history of philosophy-第24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！


present　in　worship；　with　the　substantial　content；　the　spiritual　soul；　and　secondly　with　bringing　this
before　consciousness　as　object；　but　in　the　form　of　thought。　Philosophy　thinks　and　conceives　of　that
which　Religion　represents　as　the　object　of　consciousness；　whether　it　is　as　the　work　of　the
imagination　or　as　existent　facts　in　history。　The　form　of　the　knowledge　of　the　object　is；　in　religious
consciousness；　such　as　pertains　to　the　ordinary　idea；　and　is　thus　more　or　less　sensuous　in　nature。
In　Philosophy　we　do　not　say　that　God　begot　a　Son；　which　is　a　relation　derived　from　natural　life。
Thought；　or　the　substance　of　such　a　relation；　is　therefore　still　recognized　in　Philosophy。　Since
Philosophy　thinks　its　object；　it　has　the　advantage　of　uniting　the　two　stages　of　religious
consciousness　…　which　in　Religion　are　different　moments　…　into　one　unity　in　philosophic　thought。

It　is　these　two　forms　which　are　different　from　one　another　and　which；　as　opposed；　may　therefore
seem　to　be　mutually　conflicting；　and　it　is　natural　and　it　necessarily　seems　to　be　the　case；　that　on
first　definitely　coming　to　view　they　are　so　to　speak　conscious　of　their　diversity；　and　hence　at　first
appear　as　inimical　to　one　another。　The　first　stage　in　the　order　of　manifestation　is　definite　existence；
or　a　determinate　Being…for…self　as　opposed　to　the　other。　The　later　form　is　that　Thought　embraces
itself　in　the　concrete；　immerses　itself　in　itself；　and　Mind；　as　such；　comes　in　it　to　consciousness。　In
the　earlier　stage；　Mind　is　abstract；　and　in　this　constraint　it　knows　itself　to　be　different；　and　in
opposition　to　the　other。　When　it　embraces　itself　in　the　concrete；　it　is　no　more　simply　confined　in
determinate　existence；　only　knowing　or　possessing　itself　in　that　diversity；　but　it　is　the　Universal
which；　inasmuch　as　it　determines　itself；　contains　its　〃other〃　within　itself。　As　concrete　intelligence；
Mind　thus　comprehends　the　substantial　in　the　form　which　seemed　to　differ　from　it；　of　which　it　had
only　grasped　the　outward　manifestation　and　had　turned　away　from　it；　it　recognizes　itself　in　its
inward　content；　and　so　it　for　the　first　time　grasps　its　object；　and　deals　justice　to　its　opposite。

Generally　speaking；　the　course　of　this　antithesis　in　history　is　that　Thought　first　of　all　comes　forth
within　Religion；　as　not　free　and　in　separate　manifestations。　Secondly；　it　strengthens　itself；　feels　itself
to　be　resting　upon　itself；　holds　and　conducts　itself　inimically　towards　the　other　form；　and　does　not
recognize　itself　therein。　In　the　third　place；　it　concludes　by　acknowledging　itself　as　in　this　other。　Or
else　Philosophy　has　to　begin　with　carrying　on　its　work　entirely　on　its　own　account；　isolating
Thought　from　all　popular　beliefs；　and　taking　for　itself　quite　a　different　field　of　operation；　a　field　for
which　the　world　of　ordinary　ideas　lies　quite　apart；　so　that　the　two　exist　peacefully　side　by　side；　or；
to　put　it　better；　so　that　no　reflection　on　their　opposition　is　arrived　at。　Just　as　little　did　the　thought　of
reconciling　them　occur；　since　in　the　popular　beliefs　the　same　content　appeared　as　in　any　external
form　other　than　the　notion　…　the　thought　that　is；　of　explaining　and　justifying　popular　belief；　in　order
thus　to　be　able　again　to　express　the　conceptions　of　free　thought　in　the　form　of　popular　religion。

Thus　we　see　Philosophy　first　restrained　and　confined　within　the　range　of　the　Greek　heathen　world；
then　resting　upon　itself；　it　goes　forth　against　popular　religion　and　takes　up　an　unfriendly　attitude　to
it；　until　it　grasps　that　religion　in　its　innermost　and　recognizes　itself　therein。　Thus　the　ancient　Greek
philosophers　generally　respected　the　popular　religion；　or　at　least　they　did　not　oppose　it；　or　reflect
upon　it。　Those　coming　later；　including　even　Xenophanes；　handled　popular　ideas　most　severely；　and
thus　many　so…called　atheists　made　their　appearance。　But　as　the　spheres　of　popular　conception　and
abstract　thought　stood　peacefully　side　by　side；　we　also　find　Greek　philosophers　of　even　a　later
period　in　development；　in　whose　case　speculative　thought　and　the　act　of　worship；　as　also　the　pious
invocation　upon　and　sacrifice　to　the　gods；　coexist　in　good　faith；　and　not　in　mere　hypocrisy。
Socrates　was　accused　of　teaching　other　gods　than　those　belonging　to　the　popular　religion；　his
daimonion　was　indeed　opposed　to　the　principles　of　Greek　morals　and　religion；　but　at　the　same
time　he　followed　quite　honestly　the　usages　of　his　religion；　and　we　know　besides　that　his　last
request　was　to　ask　his　friends　to　offer　a　cock　to　？esculapius　…　a　desire　quite　inconsistent　with　his
conclusions　regarding　the　existence　of　God　and　above　all　regarding　morality。　Plato　declaimed
against　the　poets　and　their　gods。　It　was　in　a　much　later　time　that　the　Neo…platonists　first　recognized
in　the　popular　mythology　rejected　earlier　by　the　philosophers；　the　universal　content；　they
transposed　and　translated　it　into　what　is　significant　for　thought；　and　thus　used　mythology　itself　as　a
symbolical　imagery　for　giving　expression　to　their　formulas。

Similarly　do　we　see　in　the　Christian　Religion；　thought　which　is　not　independent　first　placing　itself　in
conjunction　with　the　form　belonging　to　this　Religion　and　acting　within　it　…　that　is　to　say；　taking　the
Religion　as　its　groundwork；　and　proceeding　from　the　absolute　assumption　of　the　Christian
doctrine。　We　see　later　on　the　opposition　between　so…called　faith　and　so…called　reason；　when　the
wings　of　thought　have　become　strengthened；　the　young　eaglet　flies　away　for　himself　to　the　sun　of
Truth；　but　like　a　bird　of　prey　he　turns　upon　Religion　and　combats　it。　Latest　of　all　Philosophy
permits　full　justice　to　be　done　to　the　content　of　Religion　through　the　speculative　Notion；　which　is
through　Thought　itself。　For　this　end　the　Notion　must　have　grasped　itself　in　the　concrete　and
penetrated　to　concrete　spirituality。　This　must　be　the　standpoint　of　the　Philosophy　of　the　present
time；　it　has　begun　within　Christianity　and　can　have　no　other　content　than　the　world…spirit。　When
that　spirit　comprehends　itself　in　Philosophy；　it　also　comprehends　itself　in　that　form　which　formerly
was　inimical　to　Philosophy。

Thus　Religion　has　a　content　in　common　with　Philosophy　the　forms　alone　being　different；　and　the
only　essential　point　is　that　the　form　of　the　Notion　should　be　so　far　perfected　as　to　be　able　to　grasp
the　content　of　Religion。　The　Truth　is　just　that　which　has　been　called　the　mysteries　of　Religion。
These　constitute　the　speculative　element　in　Religion　such　as　were　called　by　the　Neo…platonists
being　initiated；　or　being　occupied　with　speculative　Notions。　By　mysteries　is　meant；　superficially
speaking；　the　secret；　what　remains　such　and　does　not　arrive　at　being　known。　But　in　the　Eleusinian
mysteries　there　was　nothing　unknown；　all　Athenians　were　initiated　into　them；　Socrates　alone　shut
himself　out。　Openly　to　make　them　known　to　strangers　was　the　one　thing　forbidden；　as　indeed　it
was　made　a　crime　in　the　case　of　certain　people。　Such　matters　however；　as　being　holy；　were　not　to
be　spoken　of。　Herodotus　often　expressly　says　（e。g。　ii。　45…47）　that　he　would　speak　of　the　Egyptian
Divinities　and　mysteries　in　as　far　as　it　was　pious　so　to　do：　he　knew　more；　but　it　would　be　impious
to　speak　of　them。　In　the　Christian　Religion　dogmas　are　called　mysteries。　They　are　that　which　man
knows　about　the　Nature　of　God。　Neither　is　there　anything　mysterious　in　this；　it　is　known　by　all
those　who　are　partakers　in　that　Religion；　and　these　are　thus　distinguished　from　the　followers　of
other　Religions。　Hence　mystery　here　signifies　nothing　unknown；　since　all　Christians　are　in　the
secret。　Mysteries　are　in　their　nature　speculative；　mysterious　certainly　to　the　understanding　but　not
to　reason；　they　are　rational；　just　in　the　sense　of　being　speculative。　The　understanding　does　not
comprehend　the　speculative　which　simply　is　the　concrete　because　it　holds　to　the　differences　in　their
separation；　their　contradiction　is　indeed　contained　in　the　mystery；　which；　however；　is　likewise　the
resolution　of　the　same。

Philosophy；　on　the　contrary；　is　opposed　to　the　so…called　Rationalism　of　the　new　Theology　which
for　ever　keeps　reason　on　its　lips；　but　which　is　dry　understanding　only；　no　reason　is　recognizable　in