phenomenology of mind-第91章

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！


—　that　it　is　merely　absolute　Being；　and；　again；　in　knowing　nothing　but　finitude；　taking　this；
moreover；　to　be　the　truth；　and　thinking　this　knowledge　about　finitude　as　the　truth　to　be　the　highest
knowledge　attainable。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　（3）　The　Rights　of　Enlightenment

Belief　has　a　divine　right　as　against　enlightenment；　the　right　of　absolute　self…identity　or　of　pure
thought；　and　it　finds　itself　utterly　wronged　by　enlightenment；　for　enlightenment　distorts　all　its
moments；　and　makes　them　something　quite　different　from　what　they　are　in　it。　Enlightenment；　on　the
other　hand；　has　merely　a　human　right　as　against　belief；　and　can　only　put　in　a　human　claim　for　its
own　truth；　for　the　wrong　it　commits　is　the　right　of　disunion；　of　discordance；　and　consists　in
perverting　and　altering；　a　right　that　belongs　to　the　nature　of　self…consciousness　in　opposition　to　the
simple　ultimate　essence　or　thought。　But　since　the　right　of　enlightenment　is　the　right　of
self…consciousness；　it　will　not　merely　retain　its　own　right；　too；　in　such　a　way　that　two　equally　valid
rights　of　spirit　would　be　left　standing　in　opposition　to　one　another　without　either　satisfying　the
claims　of　the　other；　it　will　maintain　the　absolute　right；　because　self…consciousness　is　the　negative
function　of　the　notion　（Begriff）；　a　function　which　does　not　merely　operate　in　independence；　but
also　gets　control　over　its　opposite。　And　because　belief　is　a　mode　of　consciousness；　it　will　not　be
able　to　baulk　enlightenment　of　that　right。　

For　enlightenment　does　not　operate　against　the　believing　mind　with　special　principles　of　its　own；
but　with　those　which　belief　itself　implies　and　contains。　Enlightenment　merely　brings　together　and
presents　to　belief　its　own　thoughts；　the　thoughts　that　lie　scattered　and　apart　within　belief；　all
unknown　to　it。　Enlightenment　merely　reminds　belief；　when　one　of　its　own　forms　is　present；　of
others　it　also　has；　but　which　it　is　always　forgetting　when　the　one　is　there。　Enlightenment　shows　itself
to　belief　to　be　pure　insight；　by　the　fact　that　it；　in　a　given　determinate　moment；　sees　the　whole；
brings　forward　the　opposite　element　standing　in　direct　relation　to　that　moment　and；　converting　the
one　in　the　other；　brings　out　the　negative　principle　which　is　the　essence　of　both　thoughts　—　the
notion。　It　appears；　therefore；　to　belief　to　be　distortion　and　lies；　because　it　shows　up　the　other　side
in　the　moments　of　belief。　Enlightenment　seems；　in　consequence；　directly　to　make　something　else
out　of　them　than　they　are　in　their　own　singleness；　but　this　other　is　equally　essential；　and　in　reality　is
to　be　found　in　the　believing　mind　itself；　only　the　latter　does　not　think　about　it；　but　keeps　it
somewhere　else。　Hence　neither　is　it　foreign　to　belief　nor　can　it　be　denied　of　belief。　

Enlightenment　itself；　however；　which　reminds　belief　of　the　opposite　of　its　various　separate
moments；　is　just　as　little　enlightened　regarding　its　own　nature。　It　takes　up　a　purely　negative　attitude
to　belief；　so　far　as　it　excludes　its　own　content　from　its　own　pure　activity　and　takes　that　content　to
be　negative　of　itself。　Consequently；　neither　in　this　negative；　in　the　content　of　belief；　does　it
recognize　itself；　nor；　for　this　reason；　does　it　bring　together　the　two　thoughts；　the　one　which　it
contributes　and　the　one　against　which　it　brings　the　first。　Since　it　does　not　recognize　that　what　it
condemns　in　the　case　of　belief　is　directly　its　very　own　thought；　it　has　its　own　being　in　the
opposition　of　both　moments；　only　one　of　which　—　viz。　in　every　case　the　one　opposed　to　belief　—　it
acknowledges；　but　cuts　off　the　other　from　the　first；　just　as　belief　does。　Enlightenment；
consequently；　does　not　produce　the　unity　of　both　as　their　unity；　i。e。　the　notion；　but　the　notion
arises　before　it　and　comes　to　light　of　its　own　accord；　in　other　words；　enlightenment　finds　the
notion　merely　as　something　there　at　hand。　For　in　itself　the　proms　of　realizing　pure　insight　is　just　this；
that　insight；　whose　essential　nature　is　the　notion；　first　comes　to　be　for　itself　in　the　shape　of　an
absolute　other；　and　repudiates　itself　（for　the　opposite　of　the　notion　is　an　absolute　opposite）；　and
then　out　of　this　otherness　comes　to　itself　or　comes　to　its　notion。　

Enlightenment；　however；　is　merely　this　process；　it　is　the　activity　of　the　notion　in　still　unconscious
form；　an　activity　which　no　doubt　arrives　at　itself　qua　object；　but　takes　this　object　for　an　external
other；　and　does　not　even　know　the　nature　of　the　notion；　i。e。　does　not　know　that　it　is　the
undifferentiated；　the　self…identical；　which　absolutely　divides　itself。　

As　against　belief；　then；　insight　is　the　power　of　the　notion　in　so　far　as　this　is　the　active　process　of
relating　the　moments　lying　apart　from　one　another　in　belief；　a　way　of　relating　them　in　which　the
contradiction　in　them　comes　to　light。　Herein　lies　the　absolute　right　of　the　power　which　insight
exercises　over　belief；　but　the　actuality　on　which　it　brings　this　power　to　bear　lies　just　in　the　fact　that
the　believing　consciousness　is　itself　the　notion　and　thus　itself　recognizes　and　accepts　the　opposite
which　insight　presents　before　it。　Insight；　therefore；　has　and　retains　right　against　belief；　because　it
makes　valid　in　belief　what　is　necessary　to　belief　itself；　and　what　belief　contains　within　it。　

At　first　enlightenment　emphasizes　the　moment　that　the　notion　is　an　act　of　consciousness；　it
maintains　in　the　face　of　belief　that　the　absolute　Being　belief　accepts　is　a　Being　of　the　believer's
consciousness　qua　a　self；　or　that　this　absolute　Being　is　produced　by　consciousness。　To　the
believing　mind　its　absolute　Being；　while　it　is　in　itself　objective　for　the　believer；　is　also　and　at　the
same　time　not　like　a　foreign　thing　standing　therein；　having　come　there　no　one　knows　bow　or
whence。　The　trust　of　belief　consists　just　in　finding　itself　as　a　particular　personal　consciousness　in
absolute　Being；　and　its　obedience　and　service　consist　in　producing；　through　its　activity；　that　Being
as　its　own　Absolute。　Enlightenment；　strictly　speaking；　only　reminds　belief　of　this；　if　belief　affirms
without　qualification　the　ultimate　nature　（Ansich）　of　absolute　Being　to　be　something　beyond　the
action　of　consciousness；　

But　while　enlightenment　no　doubt　puts　alongside　the　one…sidedness　of　belief　the　opposite　moment；
viz。：　—　action　of　belief　in　contrast　to　being　—　and　being　is　all　belief　thinks　about　here　—　and　yet
does　not　itself　in　doing　so　bring　those　opposite　thoughts　together；　enlightenment　isolates　the　pure
moment　of　action；　and　declares　that　what　belief　takes　to　be　per　se　ultimate　（Ansich）　is　merely　a
product　of　consciousness。　Isolated　action；　action　opposed　to　this　ultimate　Being　（Ansich）；　is；
however；　a　contingent　action；　and；　qua　presentative　activity；　is　a　creating　of　fictions　—　presented
figurative　ideas　that　have　no　being　in　themselves。　And　this　is　how　enlightenment　regards　the　content
of　belief。　

Conversely；　however；　pure　insight　equally　says　the　very　opposite。　When　insight　lays　stress　on　the
moment　of　otherness　which　the　notion　involves　it　declares　the　essential　Reality　for　belief　to　be　one
which　does　not　in　any　way　concern　consciousness；　is　away　beyond　consciousness；　foreign　to　it；
and　unknown。　To　belief；　too；　that　Reality　has　the　same　character。　On　one　side　belief　trusts　in　it；
and　gets；　in　doing　so；　the　assurance　of　its　own　self；　on　the　other　side　it　is　unsearchable　in　all　its
ways　and。　unattainable　in　its　being。　

Further；　enlightenment　maintains　against　the　believing　mind　a　right　which　the　latter　concedes；　when
enlightenment　treats　the　object　of　the　believer's　veneration　as　stone　and　wood；　or；　in　short；　some
finite　anthropomorphic　feature。　For；　since　this　consciousness　is　divided　within　itself　in　having　a
〃beyond〃　remote　from　actuality　and　an　immediate　present　embodiment　of　that　remote　beyond；
there　is　also　found　in　it；　as　a　matter　of　fact；　the　view　that　sense…things　have　a　value　and　significance
in　and　for　themselves　（an　und　für　sich）。　But　belief　does　not　bring　together　these　two　ideas　of
what　is　〃in　and　for　itself〃；　viz。　that　at　one　time　what　is　〃in　and　for　itself〃　is　for　belief　pure　essential
Reality　and　at　another　time　is　an　ordinary　thing　of　sense。　Even　its　own　pure　consciousness　is
affected　by　this　last　view；　for　the　distinctions　of　its　supersensuous　world；　because　this　is　without
the　notion；　are　a　series　of　independent　shapes　and　forms；　and　their　activity　is　a　happening；　i。e。　they
exist　merely　in　figurative　presentation；　and　have　the　characteristic　of　sense…existence。　

Enlightenment　on　its　side　isolates　actuality　in　the　same　way；　treating　it　as　a　reality　abandoned　by
spirit；　isolates　specific　determinateness　and　makes　it　a　fixed　finite　element；　as　if　it　were　not　a
moment　in　the　spiritual　process　of　the　real　itself；　a　something　which　is　not　nothing；　nor　possessed
of　a　being　all　its　own；　but　evanescent　and　transitory。　

It　is　clear　that　the　same　is　the　case　with　regard　to　the　ground　of　knowledge。　The　believing　mind
itself　recognizes　an　accidental　knowledge；　for　in　belief　the　mind　adopts　an　attitude　towards
contingencies；　and　absolute　Being　itself　comes　before　belief　in　the　form　of　a　pictorial　presentation
of　an　ordinary　actual　fact。　Consequently　belief　is　also　a　certainty　which　does　not　carry　the　truth
within　it；　and　it　confesses　itself　to　be　an　unsubstantial　consciousness　of　this　kind；　holding　of　this
world　and　separated　from　the　spirit　that　is　self…assuring　and　assured　of　itself。　This　moment；
however；　belief　forgets　in　its　immediate　spiritual　knowledge　of　absolute　Reality。　

Enlightenment；　however；　which　reminds　belief　of　all　this；　thinks　again　merely　of　the　contingency　of
the　knowledge　and　forgets　the　other　—　thinks　only　of　the　mediating　process　which　takes　effect
through　an　alien　third　term；　and　does　not　think　of　that　process　wherein　the　immediate　is　for　itself　its
own　third　term　through　which　it　mediates　itself　with　the　other；　viz。　with　itself。　

Finally；　on　the　view　enlightenment　takes　of　the　action　of　belief；　the　rejection　of　enjoyment　and
possessions　is　looked　upon　as　wrong　and　purposeless。　

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　th