phenomenology of mind-第101部分
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
As to the wrong thus done； enlightenment preserves its harmony with the believing mind in this： —
that belief itself acknowledges the actual reality of possessing property； keeping bold of it； and
enjoying it。 In insisting on its property； it behaves with all the more stubborn independence and
exclusiveness； and in its enjoyment with all the more frank self…abandonment； since its religious act
of giving up pleasure and property takes effect beyond the region of this actuality； and purchases
for it freedom to do as it likes so far as that other sphere is concerned。 This service； the service of
sacrificing natural activities and enjoyments； in point of fact has no truth； owing to this opposition。
The retention and the sacrifice subsist together side by side。 The sacrifice is merely a 〃sign〃 which
performs real sacrifice only as regards a small part； and hence in point of fact is only a figurative
idea of sacrifice。
As for purposiveness； enlightenment finds it pointless and stupid to throw away a possession in
order to feel and to prove oneself to be free from all possession； to renounce an enjoyment in
order to think and demonstrate that one is rid of all enjoyment。 The believing mind itself takes the
absolute act for a universal one。 Not only does the action of its absolute Reality as its object
appear something universal； but the individual consciousness； too； has to prove itself detached
entirely and altogether from its sensuous nature。 But throwing away a single possession； giving up
and disclaiming a single enjoyment； is not acting universally in this way。 And since in the action the
purpose； which is a universal； and the performance； which is a singular process； were bound to
stand before consciousness； as essentially incompatible； that action shows itself to be of a kind in
which consciousness has no share； and consequently this way of acting is seen to be too naive to
be an action at all。 It is too naive to fast in order to prove oneself quite indifferent to the pleasures
of the table； too naive to rid the body of some other pleasure； as Origen did； in order to show that
pleasure is finished and done with。 The act itself proves an external and a single operation。 But
desire is deeply rooted within the inner life； and is a universal element； its pleasure neither
disappears with the instrument for getting pleasure nor by abstention from particular pleasures。
But enlightenment on its side here isolates the unrealized inwardness as against the concrete
actuality； just as in the case of the devotion and direct intuition of belief； enlightenment held fast to
the externality of things of sense as against the inward attitude of belief。 Enlightenment finds the
main point in the intention； in the thought； and thereby finds no need for actually bringing about the
liberation from natural ends。 On the contrary； this inner sphere is itself the formal element that has
its concrete fulfilment in natural impulses； which are justified simply by the fact that they fall within；
that they belong to universal being； to nature。
Enlightenment； then； holds irresistible sway over belief by the fact that the latter finds in its own
consciousness the very moments to which enlightenment gives significance and validity。 Looking
more closely at the action exerted by this force； its operation on belief seems to rend asunder the
beautiful unity of trustfulness and immediate confidence； to pollute its spiritual life with lower
thoughts drawn from the sphere of sense； to destroy the feeling of calm security in its attitude of
submission by introducing the vanity of understanding； of self…will； and self…fulfilment。 But in point
of fact； enlightenment really brings to pass the abolition of that state of unthinking； or rather
unreflective （begrifflos） cleavage； which finds a place in the nature of belief。 The believing mood
weighs and measures by a twofold standard； it has two sorts of eyes and ears； uses two voices to
express its meaning； it duplicates all ideas； without comparing and relating the sense and meaning
in the two forms used。 Or we may say belief lives its life amidst two sorts of perceptions； the one
the perceptions of thought which is asleep； purely uncritical and uncomprehending； the other those
of waking consciousness living solely and simply in the world of sense； and in each of them it
manages to conduct a household of its own。
Enlightenment illuminates that world of heaven with ideas drawn from the world of sense； pointing
out there this element of finitude which belief cannot deny or repudiate； because it is
self…consciousness； and in being so is the unity to which both kinds of ideas belong； and in which
they do not fall apart from one another； for they belong to the same indivisible simple self into
which belief has passed； and which constitutes its life。
Belief has by this means lost the content which furnished its filling； and collapses into an inarticulate
state where the spirit works and weaves within itself。（8） Belief is banished from its own kingdom；
this kingdom is sacked and plundered； since the waking consciousness has forcibly taken to itself
every distinction and expansion of it and claimed every one of its parts for earth； and returned
them to the earth that owns them。 Yet belief is not on that account satisfied； for this illumination has
everywhere brought to light only what is individual； with the result that only insubstantial realities
and finitude forsaken of spirit make any appeal to spirit。
Since belief is without content and cannot continue in this barren condition； or since； in getting
beyond finitude； which is the sole content； it finds merely the empty void； it is a sheer longing： its
truth is an empty beyond； for which there is no longer any appropriate content to be found； for
everything is appropriated and applied in other ways。
Belief in this manner has in fact become the same as enlightenment…the conscious attitude of
relating finite that inherently exists to an unknown and unknowable Absolute without predicates；
the difference is merely that the one is enlightenment satisfied； while belief is enlightenment
unsatisfied。（9） It win yet be seen whether enlightenment can continue in its state of satisfaction； that
longing of the troubled； beshadowed spirit； mourning over the loss of its spiritual world； lies in the
background。 Enlightenment has on it this stain of unsatisfied longing： — in its empty Absolute Being
we find this in the form of the pure abstract object； in passing beyond its individual nature to an
unfulfilled beyond； the stain appears as an act and a process； in the selflessness of what is 〃useful〃
it is seen in the form of a sensuous concrete object。 Enlightenment will remove this stain： by
considering more closely the positive result which constitutes the truth for it； we shall find that the
stain is implicitly removed already。
1。 〃We live in an age of enlightenment〃 （Kant）。 Cp。 Hegel W。 W。 15 introduction to 〃French
Philosophy〃。
2。 Rameau's Neffe。
3。 In the life of 〃feeling〃 and 〃emotion〃。
4。 Cp。 the view of God held by Fichte： also Feuerbach：…Wesen der Religion。
5。 Enlightenment attacks the object and the basis of belief； and the mode of worship。
6。 The cult。
7。 Cp。 1 Timothy iv。 8： 〃Godliness is profitable unto all things。〃
8。 i。e。 the life of feeling。
9。 i。e。 the contrast between belief and enlightenment becomes a contrast inside enlightenment itself。
II。 b
The Truth of Enlightenment （1）
THE spirit that sullenly works and weaves without further distinctions within itself has thus passed
into itself away beyond consciousness； which； on the other hand； has arrived at clearness as to
itself。 The first moment of this clearness of mind is determined； in regard to its necessity and
condition； by the fact that pure insight； or insight that is implicitly and per se notion； actualizes itself；
it does so when it gives otherness or determinateness a place in its own nature。 In this manner it is
negative pure insight； i。e。 the negation of the notion； this negation is equally pure； and herewith has
arisen the pure and simple 〃thing〃； the Absolute Being； that has no further determination of any
sort。 If we define this more precisely； insight in the sense of absolute notion is a distinguishing of
distinctions that are not so any longer； of abstractions or pure notions that no longer support
themselves but find a fixed hold and a distinction only by means of the whole life of the process。
This distinguishing of what is not distinguished consists just in the fact that the absolute notion
makes itself its object； and as against that process asserts itself to be the essence。 The essence
hereby is without the aspect wherein abstractions or distinctions are kept apart； and hence
becomes pure thought in the sense of a pure thing。
This； then； is just the dull； silent； unconscious working and weaving of the spirit at the loom of its
own being； to which belief； as we saw； sank back when it lost all distinction in its content。 And this
is at the same time that movement of pure self…consciousness； in regard to which the essence is
intended to be the absolutely external beyond。 For； because this pure self…consciousness is a
movement working in pure notions； in distinctions that are no distinctions； pure self…consciousness
collapses in fact into that unconscious working and weaving of spirt； i。e。 into pure feeling； or pure
thinghood。
The self…alienated notion — for the notion still stands here at the level of such alienation does not；
however； recognize this identical nature constituting both sides； — the movement of
self…consciousness and its absolute Reality；…does not recognize the identity of their nature； which；
in point of fact； is their very substance and subsistence。 Since the notion is not aware of this unity；
absolute Reality has significance for it merely in the form of an objective beyond； while the
consciousness making these distinctions； and in this way keeping the ultimate reality outside itself；
is treated as a finite consciousness。
Regarding that Absolute Being； enlightenment itself falls out
