundo exterior: las relaciones mundanales, las clases y los estamentos, las maneras de vivir, se constituyen y organizan de un modo natural y racional. Va formándose una cohesión general e inteligente, con lo cual también la individualidad adquiere una posición distinta dentro de la sociedad, perdiendo aquella vigorosa personalidad plástica de los antiguos.” É tudo uma máquina sorridente e animada após Lutero ter traduzido a Bíblia, correto? Durkheim seria a apoteose e fim dessa maneira de pensar.

Debido a que el poder objetivo de las circunstancias es inmenso y, por ello mismo, la modalidad necesaria —según la cual soy en ellas— se ha convertido en algo indiferente para mí, por ello también se convierte en indiferente la personalidad y la vida individual.” “El mundo moderno es este poder esencial de la cohesión y, dentro de él, es sencillamente necesario para el individuo formar parte de esa cohesión general, en lo que a la vida exterior se refiere; hoy los hombres sólo pueden vivir en común dentro de su sociedad y de su clase, y la única excepción a esta regla la tenemos en Spinoza.”

La clase de los filósofos no se halla aún organizada, como la de los monjes. Los dedicados a la enseñanza y a la vida universitaria lo están ya un poco; pero incluso esta clase se ve obligada a hundirse en las normas cotidianas de las relaciones sociales, ya que la entrada en ella es algo regulado exteriormente. Lo esencial es que el filósofo se mantenga fiel a su fin.”

SECCIÓN PRIMERA:

SE ANUNCIA LA FILOSOFÍA MODERNA

Los 2 primeros filósofos que hemos de considerar aquí son [o segundo e mais relevante] Bacon, y Böhme, dos individualidades tan absolutamente dispares como lo son sus filosofías.”

Bacon (…) a quien suele citarse, por ello mismo, como el caudillo de toda esa filosofía de la experiencia con cuyas frasecillas se gusta todavía hoy de adornar cierta clase de obras.” Hahaha!

La filosofía baconiana es, pues, en términos generales, una especie de filosofía basada en la observación de la naturaleza exterior y espiritual del hombre, de sus inclinaciones, sus apetitos y sus determinaciones jurídicas y racionales; partiendo de aquí, se llega a conclusiones y se descubre o se trata de descubrir las ideas y las leyes generales que rigen en este campo de problemas. Bacon dio completamente de lado a la filosofía escolástica, la repudió como enemigo que era de razonar a base de abstracciones completamente remotas, cerrando en cambio los ojos a lo que se tiene delante de los ojos. Su punto de vista es el de los fenómenos revelados por los sentidos, [y no por la Iglesia!] tal y como se aparecen ante el hombre culto y cómo éste reflexiona en torno a ellos; punto de vista conforme al principio de aceptar lo temporal y lo finito como tal.”

a la edad aproximada de 19 años escribió una obra acerca del estado de Europa (De statu Europae). Se unió en su juventud al conde de Essex, favorito de la reina Isabel, gracias a cuya protección pronto mejoró de situación material —hay que tener en cuenta que, como segundón que era, no se había beneficiado en lo más mínimo con el patrimonio paterno, el cual correspondía íntegro al primogénito—, haciendo grandes y rápidos progresos.” “se le acusa, en efecto, de haberse dejado seducir por los enemigos de Essex para acusarlo públicamente de alta traición cuando el favorito cayó en desgracia.” “Y, aun ocupando puestos tan altos y de tan gran responsabilidad, no tenía inconveniente en entregarse a la intriga y en incurrir en actos de la más burda venalidad. Esto hizo que atrajese sobre sí él descontento del pueblo y de los grandes, hasta que, al cabo, fue acusado judicialmente, viéndose su proceso ante el parlamento. Fue condenado a pagar una multa de 4000 libras esterlinas y encarcelado en la Torre de Londres, su nombre fue borrado de la lista de los pares. Durante el proceso y su encarcelamiento, dio pruebas de una increíble debilidad de carácter.” História já muito conhecida. Mas é interessante ‘relê-la’ sob novos olhos (os de H.).

No tardó, sin embargo, en ser excarcelado, dándose por anulado su proceso, gracias al odio todavía mayor que existía contra el rey y contra el ministerio de Buckingham, bajo cuyo gobierno había desempeñado aquellos cargos y por creérsele víctima de él, ya que tuvo la suerte de que el gobierno del duque cayese antes y de que su jefe se viese abandonado y perseguido por quienes, siendo gobernante, le secundaran. Fue, pues, esta circunstancia —la de que sus perseguidores se hiciesen odiar por su labor de gobernantes tanto como él— la que más que su propia inocencia contribuyó a atenuar un poco el desprecio y el odio concitados contra Bacon.” “Durante el resto de su vida no salió ya de la oscuridad y de la miseria, viéndose obligado a mendigar del rey algún socorro y dedicando el resto de sus días al cultivo de las ciencias, hasta que murió en el año 1626. (Buhle; Brucker)

El nombre de Bacon es ensalzado siempre como el del pensador que descubrió en la experiencia la verdadera fuente del conocimiento, y no puede negarse que es, en rigor, el guía y el representante más caracterizado de lo que en Inglaterra se llama filosofía, una filosofía a la que los ingleses no aciertan a sobreponerse. Parecen ser, en Europa, a la verdad, el pueblo que vive entregado por entero al entendimiento de la realidad, como los tenderos y los artesanos viven entregados, dentro del Estado, a cuanto se refiere a la materia, y lo que les guía y gobierna es el tomar como objeto de sus pensamientos la realidad y no la razón.

Bacon realizó, sin duda alguna, una obra muy meritoria al señalar cómo es necesario tener en cuenta los fenómenos naturales exteriores e interiores; pero su nombre aparece rodeado de mayor fama que la que sus méritos inmediatos permiten reconocerle. La época misma y la manera de razonar de los ingleses revelan la tendencia general a partir de hechos y a juzgar con arreglo a ellos; y como realmente fue Bacon quien proclamó esta dirección y como, además, hace falta siempre un guía y un fundador a quien poner al frente de una manera, se le coloca en este puesto, como si, en efecto, hubiese encauzado él el conocimiento por estos derroteros de la filosofía experimental.”

Con toda la corrupción de su carácter, era un hombre de espíritu y de gran sagacidad, indudablemente, pero no poseía la capacidad necesaria para razonar con arreglo a pensamientos generales y a conceptos. No encontramos en él una consideración metódica y científica de los problemas, sino solamente los razonamientos exteriores propios de un hombre de mundo como Bacon era. El conocimiento del mundo lo poseía innegablemente en el más alto grado”

«Emite casi siempre sus juicios ex cathedra; y cuando intenta explicarlos, recurre más bien a metáforas, a ilustraciones y a agudas comparaciones que a una argumentación directa y adecuada. El razonamiento general es una de las condiciones esenciales de toda filosofía; pues bien, la ausencia de esta cualidad es sorprendente en las obras de Bacon.» The Quarterly Review, 1817

Limítase a examinar el presente y a hacer consideraciones en torno a él, a poner de relieve y dejar prevalecer los fenómenos de la realidad; contempla con los ojos bien abiertos lo existente, concentrando en ello la mirada como en lo primordial y honrando y reconociendo, por encima de todo, esta manera de ver el mundo.” “Y es en realidad este aspecto metódico de sus consideraciones lo único que hace de Bacon una figura relevante y digna de figurar en la historia de las ciencias y de la filosofía; este principio del conocimiento metódico fue, al mismo tiempo, el que le valió la gran influencia que llegó a tener en su época, haciendo que las gentes se fijasen en los defectos de que las ciencias adolecían, tanto en cuanto a su método como en cuanto a su contenido.” “Y no cabe duda de que la época moderna tiene el gran mérito de haber estimulado o creado este conocimiento, pues lo que los antiguos sabían y decían acerca de esto no puede ser más pobre.”

Es cierto que cuando se trata de una ciencia acabada, la idea debe partir de sí misma, pues la ciencia como tal no puede arrancar nunca de lo empírico. Pero, para que la ciencia llegue a existir, hace falta el tránsito de lo individual y lo particular a lo general, una actividad que se proyecte sobre la materia empírica dada y reaccione contra ella y la transforme. El postulado del conocimiento a priori, como si la idea construyese a partir de sí misma, sólo es por tanto un reconstruir, ni más ni menos que la sensibilidad lo hace en la religión en general. Sin el desarrollo de las ciencias de la experiencia jamás habría podido la filosofía llegar más allá de donde había llegado entre los antiguos. La totalidad de la idea de por sí es la ciencia acabada; lo otro es el comienzo, la marcha de su nacimiento.”

Para que pudiese existir, por ejemplo, la historia de la filosofía de los tiempos modernos era necesario que existiese, entre otras cosas, la historia de la filosofía en general, la trayectoria de la filosofía a lo largo de tantos miles de años; el espíritu hubo de recorrer este largo camino para estar en condiciones de poder producir aquella filosofía. En la conciencia, adopta la posición de rechazar o destruir este largo puente que hay detrás de ella, como si se desenvolviese libremente en su éter, sin encontrar la menor resistencia dentro de este medio; pero otra cosa muy distinta es obtener este éter y este desenvolvimiento en él. No debemos perder de vista, en modo alguno, que la filosofía jamás habría llegado a existir sin esta trayectoria anterior; pues el espíritu es esencialmente la elaboración como de algo distinto.” Não tem nada a ver com o espírito, mas H. não deixa de ter razão.

Bacon hízose famoso con 2 obras. Su mérito principal consiste, primeramente, en haber construido en su obra De augmentis scientiarum una enciclopedia sistemática de las ciencias, intento este que necesariamente tenía que causar gran sensación entre las gentes de su tiempo. No deja de tener su importancia, y grande, el tener ante la vista este panorama sistemático, ordenado, del conjunto de las ciencias, en que nadie, hasta entonces, había pensado.”

Bacon clasifica las ciencias con arreglo a las facultades de la memoria, de la fantasía y de la razón, distinguiendo estas 3 clases de materias” Poesia e arte são ciências fantasiosas. Quão bizarro isso nos soa hoje.

Estas divisiones, siguiendo el método favorito de la época, se subdividen a su vez, lo que le permite a Bacon incluir en su clasificación todas las demás ciencias, pero hay que reconocer que sus resultados distan mucho de ser satisfactorios. Forman parte de la historia, según él, las obras de Dios, o sean la historia sagrada, la profética y la eclesiástica; las obras de los hombres, que incluyen la historia en general y la historia de la literatura; las obras de la naturaleza, etc.”

En la Cosmética, al hablar de los afeites, dice: «Es, en verdad, extraño que las leyes civiles y eclesiásticas hayan tardado tanto tiempo en prestar atención a esos malos hábitos de los cosméticos; en la Biblia leemos que Jezabel usaba afeites, pero no así Ester ni Judit».”

Pero, en realidad, la clasificación de las ciencias es lo menos importante en la obra De augmentis scientiarum. Lo que da su valor a esta obra y le asegura el éxito es la crítica y la profusión de observaciones instructivas, cosa que tanto se echaba de menos por aquel entonces en los diversos géneros de conocimientos y disciplinas, sobre todo en lo tocante al problema de saber hasta qué punto debía considerarse vicioso e ineficaz el método que venía empleándose y en el que los conceptos escolástico-aristotélicos eran urdidos por el entendimiento como si se tratase de realidades.”

El segundo aspecto que caracteriza la filosofía de Bacon es que, en su segunda obra, en su Organon, trata de desarrollar prolijamente un nuevo método acerca del saber; y es esto precisamente lo que con mayor frecuencia se invoca, todavía hoy, en apoyo de su fama. Bacon se manifiesta polémicamente en contra del método escolástico hasta entonces imperante y que consistía en saber deduciendo, es decir, contra las formas silogísticas. Llama a este método anticipationes naturae, pues consiste, nos dice, en arrancar de supuestos, definiciones y conceptos hipotéticos, es decir, de abstracciones escolásticas y en seguir razonando a partir de ahí, sin fijarse para nada en lo que sucede en la realidad.”

«La dialéctica en nada ayuda al descubrimiento de las artes; muchas artes han sido descubiertas por obra del azar.»

Contra este método deductivo polemiza calurosamente Bacon, pero no contra el método en general, es decir, no contra el concepto del mismo (concepto que Bacon no posee), sino contra el modo como se manejaba, contra aquella clase de deducciones escolásticas que procedían tomando como base un contenido hipotético.”

En realidad, aunque no lo supiese ni se diese cuenta de ello, Bacon empujaba hacia esta confusión en cuanto al contenido. Pues, aunque en rigor rechazase la deducción de un modo general y sólo admitiese las conclusiones inductivas, no cabe duda de que él mismo incurre, inconscientemente, en deducciones. En parte, todos aquellos héroes de la experiencia que siguiendo a Bacon han puesto en práctica sus postulados y que creen llegar al conocimiento puro de la cosa por la vía de la observación, el experimento y la experiencia, lo que hacen es proceder sin ninguna clase de conclusiones ni conceptos, comprendiendo y concluyendo tanto peor cuanto más creen no tener nada que ver con los conceptos, y, además, no se remontan nunca del plano de la inducción hasta el conocimiento inmanente y verdadero. Por tanto, cuando Bacon contrapone la inducción al silogismo formula una contraposición puramente formal; toda inducción es, al mismo tiempo, una deducción, cosa que ya sabía también Aristóteles.” Toda observação é ideológica. Mas é possível construir novas ideologias mediante observações.

O “AVÔ” DA FENOMENOLOGIA: “Este momento del ahora y el aquí es el que se revela así, en general, a la conciencia de sí. Pero las experiencias, los experimentos, las observaciones no saben lo que en realidad hacen, no saben que el único interés que se toman por las cosas es precisamente la certeza inconsciente interior de la razón de encontrarse en la realidad misma; y las observaciones y los experimentos tienden, en efecto, cuando están certeramente orientados, a la conclusión de que lo único objetivo es el concepto. A los experimentos se les escapa de entre las manos lo particular sensible y se convierte en algo general; el ejemplo más conocido es el de la electricidad positiva y negativa, en cuanto que es eso: positiva y negativa.” Nem sei do que ele está falando (eletricidade + ou -). Provavelmente da escolha arbitrária do vetor, pois obviamente a natureza em si não depõe e positividade ou negatividade de algo, a não ser pelo nada!

El otro defecto formal en que incurren todos los empíricos consiste en creer que se atienen exclusivamente a la experiencia; no se dan cuenta de que, al asimilarse estas percepciones, entran ya en el campo de la metafísica. El hombre nunca permanece, ni puede permanecer aunque quiera, en el campo de lo particular. Busca siempre lo general, y lo general son siempre los pensamientos, aunque éstos no sean conceptos.” “la fuerza es algo general, no perceptible; los empíricos se entregan a estas determinaciones sin el menor atisbo de crítica, de un modo inconsciente.”

Y en su Historia natural ofrece recetas en toda forma para fabricar oro y realizar muchos milagros.” Hahaha! Tinha que aprender com Plínio!

Como vemos, Bacon no se sitúa aún, ni mucho menos, en el punto de vista racional de la investigación de la naturaleza, sino que se deja llevar todavía por las más burdas supersticiones, por una falsa magia, etc. Todo esto aparece expuesto, en conjunto, de un modo intelectivo, con lo cual se mantiene dentro del marco de las ideas de su tiempo.”

«Es inútil investigar las causas finales; esta investigación es incluso perjudicial para las ciencias y sólo tiene interés en el campo de la moral.»

Bacon está en lo cierto al oponerse a esta investigación basada en causas finales, cuando se trata de finalidades puramente externas, y el propio Kant distingue, con mucha razón, esas finalidades externas de las internas.”

Quien actúa en nombre de la colectividad, del Estado, un general por ejemplo, en caso de guerra, no tiene por qué respetar al individuo como tal, sino que éste, aun siendo un fin en sí, es para estos efectos un fin puramente relativo. Es este fin en sí, no como algo exclusivo y contrapuesto a todo lo demás, sino solamente en cuanto su esencia es el concepto general.”

Cuando estudiemos la filosofía de Locke, tendremos ocasión de referirnos de nuevo a este método empírico de los ingleses.”

Este Jacob Böhme había caído en el olvido desde hacía mucho tiempo y pasaba por ser, cuando de él se hablaba, un pietista fanático y soñador; su público fue reduciéndose por obra, sobre todo, de la Ilustración. Leibniz le tenía todavía en alta estima; pero es sobre todo en estos últimos tiempos cuando vuelve a reconocerse toda su profundidad y a enaltecerse la obra de este pensador. No cabe duda de que no era merecedor de aquel desprecio en que se le llegó a tener, pero tampoco creemos que merezca tantos honores como se le han querido tributar.”

Desde este punto de vista, hay que reconocer que Böhme, como filósofo, es un perfecto bárbaro; trátase, sin embargo, de un hombre que, con toda su tosquedad de exposición, posee un corazón concreto y profundo. Lo malo es que por no tener un método ni seguir un orden resulta difícil llegar a formarse una idea clara de su filosofía.”

en su libro De signatura rerum se aclara y contiene bastante bien esta impresión [prostrações extáticas de vários dias, ou ver objetos reluzentes, ou a própria luz, de forma intensa e inexplicável] grabada en él”

Sus obras son muy solicitadas por los holandeses, razón por la cual la mayoría de sus ediciones aparecieron en Amsterdam, habiendo sido reimpresas en Hamburgo. Su primer escrito es la Aurora, al que siguen muchos otros; el titulado De los tres principios y otro que lleva por título De la triple vida del hombre figuran entre los más notables. Böhme era un lector infatigable de la Biblia. No sabemos de otras lecturas suyas. Pero gran cantidad de pasajes de sus obras revelan que leía mucho, principalmente, sin duda alguna, obras de mística, de teosofía y de alquimia, entre las que podemos estar seguros de que figurarían las de Teofrasto Paracelso Bombast von Hohenheim, filósofo de parecido calibre, aunque más confuso que Böhme y sin la profundidad de espíritu de éste.” Vai me desculpar, H., mas Giordano Bruno é muito mais moderno que esse Böhme – isso foi xenofobia sua!

Pero como Böhme no posee el concepto y se halla tan rezagado en cuanto a la formación del espíritu, resulta que esto se traduce en una espantosa y angustiosa batalla de su ánimo y de su conciencia con el lenguaje; y el contenido de esta batalla es la más profunda idea de Dios, que se esfuerza por unir y enlazar las más absolutas contradicciones, pero no por unirlas y enlazarlas para la razón pensante.” Dá a impressão de ser o Kierkegaard do pré-hegelianismo, como Kierk. foi o Böhme do pós-hegel..

Así como Próspero, en el drama de Shakespeare —en La Tormenta—, amenaza a Ariel con hendir un nudoso roble y aprisionarle en él por mil años, así el gran espíritu de Böhme se halla aprisionado en el duro y nudoso roble de lo sensible, en la dura prisión de las representaciones, sin poder alcanzar la libre exposición de la idea.”

nos equivocaríamos en nuestro trabajo si tratáramos de encontrar en Böhme, a todo trance, un desarrollo consecuente de sus ideas, sobre todo en tanto que trascienden.” Os loucos também podem figurar na história da filosofia, por que não?

Con el tormento, trata Böhme de expresar lo absoluto, es decir, justo la negatividad consciente de sí y sentida, lo negativo referente a sí mismo, que es, por ello, afirmación absoluta. En torno a este punto giran, en efecto, todo el esfuerzo y toda la preocupación de Böhme”

Trátase evidentemente tan sólo de una tergiversación muy propia de zapatero de portal del nombre sal nitri, salitre (que en austríaco aún se sigue llamando hoy «salnitre»), es decir, sal neutra, la esencia neutral y verdaderamente general.”

SECCIÓN SEGUNDA:

EL PERÍODO DEL ENTENDIMIENTO PENSANTE

Esta seção será desproporcional, respondendo por de 40 a 50% de todo o conteúdo de relevo deste volume; portanto, bastante mais extensa que qualquer outra seção de capítulo do livro III.

Con Cartesio entramos, en rigor, desde la escuela neoplatónica y lo que guarda relación con ella, en una filosofía propia e independiente, que sabe que procede sustantivamente de la razón y que la conciencia de sí es un momento esencial de la verdad.”

Aquí, ya podemos (…) gritar, al fin (…) ¡tierra!”

El alemán, sobre todo, cuanto más servil en un sentido más desenfrenado se muestra en otro; la limitación y la falta de medida, el afán de la originalidad, es el ángel satánico que nos azota con sus alas.” Bela caracterização do nazismo!

Este recomenzar de la filosofía, en esta época, explica por qué las viejas historias de la filosofía del siglo XVII, la de Stanley por ejemplo, sólo tratan de la filosofía de los griegos y los romanos, terminando con el advenimiento del cristianismo, como si para ellas no existiese, a partir de entonces, ninguna filosofía, por considerarla, en realidad, innecesaria, ya que la teología filosófica de la Edad Media no tenía como principio el pensamiento libre, que parte de sí mismo.”

Este [primer] período nos revela como principales figuras a Descartes y Spinoza y, al lado de ellas, las de Malebranche, Locke, Leibniz y Wolff. La otra forma es la del escepticismo y el criticismo contra el entendimiento pensante [esse suposto primeiro período moderno], contra la metafísica como tal y contra lo que hay de general en el empirismo: al llegar aquí, examinaremos las modalidades de estas corrientes filosóficas entre los escoceses, los alemanes y los franceses; los materialistas franceses retornan, más tarde, a la metafísica.”

Lo primero es la metafísica espontánea, pero también exenta de crítica: Descartes y Spinoza, que implantan la unidad del ser y el pensar. Lo segundo es Locke, quien trata de la contraposición misma, considerando la idea metafísica de la experiencia (…) La mónada de Leibniz, es, en tercer lugar, la totalidad de la concepción del mundo.”

La filosofía spinozista, en segundo lugar, se comporta con respecto a la filosofía de Cartesio solamente como si se tratase de su consecuente desarrollo; el método es lo fundamental. Una forma que aparece al lado del spinozismo y que constituye también un desarrollo completo del cartesianismo es, en tercer lugar, el modo como Malebranche se representa esta filosofía.”

René Descartes es un héroe del pensamiento, que aborda de nuevo la empresa desde el principio y reconstruye la filosofía sobre los cimientos puestos ahora de nuevo al descubierto al cabo de mil años.” Exagero da porra!

su importancia estriba principalmente en haber sabido exponer su pensamiento de un modo simple y sencillo y, al mismo tiempo, popular, relegando a segundo plano toda premisa del pensamiento popular mismo, partiendo de tesis completamente simples y reduciendo el contenido a los pensamientos o a la extensión y el ser, con lo que, en cierto modo, enfrenta el pensamiento con esta su antítesis. Este pensamiento simple se presenta bajo la forma del entendimiento determinado y claro, razón por la cual no se le puede llamar un pensamiento especulativo, una razón especulativa. Cartesio parte de determinaciones fijas, firmes, pero solamente del pensamiento; es la manera de su tiempo. Lo que los franceses llaman ciencias exactas, ciencias del entendimiento determinado, tiene justo en esta época su punto de partida. La filosofía y la ciencia exacta no se hallan separadas todavía; la separación de una y otra habrá de producirse más tarde.”

poco después, en 1619, el primero de la guerra de los Treinta años, entró como voluntario en las tropas bávaras y tomó parte en varias campañas bajo el mando de Tilly. Muchos hombres abrazaron la carrera de soldado por no encontrar satisfacción en el cultivo de las ciencias; pero éste entró en la profesión de las armas, no por desamor a las ciencias, sino porque las amaba demasiado y las tenía en muy alta estima.” ¿??

Estuvo también en la batalla de Praga, en la que Federico, el del Palatinado, perdió la corona de Bohemia. Nuestro filósofo, a quien no podía agradar el espectáculo de aquellas salvajes escenas, abandonó en 1621 el servicio militar, emprendiendo varios viajes por el territorio del resto de Alemania primero, y luego por Polonia, Prusia, Suiza, Italia y Francia. Después se retiró a Holanda, a donde lo invitaba la gran libertad de que gozaba este país, decidido a llevar a cabo allí sus designios; en Holanda vivió pacíficamente desde 1629 a 1644, período durante el cual compuso y editó la mayoría de sus obras, defendiéndolas contra los repetidos ataques desencadenados contra ellas, principalmente por parte del clero. Por último, la reina Cristina de Suecia lo llamó a su corte de Estocolmo, que era el centro de reunión de los más famosos eruditos de la época; y allí murió Descartes en el año 1650. (Brucker; Tennemann)”

Entre sus obras filosóficas, aquellas que contienen los fundamentos se distinguen, sobre todo, por un rasgo muy popular en su modo de exponer, que las hace muy gratas y recomendables a quien se inicia en el estudio. Este filósofo procede, en ellas, al abordar los problemas, de un modo muy sencillo e infantil, como si fuese narrando sus pensamientos uno detrás de otro, sin complicación alguna. El profesor Cousin de París ha reeditado recientemente las obras de Cartesio, en una colección de 11 volúmenes en octavo; la mayoría de ellos los ocupan las cartas sobre temas y problemas de física.”

Entre sus descubrimientos se cuentan varios métodos fundamentales gracias a los cuales pudieron obtenerse más tarde brillantísimos resultados en las matemáticas superiores.” Outra superestimação // o desenvolvimento paralelo das matemáticas por outros autores dessa época foi bem intenso.

“…Como tampoco tienen ningún interés para nosotros sus aplicaciones de la metafísica a ciertos problemas eclesiásticos, a determinadas investigaciones especiales, etc.”

en la filosofía de Descartes hay que distinguir entre lo que tiene un interés general para nosotros y lo que no lo tiene: lo primero es la trayectoria de sus pensamientos mismos; lo segundo, el modo como estos pensamientos se formulan y derivan. No debemos, sin embargo, considerar la trayectoria del pensamiento cartesiano como un método consecuentemente probatorio; trátase evidentemente de un profundo desarrollo interior, pero que se manifiesta de un modo ingenuo. (…) poco es lo que en conjunto cabe decir acerca de su filosofía.”

Descartes hace, pues, de este levantamiento de todas las determinaciones mismas el postulado primordial de la filosofía. Sin embargo, esta primeva tesis cartesiana no encierra, ni mucho menos, el sentido del escepticismo, el cual no persigue otra meta que la duda misma, el detenerse en esta actitud de indecisión del espíritu, por creer que éste encuentra en ello su libertad.”

los sentidos nos engañan frecuentemente, y la prudencia nos aconseja no confiar en aquello que nos haya engañado siquiera sea una sola vez (…) y al que duda no se le revela ninguna señal, ningún indicio que le permita distinguir con seguridad la vigilia del sueño.” O segundo é anacrônico.

Y esto nos lleva a dudar de todo lo demás, incluso de los axiomas matemáticos”

Descartes busca algo cierto y verdadero en sí, algo que no sea simplemente verdadero, a la manera como lo es el objeto de la fe sin saber, ni sea tampoco esa certeza sensible y también escéptica carente de verdad. Toda la filosofía anterior a Descartes llevaba la tara de presuponer algo como verdadero y, en parte, como ocurría con la filosofía neoplatónica, con la de atribuir la forma de la ciencia no a su esencia misma, o la de no analizar los elementos de ella.”

sería contradictorio pensar que no existe aquello que piensa.” Principia philosophiae, parte I, §§ 7 s.

Descartes arranca, como hará más tarde Fichte, del Yo como lo sencillamente cierto; yo sé que algo se representa en mí. Con ello, la filosofía entra de golpe en un campo totalmente nuevo y se sitúa en un punto de vista completamente distinto, pues se desplaza a la esfera de la subjetividad. Se abandona la premisa de la religión y se busca solamente la prueba, y no el contenido absoluto, el cual desaparece ante la subjetividad abstractamente infinita.” “la existencia de un determinado contenido es justo aquello de que debe dudarse, pues no existe nada firme.”

En esta tesis se ve, de una parte, un silogismo, como si del pensamiento se dedujese el ser. Kant razona, en especial, contra este mecanismo silogístico, alegando que en el pensamiento no se contiene el ser, pues éste es algo distinto del pensar. Y esto es cierto, pero no lo es menos que ambos son inseparables, es decir, que existe entre ellos, a pesar de todo, una identidad; su unidad no es destruida ni menoscabada por su diversidad.” “El propio Descartes lo dice: «No es en modo alguno un silogismo, pues para ello tendría que formularse así la premisa mayor: todo lo que piensa existe», después de lo cual vendría la subsunción en la menor, como conclusión: «luego yo existo». Con ello se levantaría justo la inmediatidad que la proposición lleva consigo.”

Para que haya un silogismo tiene que haber 3 términos; aquí, concretamente, tendría que haber un 3º que sirviese de mediador, de eslabón entre el pensar y el ser; pero este 3º término no existe. El «luego» o «por tanto» que enlaza ambos lados no es el «luego» o el «por tanto» de un silogismo; la conexión entre el ser y el pensar se establece sólo de un modo inmediato. Esta certeza es, por consiguiente, el prius; todas las demás proposiciones vienen después.” penso existo – um pleonasmo, redundância, tautologia, auto-referência e nada mais. Não no sentido de deboche do que é. A auto-referência por excelência, além do mais. O “ponto zero” do plano cartesiano, de onde parte todo o pensamento metafísico moderno.

en el ser no hay que representarse tampoco, ni mucho menos, un contenido concreto; por donde es la misma identidad inmediata la que constituye también el pensamiento. (…) la inmediatidad es una determinación unilateral; el pensamiento no contiene esta determinación solamente, sino también la de servir de mediador consigo mismo: la inmediatidad existe precisamente por el hecho de que el mediar es, al mismo tiempo, levantar la mediación.” eu penso eu existo; (eu) (eu); yo = yo; a rigor, não existe sequer o “”, elemento relacional, que designa ou conota MEDIAÇÃO, já que é uma Imediação. penso-existo. ser-pensamento. É o principio de individuação de Aristóteles em seu grau máximo formulado da forma mais sintética. Esta imediação não contempla, ainda, o inconsciente enquanto tal (é o ser no aqui e agora, mas não o Ser total).

Por tanto, Descartes no se preocupa de seguir demostrando esta identidad del ser y el pensar, que constituye sin disputa la idea más interesante de los tiempos modernos, sino que se remite única y exclusivamente a la conciencia y la coloca momentáneamente a la cabeza. Y es que Descartes no siente todavía, en modo alguno, la necesidad de desarrollar las diferencias contenidas en el «yo pienso»; será Fichte quien, andando el tiempo, proceda a derivar todas las determinaciones partiendo de esta cúspide de la certeza absoluta.” Mas suas derivações são totalmente inúteis.

Contra Descartes se han alegado también otras proposiciones. Gassendi, por ejemplo, formula esta objeción: Ludificor, ergo sum: Soy juguete de mi conciencia, luego existo; en realidad: luego, soy juguete de mi conciencia. Y el propio Descartes comprende perfectamente que esta objeción merece ser tenida en cuenta; pero la refuta él mismo, diciendo que sólo debe hacerse hincapié en el Yo, no en el resto del contenido. Sólo el ser es idéntico al pensamiento puro, no el contenido del ser, sea el que fuere.” Gassendi é bobo. Trata-se de solipsismo ingênuo de sua parte.

como con frecuencia sucede en sueños, puedo creer que veo o que me paseo a pesar de que no abro siquiera los ojos ni me muevo del sitio” A rigor, pensa-se no sonho, o que enfraquece o discurso cartesiano. Ainda que em simulacro, há uma certeza na representação onírica de que se pensa, pois apesar de não ser em vigília o ato é efetivamente levado a cabo, idêntico ao pensar.

Decir «en sueños» es una modalidad de razonamiento empírico; por lo demás, nada hay que objetar contra esta argumentación. En el querer, ver, oír, etc., va implícito también el pensamiento; sería absurdo creer que el alma guarda, por decirlo así, la facultad de pensar en un bolsillo especial y la de ver, querer, etc., en otro. Sin embargo, cuando digo: veo, me paseo, en ello va implícito de una parte, mi conciencia, el Yo y, por tanto, el pensamiento; pero, por otra parte, va también implícito en ello el querer, el ver, el oír, el pasear y, con ello, por tanto, una modificación ulterior del contenido. Y precisamente esta modificación es la que me impide afirmar: Me paseo, luego existo; pues puedo abstraerme de la tal modificación, puesto que no es ya el pensamiento general. Hay que mirar, pues, solamente a la conciencia pura contenida en este Yo concreto. Sólo cuando destaco que existo en ella como un ser pensante, sólo entonces tengo delante el ser puro, pues el ser sólo va unido a lo general.”

Puedo dudar de todo lo demás, de la existencia de las cosas físicas, de mi propio cuerpo; o bien, esta certeza no lleva en sí misma la nota de lo inmediato. Pues el yo es precisamente la certeza misma, que en lo demás es solamente predicado; mi cuerpo es cierto para mí, pero no es la certeza misma.” “Lo real, dice, es una sustancia, y el alma la sustancia pensante”

«Ahora bien, la evidencia de todo se basa en que lo veamos tan claro y tan nítido como aquella certeza misma, y en que, por tanto, de tal modo dependa de este principio y coincida con él, que si quisiéramos dudar de ello tengamos que dudar también de este principio»

Lo tercero es, por tanto, el tránsito de esta certeza a la verdad, a lo determinado; también este tránsito presenta en Descartes un carácter simplista, y con ello se ofrece a nuestra consideración, por vez primera, la metafísica cartesiana.” “Ahora bien, la verdad de todo saber descansa sobre la prueba de la existencia de Dios.” Podemos resumir as meditações cartesianas como uma tentativa mal-sucedida (mas corajosa) de resgatar a alegoria da caverna de Platão; obviamente, o que este magnânimo pensador consegue de modo completo numa fábula auto-contida, Descarte mal e mal consegue em uma frase, ou seja, não consegue sustentar por mais do que 3 palavras, com o mesmo poder, o tipo de raciocínio-em-direção-à-essência. O fato de haver um Deus monoteísta a que se deve remeter todos os achados atrapalha bastante…

En efecto, el triángulo no tiene nada de cierto, ya que la extensión no se da en la certeza inmediata de mí mismo.”

mientras no se pruebe y se reconozca la existencia de Dios, existe la posibilidad de que nos equivoquemos, por no poder saber si nuestra naturaleza será realmente propensa al error” Caso em que deveríamos ter de buscar novos valores…

La perfección lleva también consigo, en efecto, la determinación de la existencia, ya que no puede decirse que la representación de algo inexistente sea perfecta. Ahí tenemos, pues, la unidad del pensar y el ser y la prueba ontológica de la existencia de Dios”

Implicações de se remeter a algo externo (neste caso um Deus): “en el Yo va contenido el ser como la certeza inmediata de una alteridad, del no-Yo opuesto al Yo. § «Ninguna cosa o ninguna perfección de una cosa que exista realmente actu puede tener como causa de su existencia la nada. Pues si de la nada pudiese predicarse algo, podría predicarse también el pensamiento: diría por tanto que, puesto que pienso, no soy.»

«los grados de la realidad que percibimos en las ideas no existen en las ideas mismas, en cuanto se las considera simplemente como modalidades del pensamiento, sino en la medida en que la una representa una sustancia y la otra solamente un modo de ella; en una palabra, en cuanto que se las considera como representaciones de cosas» Spinoza

aquí no se da en la forma de Dios ninguna otra representación que la contenida en el cogito, ergo sum, en la que el ser y el pensar aparecen inseparablemente unidos, sólo que ahora bajo la forma de una representación que poseo en mí. El contenido de esta representación, el Omnipotente, el Omnisciente, etc., son predicados que se manifiestan después; el contenido mismo es el contenido de la idea, vinculado con la existencia. Vemos así cómo estas determinaciones se suceden unas a otras de un modo puramente empírico y que, por tanto, no prueba filosóficamente nada: un ejemplo de cómo en la metafísica apriorística se procede a base de premisas de representaciones y de cómo éstas son pensadas, ni más ni menos que empíricamente se procede a base de ensayos, observaciones y experiencias.”

A suprema ironia é que o que prova ontologicamente o eu e a outridade neste caso é o princípio <NIHIL EX NIHILO>, quando na era cristã, justamente, tudo depende desse motto. Ter-se-ia que imaginar uma sociedade (a Atenas clássica?) que não crê em genealogia ou escatologia e que fundamenta sua filosofia no Nada!

RECAÍDA NA ESCOLÁSTICA: “Viene, en cuarto lugar, esta afirmación de Descartes: «Lo que nos es revelado acerca de Dios debemos creerlo aunque no lo comprendamos. Y no es de extrañarse de que, siendo nosotros seres finitos, lo que hay de infinito en la naturaleza de Dios sea inconcebible para nosotros, se halle por encima de nuestra comprensión.»

Todo esto aparece relatado de un modo extraordinariamente sencillo, pero no por ello deja de ser algo indeterminado, formal y carente de profundidad; no se hace sino afirmar que las cosas son precisamente así, y no de otro modo. La trayectoria de Descartes es simplemente la trayectoria del entendimiento claro. La certeza es para él lo primero; de ella no se deriva necesariamente ningún contenido, ni un contenido en general, ni menos aún su objetividad como distinta de la subjetividad interior del Yo. Nos encontramos, pues, de una parte, con la contraposición entre el conocer subjetivo y la realidad y, de otra parte, con su inseparable vinculación.” “la prueba de esta unidad descansa única y exclusivamente en decir que descubrimos en nosotros la idea de lo más perfecto” “Una objeción en contra de esta identidad, objeción ya antigua y también kantiana, es ésta: que del concepto de la más perfecta esencia no se desprende más de lo que se halla entrelazado en los pensamientos existencia y esencia perfectísima, pero no fuera del pensamiento.”

Descartes concibe el ser en el sentido absolutamente positivo, sin llegar al concepto de que es lo negativo de la conciencia de sí: ahora bien, el ser simple, establecido como lo negativo de la conciencia de sí, es la extensión; por eso Descartes niega a Dios el atributo de la extensión, se atiene a esta separación, y enlaza el universo, la materia, con Dios como el creador, causa de ella, formulando el certero pensamiento de que la conservación de la materia es una creación continua, en cuanto que la creación se establece de un modo separado, como actividad.” “la materia, las sustancias extensas, se enfrentan a las sustancias pensantes, que son simples; por cuanto el universo ha sido creado por Dios, no podría ser tan perfecto como su causa. En realidad, el efecto es más imperfecto que la causa, puesto que es algo que se establece, aunque nos atengamos al concepto puramente intelectivo de la causa. La extensión es, por tanto, según Descartes, lo más imperfecto: pero, como imperfectas que son, las sustancias extensas no pueden existir y persistir por sí mismas o a través de su concepto; necesitan, pues, en todo momento de la asistencia de Dios para su conservación”

Descartes da definiciones de estos pensamientos, lo mismo que Aristóteles indaga las categorías. Pero, así como antes establecía como fundamento que no se debía partir de premisa alguna, ahora toma las nociones a que pasa como algo con que se encuentra en nuestra conciencia. Define la sustancia así: «Entiendo por sustancia, simplemente, una cosa (rem) que no necesita de ninguna otra para existir; y esa sustancia que no necesita de ninguna otra cosa sólo puede ser una, a saber: Dios.»

Descartes pretende pensar siempre, y no hacer otra cosa; ahora bien, la resistencia, el color, etc., no los piensa, sino que se limita a captarlos como cualidades sensibles.” “La extensión y el movimiento son los conceptos fundamentales de la física mecánica; son lo que es la verdad del mundo de los cuerpos. Descartes ve flotar vagamente ante él la idealidad y se halla muy por encima de la realidad de las cualidades sensibles, pero no pasa a la particularización de esta idealidad. Se detiene, pues, en el mundo de la mecánica en sentido estricto.” “En los organismos vivos, la digestión, etc., no son sino efectos mecánicos de esa clase, que tienen como principios la quietud y el movimiento. Vemos, pues, aquí el fundamento y el origen de la filosofía mecánica; sin embargo, una visión más a fondo nos dice que esto es insuficiente, poco satisfactorio, que la materia y el movimiento no bastan para explicar la vida.”

En esta filosofía predomina, por tanto, el tratamiento pensante de lo empírico; y es éste justo el modo como se manifiestan los filósofos de esta época. En Descartes y otros, la filosofía tenía aún la significación indeterminada de conocer por medio del pensamiento, la reflexión, el razonamiento. El conocimiento especulativo, las deducciones a partir del concepto, la evolución libre e independiente de la cosa misma serán introducidos más tarde por obra de Fichte; por tanto, en Descartes no aparecen separados aún lo que hoy llamamos conocimiento filosófico y el conocimiento científico de otra clase. Por aquel entonces, incluíanse en la filosofía todas las ciencias humanas; por eso nos encontramos con que en la metafísica cartesiana se mezclan y confunden del modo más simplista las reflexiones y los razonamientos completamente empíricos nacidos de razones, de experiencias, de hechos, de fenómenos, sin que tengamos la sensación de estar asistiendo a algo especulativo.”

Para Spinoza, el alma y el cuerpo, el pensamiento y el ser, dejan de ser cosas especiales, cada una de ellas para sí. Por tanto Spinoza, como judío que es, levanta [suspende] totalmente el dualismo [corpo-alma, e mediação do Deus cristão, como veremos na seqüência da explicação de H.] que lleva consigo el sistema cartesiano. Como judío que es, decimos, pues la profunda unidad de su filosofía, tal y como a través de él se manifiesta en Europa, la concepción del espíritu, de lo infinito y lo finito, como idéntico en Dios, sin ver en éste un tercer término, es en realidad un eco del pensamiento oriental. Con Spinoza penetra por vez primera en la mentalidad europea la concepción oriental de la identidad absoluta y más concretamente se incorpora directamente a la filosofía europea, cartesiana.”

Este pensador descendía de una familia de judíos portugueses, y nació en Amsterdam en el año 1632, recibiendo el nombre de Baruch, que más tarde cambió en el de Benedicto. Recibió en sus años mozos las enseñanzas de los rabinos de la sinagoga a que pertenecía, pero pronto entró en conflicto con ellos, furiosos de que se declarase en contra de las quimeras talmúdicas. Se mantuvo por algún tiempo apartado de la sinagoga; pero los rabinos, temerosos de que su ejemplo pudiese traer malas consecuencias a su iglesia, le ofrecieron mil florines de estipendio anual si se prestaba a seguir asistiendo a la sinagoga, sin plantear ninguna clase de conflictos. Benedicto rechazó el ofrecimiento y las persecuciones de los rabinos contra él llegaron a enconarse tanto, que incluso maquinaron el plan de quitarlo de en medio, atentando contra su vida.

Habiendo logrado a duras penas escapar de los espadachines que habían de darle muerte, se separó formalmente de la iglesia judaica, aunque sin abrazar la religión cristiana. Se dedicó preferentemente al cultivo del latín y al estudio de la filosofía cartesiana. Más tarde, se trasladó a la villa de Rynsburg, cerca de Leiden, donde vivió desde 1664, respetado por muchos amigos, pero entregado por entero a la quietud y al aislamiento, primero en Voorburg, aldea cercana a La Haya, y más tarde en esta misma ciudad, ganándose la vida con un trabajo manual, consistente en la preparación de cristales para fines ópticos.

No es extraño que le interesase especialmente la luz, que es, en la materia, la identidad absoluta misma, base de la concepción oriental. Aunque tenía amigos ricos y poderosos protectores, entre los que figuraban algunos generales, vivió siempre pobremente, habiendo rechazado en varias ocasiones grandes regalos que le fueron ofrecidos. Se negó también a ser instituido heredero de Simón de Vries, empeñado en dejarle todos sus bienes, y sólo aceptó de él una pensión anual de 300 florines; renunció también, en beneficio de sus hermanas, a la parte que le correspondía de la herencia paterna. El Gran Elector del Palatinado, Carlos Luis, hombre de una nobleza extraordinaria y libre de los prejuicios de su tiempo, le invitó a desempeñar una cátedra en Heidelberg, con libertad absoluta para enseñar y escribir, ya que «el príncipe estaba seguro de que no abusaría de ella para atacar a la religión públicamente establecida». Pero Spinoza (según sabemos por sus cartas impresas) rechazó la oferta con buenas razones, por «no saber dentro de qué límites habría de encerrarse aquella libertad filosófica a que se ponía como condición el no atacar la religión públicamente establecida». Permaneció, pues, en Holanda, país extraordinariamente interesante para la cultural general, el primero que dio en Europa un ejemplo de tolerancia, brindando a muchos hombres un refugio de libertad de pensamiento; pues aunque los teólogos holandeses adoptasen, a veces, una actitud furiosa contra algunos pensadores, por ejemplo contra Bekker (v. Brucker), o se mostrasen, por ejemplo, en el caso de Voetius, rabiosos contra la filosofía cartesiana, lo cierto es que esta actitud no se traducía nunca en las consecuencias a que habría conducido en cualquier otro país.”

Já que estamos falando aqui de alguém de vida beata, cabe ressaltar que Pascal não é citado uma única vez nessa deficiente História da Filosofia de Hegel!

Un clérigo protestante llamado Colerus, aunque da muestras de una furiosa enemistad contra él en la biografía que escribió de Spinoza, ofrece por otra parte noticias muy exactas y afectuosas acerca de sus condiciones de vida, dice que, al morir, sólo dejó unos 200 táleros, cuenta las deudas que tenía, etc. El buen predicador se escandaliza a propósito de una cuenta encontrada entre los papeles del muerto, en la que su barbero reclamaba del «bienaventurado» señor Spinoza el pago de sus estipendios atrasados, y escribe las siguientes palabras, a modo de comentario: «A buen seguro que si el barbero hubiese sabido qué clase de pájaro era Spinoza, no le habría llamado bienaventurado.»

El primer escrito de Spinoza que encontramos entre sus obras lleva por título: Principios de Cartesio, probados por el método geométrico. Más tarde, escribió su Tractatus theologico-politicus que le valió gran celebridad. En efecto, si había sido grande el odio que había concitado contra sí por parte de los rabinos, este tratado atrajo ahora sobre su cabeza un odio aún mayor por parte de los teólogos cristianos, principalmente de los protestantes. Figura en él la teoría de la inspiración, un estudio crítico de los libros mosaicos y otras cosas por el estilo, expuestas sobre todo desde el punto de vista de que estas leyes se limitan al pueblo judío. En esta obra de Spinoza encontramos ya todas las disquisiciones críticas de los teólogos cristianos acerca de estos problemas y que tienden generalmente a demostrar que estos libros fueron redactados más tarde de lo que se piensa y que son, en parte al menos, posteriores al cautiverio babilónico, doctrina que constituye un capítulo fundamental para los teólogos protestantes y con la que los modernos se dan gran importancia y tratan de brillar sobre los antiguos.

Pero lo que mayores odios atrajo sobre Spinoza fue su filosofía misma, que examinaremos aquí más de cerca, partiendo de su Ética. Descartes no dio a conocer ética alguna, la obra filosófica fundamental de Spinoza es precisamente una Ética, publicada después de su muerte por Luis Mayer, un médico, que había sido el amigo más íntimo del autor.

La Ética de Spinoza consta de 5 partes. La primera trata de Dios (De Deo). Se exponen en ella algunas ideas metafísicas generales que implican el conocimiento de Dios y de la naturaleza. La segunda parte trata de la naturaleza y del origen del espíritu (De natura et origine mentis). Spinoza no expone aquí, en modo alguno, una filosofía de la naturaleza, los problemas de la extensión y el movimiento, sino que pasa inmediatamente de Dios a la filosofía del espíritu, al aspecto ético; y lo referente al conocimiento, al espíritu inteligente, figura en la primera parte, en los principios del conocimiento humano. El tercer libro de la Ética trata del origen y la naturaleza de los afectos (De origine et natura affectuum). El cuarto, de las fuerzas de ellos o de la servidumbre humana (De servitute humana seu de affectuum viribus). Finalmente, el libro quinto se ocupa del poder del entendimiento, del pensamiento o de la libertad humana (De potentia intellectus seu de libertate humana).”

La sustancia cartesiana probablemente encierra, como idea, el ser mismo en su concepto; pero es solamente el ser como ser abstracto, no el ser en cuanto ser real o en cuanto extensión. En Descartes, la corporeidad y el Yo pensante son esencias independientes por sí mismas; esta independencia de los dos extremos es levantada en el spinozismo, al convertirse en momentos de la Esencia absoluta y única. Vemos que lo que importa, en esta expresión, es el concebir el ser como la unidad de lo contradictorio; el interés fundamental reside en no hacer caso omiso de la contradicción y darla de lado, sino en reducirla y disolverla. Y en cuanto que aquí el ser y el pensar no forman ya una contraposición como las abstracciones de lo finito y lo infinito o el límite y lo ilimitado, el ser es concebido ahora, de un modo más determinado aún, como extensión; pues, en su abstracción, sólo sería en rigor el mismo retorno a sí, la misma identidad simple consigo mismo que es el pensamiento. Por tanto, el pensar puro de Spinoza no es lo general espontáneo de Platón, sino lo que se conoce al mismo tiempo con la contraposición absoluta del concepto y el ser.” “pero no es la verdad entera; para serlo, habría que concebirla como algo activo de suyo, como algo vivo, con lo cual se la determinaría ya como espíritu. Pero, la sustancia spinozista es solamente la determinación general y, por tanto, la determinación abstracta del espíritu; cierto es que podría decirse que este pensamiento es la base de toda concepción verdadera, pero no como el fundamento que permanece firme de un modo absoluto, sino como la unidad abstracta que es el espíritu dentro de sí.”

Hay que reconocer que el pensamiento no tuvo más remedio que colocarse en el punto de vista del spinozismo; ser spinozista es el punto de partida esencial de toda filosofía. Pues cuando se comienza a filosofar, el alma tiene que empezar bañándose en este éter de la sustancia una, en el que naufraga todo lo que venía teniéndose por verdad. Esta negación de todo lo particular a que necesariamente tiene que llegar todo filósofo es la liberación del espíritu y la base absoluta sobre que éste descansa. La diferencia entre nuestro punto de vista y el de los filósofos eléatas sólo estriba en que el cristianismo hace que exista en el mundo moderno la individualidad absolutamente concreta dentro del espíritu.”

lo grandioso del modo de pensar de Spinoza consiste en poder renunciar a todo lo determinado, a todo lo particular, para situarse solamente ante lo Uno, para prestar atención solamente a esto.”

La primera definición de Spinoza es la de la causa de sí misno. Dice: «Por causa de sí (causam sui) entiendo aquello cuya esencia implica la existencia, o sea, aquello que sólo puede concebirse como existente.» La unidad del pensamiento general y de la existencia se establece, como se ve, desde el primer momento; y en torno a esta unidad habrá de girar continuamente todo. Esto de la causa de sí mismo es una expresión importante, pues mientras nos imaginamos que el efecto es lo opuesto a la causa, la causa de sí mismo es aquella causa que, al actuar y separar lo otro, sólo se produce, al mismo tiempo, a sí mismo, por lo tanto, al producirse, levanta esta distinción. El establecerse a sí mismo como si fuese otro es el contraste y, al mismo tiempo, la negación de esta pérdida; estamos ante un concepto totalmente especulativo, más aún, ante un concepto fundamental en toda especulación.”

esta otra cosa tiene que ser del mismo género, pues las cosas que se limitan, para poder limitarse, tienen que entrar en contacto y, por tanto, guardar una relación entre sí, es decir, ser cosas de la misma clase, descansar sobre la misma base, pertenecer a una esfera común. Tal es el lado afirmativo del límite.

«Según esto, el pensamiento es limitado por otro pensamiento, el cuerpo por otro cuerpo; pero el pensamiento no es limitado por un cuerpo, ni el cuerpo por un pensamiento.»

Ya lo veíamos en Descartes: el pensamiento es totalidad para sí, y lo mismo la extensión, sin que tengan nada de común ni mantengan relaciones mutuas de ninguna clase; no se limitan el uno al otro, sino que cada cual forma un todo cerrado de suyo.”

«Por sustancia entiendo aquello que es en sí y se concibe por sí; es decir, aquello cuyo concepto no necesita del concepto de otra cosa para formarse (a quo formari debeat) de otro modo sería algo finito, accidental. Lo que necesita de otra cosa para ser concebido no es algo independiente, sino que depende de esta otra cosa.»

«Por atributo entiendo aquello que el entendimiento percibe como lo que constituye la esencia de la sustancia» “Y no cabe duda de que es ésta una gran determinación; el atributo es evidentemente una determinabilidad, pero una determinabilidad que sigue siendo, al mismo tiempo, totalidad. Y Spinoza, como Descartes, sólo admite 2 determinabilidades de éstas: el pensamiento y la extensión. (…) Cada uno de estos 2 modos de consideración, la extensión y el pensamiento, contiene indudablemente el contenido íntegro de la sustancia, pero solamente bajo una forma que hace entrar en ello también el entendimiento; precisamente por ello son ambos lados idénticos en sí, infinitos.”

La quinta definición se refiere al tercer elemento de la sustancia, al modo. «Por modo entiendo las afecciones de la sustancia o sea aquello que es en otra cosa por medio de la cual es también concebido.» Por tanto, la sustancia se concibe por sí misma; el atributo no es lo concebido por sí mismo, sino que guarda relación con el entendimiento conceptual, pero en tanto éste concibe la esencia; finalmente, el modo es lo no concebido como la esencia, sino por otra cosa y en ella.”

son 3 momentos muy importantes y corresponden a lo que nosotros, de un modo más preciso, distinguimos como lo general, lo particular y lo individual. Pero no debemos enfocarlos de un modo formal, sino en su sentido verdadero y concreto: lo general concreto es la sustancia, lo particular concreto el género concreto”

Como vemos, Spinoza va descendiendo, pues el modo es la fase más baja de todas; el defecto de este filósofo estriba en que concibe lo 3º solamente como modo, como la individualidad mala. La verdadera individualidad, la subjetividad, no es solamente un alejamiento de lo general, lo determinado puro y simple, sino que es, al mismo tiempo, como algo determinado pura y simplemente, lo que es para sí, lo que se determina solamente a sí mismo. De este modo, lo individual, lo subjetivo es justo el retorno a lo general; al ser lo que es consigo mismo es también de suyo lo general. El retorno consiste simplemente en ser en sí mismo lo general; pero a este retorno no llega Spinoza.”

En el mismo sentido distingue Spinoza, en la carta 29 (Opera, 1.1, pp. 526-532) lo infinito de la imaginación de lo infinito del pensamiento (intellectus), de lo realmente (actu) infinito. La mayoría de los hombres, cuando tratan de elevarse sobre la realidad, sólo llegan al primero, que es el infinito malo,¹ como cuando se dice: «y así sucesivamente, hasta el infinito»: por ejemplo, la infinitud del espacio entre un astro y otro, o el del tiempo. Lo mismo ocurre con las series infinitas del número en las matemáticas. Cuando un quebrado se representa como quebrado decimal, es imperfecto; V7 [¿?] expresa por el contrario el infinito verdadero, no es por tanto una expresión imperfecta, aunque el contenido sea, en este caso, ciertamente limitado. Lo infinito malo se suele tener presente cuando se habla de infinitud; y por muy superior que la consideremos, no es, en realidad, nada presente, y trasciende solamente a lo negativo, sin ser actu.”

¹ Esses conceitos hegelianos e ficar identificando-os em filósofos prévios são duas coisas que não levam a nada!

Spinoza llama a la infinitud filosófica, a lo que es infinito actu, la afirmación absoluta de sí mismo. Y es absolutamente exacto. Lo que ocurre es que habría podido expresarlo mejor, diciendo: «Es la negación de la negación

en Spinoza existe, pues, la infinitud verdadera. Pero sin que él tenga conciencia alguna de ello, sin que reconozca este concepto como un concepto absoluto, ni lo exprese, por tanto, como momento de la esencia misma, pues ese concepto cae aquí fuera de la esencia para entrar en el pensamiento de ella.” Essa crítica enviesada já está me cansando…

«Dios es causa inmanente, pero no transitiva (transiens) de todas las cosas», es decir, externa. Su esencia y su existencia son lo mismo, a saber: la verdad. Una cosa que ha sido determinada a obrar algo, ha sido necesariamente determinada por Dios, ya que Dios es la causa: y siendo ese su destino, no puede carecer de determinación. En la naturaleza no hay nada contingente. La voluntad no es una causa libre, sino solamente necesaria, solamente un modo; esto quiere decir que se halla determinado por otro. Dios no obra con arreglo a causas finales (sub ratione boni). Quienes lo afirman, parecen estatuir al lado de Dios algo que no depende de Dios y hacia lo que Dios mira en sus actos, como hacia un fin. Así concebido el problema, Dios no sería una causa libre, sino que se hallaría sometido a lo fatal. E igualmente insostenible es querer someterlo todo a la arbitrariedad, es decir, a una voluntad indiferente de Dios.” Éticaos trechos em vermelho são muito importantes, pois mostram que Spinoza não está submetido a nenhuma teleologia, i.e., historicismo, hegelianismo…

«La natura naturans es Dios considerado en cuanto causa libre, en tanto que es en sí y concebido por sí, o aquellos atributos de la sustancia que expresan la esencia eterna e infinita. Por natura naturata entiendo todo lo que se sigue de la necesidad de la naturaleza de Dios o de cada uno de los atributos de Dios, todos los modos de los atributos divinos, en cuanto considerados como cosas que son en Dios y que sin Dios no pueden ser ni ser concebidas.» É., prop. XXIX

El desarrollo de su pensamiento es extraordinariamente sencillo o, mejor dicho, no es desarrollo alguno; arranca directamente del espíritu.”

O desenvolvimento de seu pensamento é extraordinariamente simples ou, melhor dizendo, não é desenvolvimento algum; arranca diretamente do espírito.” Algo mais específico eu deixarei para evidenciar quando ler a Ética em si.

Bayle (que no tiene la menor noción de lo especulativo, aunque, como sutil dialéctico que era, impulsara el razonamiento pensante en torno a determinados temas) ridiculiza la creencia de que todo contenido especial es solamente una modificación de Dios, al deducir de ahí que Dios, modificado en forma de turco y de austríaco, hace la guerra consigo mismo.” Dicionário desarrazoado.

Las cosas individuales brotan de Dios de un modo eterno e infinito (es decir, al mismo tiempo y de una vez), no de un modo transitorio, finito y perecedero; se desintegran simplemente al engendrarse y destruirse mutuamente, pero permaneciendo inmutables en su existencia eterna. Todas las cosas individuales se presuponen mutuamente y ninguna puede pensarse sin la otra: es decir, forman en su conjunto un todo indivisible; se reúnen en una cosa simplemente indivisible, infinita y que no existe ni puede existir de otro modo.”

Ya sólo nos resta hablar de la moral de Spinoza; pero esto es precisamente lo fundamental de su doctrina. El principio en que descansa no es otro sino el de que el espíritu finito es moral en tanto tiene la idea verdadera; es decir, cuando endereza su conocimiento y su voluntad hacia Dios, pues la verdad consiste exclusivamente en el conocimiento de Dios. Puede decirse, en este sentido, que no existe moral más alta que ésta, la cual sólo postula una idea clara de Dios.”

«El matricidio de Nerón, en cuanto contenía algo positivo, no era un crimen. El mismo acto material cometió Orestes, animado por la misma intención de matar a su madre, y, sin embargo, no fue acusado de ningún acto criminal» Lo afirmativo es la voluntad, la idea, el acto de Nerón. «¿En qué consiste, pues, la maldad neroniana? Simplemente, en la ingratitud, en la falta de caridad, en la desobediencia. Y es evidente que nada de esto expresa una esencia, por lo cual Dios no pudo ser causa de ello, aunque fuese evidentemente la causa del acto y las intenciones de Nerón.»

Es, pues, falso el reproche que se le hace a Spinoza cuando se dice que su filosofía mata la moral; lejos de ello, se llega por este camino filosófico al elevado resultado de que todo lo que se recibe a través de los sentidos es solamente limitación, de que sólo existe una verdadera sustancia y de que la libertad del hombre consiste en levantar la mirada hacia esta sustancia una y ajustarse, en sus intenciones y en su voluntad, a este Uno eterno.”

Quienes atacan a Spinoza hacen como si les importase mucho Dios; pero a estos adversarios no les preocupa realmente Dios, sino algo finito: el problema gira, para ellos, en torno a sí mismos.” Este homem ser acusado de ateísmo (Jacobi & al.) é sacanagem mesmo!

La necesidad filosófica consiste, pues, en captar la unidad de estas diferencias, de tal modo que la diferencia no se deje a un lado, sino que brote eternamente de la sustancia, sin cristalizar y petrificarse en forma de dualismo. Spinoza se remonta por encima de este dualismo; y lo mismo hace la religión, si sabemos trocar las representaciones en pensamientos. El ateísmo de la primera actitud, en que los hombres consideran como lo supremo el libre arbitrio, su vanidad, las cesas finitas de la naturaleza, haciendo del universo algo perenne en la representación, no es el punto de vista de Spinoza, para quien Dios es la Sustancia una y el universo, por el contrario, solamente la afección o el modo de esta sustancia.”

Spinoza afirma que lo que se llama universo no existe en modo alguno, pues sólo es una forma de Dios y no algo en y para sí. El universo no posee una realidad verdadera, sino que todo esto se lanza al abismo de una identidad única. Nada es, pues, en la realidad finita: ésta no posee verdad alguna; para Spinoza, solamente Dios es.” H. chama isso de acosmismo (meu deus, quanta expressão feia nesse trabalho!).

Por tanto, quienes pintan a nuestro filósofo con tan negros colores no tratan de mantener en pie precisamente a Dios, sino lo finito, lo temporal; le echan en cara a Spinoza, en realidad, su propia anulación y la del mundo.” Porque ele disse que tudo era vaidade, em termos filosóficos, já está!

El sistema spinozista es el del panteísmo y el monoteísmo absolutos, elevados al plano del pensamiento. El spinozismo dista, pues, mucho de ser un ateísmo en el sentido corriente de la palabra; pero sí lo es en el sentido de que en él no se concibe a Dios como espíritu. Pero en este mismo sentido podríamos acusar de ateísmo a muchos teólogos que sólo llaman a Dios el Ser supremo, omnipotente, etc., que no quieren reconocer, en realidad, a Dios y sólo reconocen como verdadero lo finito; y las doctrinas de éstos son bastante más peligrosas que las de Spinoza.” Um livro interessante para quem está no seminário (me refiro a este de H., mas não nego que a Ética de Spinoza, pelas citações já lidas, também deva sê-lo bastante!).

Reclama dos diagraminhas geométricos de Spinoza em meio à Ética: “Ya Descartes partía de que las proposiciones filosóficas deben poder tratarse y demostrarse matemáticamente y poseer la misma evidencia que las verdades matemáticas. Se considera el método matemático como el mejor de todos por su evidencia, y es natural que al renacer la ciencia como algo independiente recurra primeramente a esta forma, que le muestra un ejemplo tan brillante. Sin embargo, trátase de una forma inadecuada para un contenido especulativo y que sólo tiene razón de ser tratándose de ciencias finitas del entendimiento.” “El conocimiento matemático representa la prueba sobre el objeto existente como tal, pero no, en modo alguno, como concebido; carece en absoluto de concepto, siendo así que el contenido de la filosofía es justo el concepto y lo concebido.” “La matemática, en sus proposiciones verdaderas acerca de un todo, recurre al procedimiento de demostrar las proposiciones también a la inversa, privándolas con ello de esta determinabilidad, al conferir ambas cosas a cada parte. Las proposiciones verdaderas pueden considerarse, por tanto, como definiciones; y la inversión es la prueba del lenguaje corriente. Sin embargo, la filosofía no puede valerse propiamente de este recurso, ya que el sujeto con respecto al cual prueba algo no es de suyo otra cosa que el concepto o lo general, y la forma de la proposición, por tanto, algo completamente superfluo y, por consiguiente, torcido.”

En estos últimos tiempos, ha sostenido Jacobi (Werke, t. IV, secc. 1, pp. 217-223) que toda demostración, todo conocimiento científico conduce al spinozismo, el cual es, según él, el único modo consecuente de pensar; y precisamente por eso, porque conduce a esa fuente, es por lo que no puede servir, [¡!] sino solamente el saber inmediato.” Esse Jacobi é um tapado!

La trayectoria seguida por Spinoza es, pues, indudablemente certera; sin embargo, la proposición individual es falsa, ya que sólo expresa uno de los lados de la negación. El entendimiento tiene determinaciones que no se contradicen; no puede hacer frente a la contradicción.”

El pensamiento, para él, tiene solamente la significación de lo general, no la de la conciencia de sí. Es esta falla la que, de una parte, ha hecho que se rebelara con tanta fuerza contra el sistema spinozista la idea de la libertad del sujeto, ya que en él desaparece el ser para sí de la conciencia humana, la llamada libertad, es decir, precisamente la abstracción del ser para sí, levantando también con ello a Dios como algo distinto de la naturaleza y de la conciencia humana, o sea como algo en sí, en lo absoluto; pues el hombre tiene la conciencia de la libertad, de lo espiritual, que es lo negativo de lo corporal, la conciencia de que es precisamente en lo opuesto a lo corporal donde es lo que verdaderamente es.” A vontade não-livre pré-morte de Deus, diria com certeza Nie.

Y tampoco Dios es aquí el Espíritu, porque no es el Dios Trino y Uno.”

Por consiguiente, de una parte, se concibe el defecto del spinozismo como la falta de correspondencia con la realidad; de otra parte, se debe ver en él una manera superior, de tal modo que se conciba la sustancia spinozista simplemente como la idea totalmente en abstracto, pero no en su vivacidad.” O que psicólogos do séc. XX ainda se esforçam por provar (e.g. Skinner).

lo negativo, en Spinoza, existe solamente como la nada, ya que en lo absoluto no se da modo alguno”

Y así como Spinoza se limitaba a considerar estas representaciones, ya que lo más alto, para él, era su desaparición en la Sustancia una, Locke se detiene a investigar cómo nacen estas representaciones [filósofo especializado no para-si] y Leibniz, por su parte, contrapone a Spinoza la pluralidad infinita de los individuos, si bien todas sus mónadas tienen como esencia fundamental la mónada una [filósofo especializado no em-si]. Ambas filosofías surgen, pues, como reacción contra las unilateralidades spinozistas, puestas de manifiesto aquí.” Podemos dizer que Spinoza foi o maior filósofo do ser em-si-e-para-si até seu tempo (obviamente estou excluindo Platão). Até mesmo Hegel – que é nosso antípoda tantas vezes – teria de concordar.

La filosofía de Malebranche tiene exactamente el mismo contenido del spinozismo, pero expuesto bajo otra forma, bajo una forma más piadosa, más teológica. Y es esta forma la que le impide encontrar la contradicción descubierta por Spinoza y lo que explica, al mismo tiempo, por qué Malebranche no ha sido acusado, como Spinoza, de ateísmo.”

Por casualidad, pasando un día por delante de una tienda de libros, vio la obra de Descartes De homine; la adquirió, la leyó, y le apasionó tanto, que sintió al leerla que le palpitaba con gran fuerza el corazón, viéndose obligado a interrumpir la lectura. Fue esto lo que decidió su carrera, inclinándole resueltamente al cultivo de la filosofía. (Buhle)”

Su obra fundamental lleva por título De la recherche de la verité. Una parte de ella es completamente metafísica, pero la parte más importante tiene un contenido totalmente empírico”

«Porque vemos en Dios todas las cosas», BLABLABLABLABLABLABLÁ…

El catecismo dice: «Dios está en todas partes»: si desarrollamos este don de la omnipresencia, vemos que nos conduce al spinozismo; y, sin embargo, los teólogos hablan en contra del sistema de identidad y ponen el grito en el cielo contra el panteísmo.”

En Locke, lo primero es lo individual, a base de lo cual se forma lo general; en Malebranche, por el contrario, la idea general es lo primero en el hombre.”

Fuera de esto, se encuentran toda una serie de vacuas letanías acerca de Dios y un catecismo para niños de 8 años acerca de la bondad, la justicia, la omnipresencia divinas y el orden moral del universo; los teólogos no han pasado de aquí en su vida entera.”

De Locke arrancará después una ancha trayectoria, sobre todo de filósofos ingleses, que adoptarán formas distintas, pero manteniéndose fieles al mismo principio; esta manera acaba convirtiéndose, así, en una concepción general y se hace pasar además por filosofía, aunque el verdadero objeto de la filosofía no se encuentre aquí.” “Consideradas las cosas de tal modo que el concepto tenga una realidad objetiva para la conciencia, no cabe duda de que la experiencia es un momento necesario de la totalidad; pero tal y como este pensamiento aparece en Locke, es decir, como la pretensión de que la verdad es deducida de la experiencia y la percepción sensible, es el peor de los pensamientos”

Ahora bien, estas necesidades sólo se dan a conocer de un modo imperfecto en la filosofía de Locke y de Leibniz; lo general, común a ambos filósofos, consiste en erigir en principio, por oposición a Spinoza y Malebranche, lo particular, la determinabilidad finita y lo individual. En Spinoza y Malebranche es la sustancia o lo general lo verdadero, lo único que es, lo eterno, lo que es en y para sí, sin origen, aquello de que las cosas particulares no son sino modificaciones, comprendidas por medio de la sustancia.”

La tendencia general de la conciencia es ahora, por el contrario, poner de manifiesto la diferencia y aferrarse a ella: en parte, para determinarse a sí misma libremente frente a su objeto, el ser, la naturaleza y Dios; y, en parte, para descubrir en esta contraposición la unidad y hacerla surgir de ella.” “Al llegar a Locke, este principio empieza a enfrentarse en filosofía a aquella identidad rígida e indistinta de la sustancia de Spinoza de tal modo que ahora lo más importante de todo, lo fundamental es, por el contrario, lo sensorial, lo limitado, lo inmediatamente existente. Locke se mantiene enteramente en esa fase vulgar de la conciencia que consiste en creer que lo verdadero y lo real son los objetos que se hallan fuera de nosotros. Por tanto, Locke no concibe lo finito como una negatividad absoluta, es decir, en su infinitud; con esto nos encontraremos solamente al llegar a Leibniz. En efecto, éste establece, en un sentido elevado, la individualidad, lo distinto, como algo que es para sí, y además carente de objeto, como un verdadero ser; es decir, no como algo finito y, sin embargo, distinto, de tal modo que cada mónada es de suyo una totalidad.”

John Locke nació en Wrington (Inglaterra) en 1632. Estudió en Oxford por su cuenta la filosofía cartesiana, dando de lado a la filosofía escolástica que era la que todavía se profesaba en la enseñanza. Abrazó la carrera de la medicina, aunque sin llegar a ejercerla, en realidad, por razón de su debilidad física.” “podía vivir en la casa del conde y tener cubiertas sus necesidades de vida, sin necesidad de dedicarse a la práctica de la medicina. Más tarde, al ser nombrado Shaftesbury Lord canciller de Inglaterra, designó a Locke para un cargo, del que se vio privado en seguida, al producirse un cambio de ministerio. § En 1675, temeroso de padecer de tuberculosis, se trasladó a Montpellier para restablecer su salud. Al ocupar de nuevo el ministerio su protector, volvió a ser nombrado para el cargo que antes ocupara, pero no tardó en verse otra vez separado de él, al sobrevenir un nuevo cambio de gabinete, y hubo incluso de huir de Inglaterra.” “Locke, en vista de ello, se trasladó a Holanda, que era por entonces el país donde encontraban asilo y protección cuantos se veían en el trance de huir de las persecuciones políticas o religiosas de otros gobiernos y donde habían ido reuniéndose, en aquellos años, los hombres más famosos y más liberales de Europa.” “Después de la revolución de 1688, al subir al trono de Inglaterra Guillermo de Orange, regresó en unión de éste a su país. Fue designado comisario del Comercio y las Colonias en el nuevo gobierno, publicó su famosa obra sobre el entendimiento humano y, por último, retirado de los negocios públicos por razón de su débil salud, vivió en las casas de campo de algunos grandes ingleses, hasta el 28 de octubre de 1704, en que murió, a la edad de 73 años. (Buhle)”

La filosofía de Locke goza de gran estimación; sigue siendo todavía hoy en conjunto la filosofía de los ingleses y los franceses y, hasta cierto punto, también la de los alemanes. Su pensamiento central, formulado en pocas palabras, es éste: de una parte, que la verdad, el conocimiento, descansa sobre la experiencia y la observación; de otra parte, se prescriben el análisis y la abstracción de las determinaciones generales como vía de conocimiento; es, si se quiere, un empirismo metafisizante, y no es otro el camino corriente que se sigue en las ciencias.”

DA GENEALOGIA DAS IDÉIAS: “Locke trata, pues, de satisfacer una necesidad verdaderamente sentida. No se le puede negar el mérito de haber abandonado el camino de las simples definiciones, de las que los demás arrancaban, para intentar una deducción de los conceptos generales, esforzándose, por ejemplo, en poner de manifiesto cómo la sustancialidad nace subjetivamente de los objetos.” “Ahora, estas definiciones aparecen como un resultado y no como una proclamación oracular, aunque el modo como esta legitimación se establece no sea, por cierto, el más adecuado. En efecto, el interés es puramente subjetivo y de carácter más bien psicológico, en cuanto que Locke se limita a describir el camino del espíritu que se manifiesta; pues lo que a él le preocupa principalmente es derivar, en nuestro conocimiento, las representaciones generales o las ideas, como él las llama, y el origen de ellas, partiendo de lo exterior e interiormente perceptible.”

Es verdad que también Malebranche se pregunta cómo llega el hombre a sus representaciones, lo que parece dar a entender que existe en él el mismo interés que en Locke. Pero, de una parte, este aspecto psicológico en Malebranche es solamente lo posterior; y, de otra parte, lo primario para él es lo general, es Dios; mientras que Locke arranca precisamente de las percepciones singulares, para remontarse, partiendo de ellas, a los conceptos y a Dios.”

Todo hombre sabe ciertamente que, cuando su conciencia se desarrolla empíricamente, arranca siempre de sensaciones, de estados totalmente concretos, y que sólo más tarde aparecen las representaciones generales, que guardan con lo concreto de las sensaciones la conexión de hallarse contenidas en ello. El espacio, por ejemplo, se revela a la conciencia después de lo espacial, el género después de los individuos; y es actividad de mi conciencia, y solamente de ella, el disociar lo general de lo particular de las representaciones, las sensaciones, etc. Es cierto que el sentimiento, la sensación, es lo más bajo, la modalidad animal del espíritu; pero el espíritu, en cuanto pensamiento, aspira a transformar a su modo las sensaciones.”

Kant le pone a Locke, con razón, el reparo de que la fuente de las representaciones generales no es precisamente lo individual, sino el entendimiento. Por lo que se refiere a los pensamientos de Locke, vistos más de cerca, no pueden ser más sencillos. Locke considera que el entendimiento es solamente la conciencia y algo dentro de ella, y sólo reconoce el en sí en cuanto se contiene en ella.”

La filosofía de Locke va dirigida principalmente contra Descartes, quien, al igual que Platón, había hablado de ideas innatas. (…) discute, pues, en el libro primero de su obra las llamadas ideas innatas, tanto las teóricas como las prácticas, es decir, las ideas generales, que son en y para sí y que, al mismo tiempo, se conciben como si formasen parte del espíritu de un modo natural.” “Locke concibe, pues, el alma como una tabula rasa, vacía de todo contenido y que va llenándose con lo que llamamos experiencia.”

si es el uso de la razón el que les ayuda a descubrir esos principios y el que, en realidad, los descubre, no se tratará de principios innatos. La razón consiste, a lo que parece, en descubrir verdades desconocidas partiendo de principios ya conocidos. ¿Por qué ha de ser necesario el empleo de la razón para descubrir unos principios pretendidamente innatos?”

el desarrollo que se opera en la conciencia es algo distinto de la determinación racional en sí; y en este sentido hay que reconocer que la expresión de «ideas innatas» es completamente desacertada. «Es en los niños y en las personas incultas, por no estar deformados por la educación, donde mejor debieran darse estas ideas.» Locke añade todavía algunas razones de esta clase, especialmente de orden práctico: la divergencia que se advierte entre las ideas morales, la existencia de gentes malas y crueles, que no tienen conciencia moral, etc.”

En el libro segundo, Locke pasa al origen de las ideas y trata de poner de manifiesto su formación, partiendo de la experiencia; en esto se concentra su esfuerzo fundamental. Pero este aspecto positivo, que opone a aquella derivación del interior del hombre, resulta igualmente torcido, ya que sólo toma los conceptos de fuera, reteniendo, por tanto, el ser para otro y desconociendo totalmente el en sí.”

Ante todo, por lo que a la cosa misma se refiere es exacto, desde luego, que el hombre arranca de la experiencia cuando trata de formarse algún pensamiento. En todo anda la experiencia, no sólo en lo sensible, sino también en lo que «determina y mueve mi espíritu». Es, pues, indudable que la conciencia toma todas sus representaciones y todos sus conceptos de la experiencia y en ella; pero se trata de saber qué ha de entenderse por experiencia. Ordinariamente, cuando se habla así, no se tiene concepto alguno de lo que la experiencia es; se habla de ella como de algo perfectamente conocido. Ahora bien, la experiencia no es otra cosa que la forma de la objetividad; cuando decimos que algo se halla en la conciencia queremos decir que ese algo tiene forma objetiva para ella, que la conciencia lo experimenta, que lo contempla como algo objetivo. Experiencia quiere decir, aquí, saber inmediato, percepción: es decir, yo mismo debo poseer eso, y ser; y la conciencia acerca de lo que poseo y soy es justo la experiencia.” “Lo racional es, es decir, es como un ente para la conciencia, que ésta experimenta; necesita ser visto, oído, existir o haber existido como un fenómeno del universo.” “Y es de todo punto indiferente que se tome esto como algo experimentado, como una serie de conceptos de experiencia, si podemos expresarnos así, o de representaciones, o que se vea en esa serie una serie de pensamientos, es decir, de algo que es en sí.”

Ahora bien, el trabajo del entendimiento consiste en sacar de varias llamadas ideas simples una cierta cantidad de ideas nuevas mediante la elaboración de aquellos elementos recibidos, por la vía de la comparación, la distinción y la contraposición y, finalmente, por la de la disociación o la abstracción, y así nacen los conceptos generales; nacen así, por ejemplo, los conceptos de espacio y tiempo, de existencia, unidad y diferencia, de potencia, causa y efecto, de libertad y necesidad.” “Ahora bien, Locke cifraba la esencia del entendimiento solamente en la actividad formal que consiste en formar nuevas determinaciones a base de las representaciones simples obtenidas a través de la percepción, mediante la comparación y la combinación de varias en una; el entendimiento es la aprehensión de las sensaciones abstractas contenidas en los objetos.” “Ahora bien, ¿cómo obtiene el entendimiento, partiendo de las representaciones simples de la experiencia, otras más complejas? Locke explica esto a la luz de lo particular; sin embargo, este extraer determinaciones generales a base de percepciones concretas no dice absolutamente nada, es algo extraordinariamente trivial, fastidioso y, además, muy prolijo; algo completamente formal, una vacua tautología. Así, por ejemplo, la representación general de espacio, nos dice, se forma en nosotros partiendo de la percepción de la distancia entre los cuerpos a través de la vista y el tacto. (…) la distancia misma es ya espacialidad, lo que quiere decir que el entendimiento saca la determinación del espacio mismo.” Um Piaget das cavernas.

La idea de sustancia