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！
Christian Church。 The question is thus not only whether regard is to be paid to Religion in the
history of Philosophy； for it has been the case that Philosophy has paid attention to Religion； and
the latter to the former。 Since neither of the two has allowed the other to rest undisturbed； we are
not permitted to do so either。 Of their relations； therefore； we must speak definitely； openly and
honestly … aborder la question； as the French say。 We must not hesitate； as if such a discussion
were too delicate； nor try to help ourselves out by beating about the bush； nor must we seek to
find evasions or shifts； so that in the end no one can tell what we mean。 We must not seem to wish
to leave Religion alone。 This is nothing else than to appear to wish to conceal the fact that
Philosophy has directed its efforts against Religion。 Religion； that is； the theologians； are indeed the
cause of this； they ignore Philosophy； but only in order that they may not be contradicted in their
arbitrary reasoning。
It may appear as if Religion demanded that man should abstain from thinking of universal matters
and Philosophy because they are merely worldly wisdom and represent human operations。 Human
reason is here opposed to the divine。 Men are； indeed； well accustomed to a distinction between
divine teaching and laws and human power and inventions； such that under the latter everything is
comprehended which in its manifestation proceeds from the consciousness； the intelligence or the
will of mankind which makes all this opposed to the knowledge of God and to things rendered
divine by divine revelation。 But the depreciation of what is human expressed by this opposition is
then driven further still； inasmuch as while it implies the further view that man is certainly called
upon to admire the wisdom of God in Nature； and that the grain； the mountains； the cedars of
Lebanon in all their glory； the song of the birds in the bough； the superior skill and the domestic
instincts of animals are all magnified as being the work of God； it also implies that the wisdom；
goodness and justice of God is； indeed； pointed out in human affairs； but not so much in the
disposition or laws of man or in actions performed voluntarily and in the ordinary progress of the
world； as in human destiny； that is； in that which is external and even arbitrary in relation to
knowledge and free…will。 Thus what is external and accidental is regarded as emphatically the
work of God； and what has its root in will and conscience； as the work of man。 The harmony
between outward relations； circumstances and events and the general aims of man is certainly
something of a higher kind； but this is the case only for the reason that this harmony is considered
with respect to ends which are human and not natural such as those present in the life of a sparrow
which finds its food。 But if the summit of everything is found in this； that God rules over Nature；
what then is free…will？ Does He not rule over what is spiritual； or rather since He himself is
spiritual； in what is spiritual？ and is not the ruler over or in the spiritual region higher than a ruler
over or in Nature？ But is that admiration of God as revealed in natural things as such； in trees and
animals as opposed to what is human； far removed from the religion of the ancient Egyptians；
which derived its knowledge of what is divine from the ibis； or from cats and dogs？ or does it
differ from the deplorable condition of the ancient and the modern Indians； who held and still hold
cows and apes in reverence； and are scrupulously concerned for the maintenance and nourishment
of these animals； while they allow men to suffer hunger； who would commit a crime by removing
the pangs of starvation through their slaughter or even by partaking of their food？
It seems to be expressed by such a view that human action as regards Nature is ungodly； that the
operations of Nature are divine operations； but what man produces is ungodly。 But the
productions of human reason might； at least； be esteemed as much as Nature。 In so doing；
however； we cede less to reason than is permitted to us。 If the life and the action of animals be
divine； human action must stand much higher； and must be worthy to be called divine in an infinitely
higher sense。 The pre…eminence of human thought must forthwith be avowed。 Christ says on this
subject （Matt。 vi。 26…30）； 〃Behold the fowls of the air；〃 （in which we may also include the Ibis and
the Kokilas；） 〃are ye not much better than they？ Wherefore； if God so clothe the grass of the field；
which to…day is； and to…morrow is cast into the oven； shall He not much more clothe you？〃 The
superiority of man； of the image of God； to animals and plants is indeed implicitly and explicitly
established； but in asking wherein the divine element is to be sought and seen … in making use of
such expressions … none of the superior； but only the inferior nature； is indicated。 Similarly； in
regard to the knowledge of God； it is remarkable that Christ places the knowledge of and faith in
Him not in any admiration of the creatures of nature nor in marvelling at any so…called dominion
over them； nor in signs and wonders； but in the witness of the Spirit。 Spirit is infinitely high above
Nature； in it the Divine Nature manifests itself more than in Nature。
But the form in which the universal content which is in and for itself； first belongs to Philosophy is
the form of Thought； the form of the universal itself。 In Religion； however； this content is for
immediate and outward perception； and further for idea and sensation through art。 The import is
for the sensuous nature； it is the evidence of the Mind which comprehends that content。 To make
this clearer； the difference must be recollected between that which we are and have； and how we
know the same … that is； in what manner we know it and have it as our object。 This distinction is an
infinitely important matter； and it alone is concerned in the culture of races and of individuals。 We
are men and have reason； what is human； or above all； what is rational vibrates within us； both in
our feelings； mind and heart and in our subjective nature generally。 It is in this corresponding
vibration and in the corresponding motion effected that a particular content becomes our own and
is like our own。 The manifold nature of the determinations which it contains is concentrated and
wrapt up within this inward nature … an obscure motion of Mind in itself and in universal
substantiality。 The content is thus directly identical with the simple abstract certainty of ourselves
and with self…consciousness。 But Mind； because it is Mind； is as truly consciousness。 What is
confined within itself in its simplicity must be objective to itself and must come to be known。 The
whole difference lies in the manner and method of this objectivity； and hence in the manner and
method of consciousness。
This method and manner extends from the simple expression of the dullness of mere feeling to the
most objective form； to that which is in and for itself objective； to Thought。 The most simple； most
formal objectivity is the expression of a name for that feeling and for the state of mind according
with it； as seen in these words； worship； prayer； etc。 Such。 expressions as 〃Let us pray〃 and 〃Let
us worship〃 are simply the recalling of that feeling。 But 〃Let us think about God〃 brings with it
something more； it expresses the absolutely embracing content of that substantial feeling； and the
object； which differs from mere sensation as subjective self…conscious activity； or which is content
distinguished from this activity as form。 This object； however； comprehending in itself the whole
substantial content； is itself still undeveloped and entirely undetermined。 To develop that content；
to comprehend； express and bring to consciousness its relations； is the commencement； creation
and manifestation of Religion。 The form in which this developed content first possesses objectivity
is that of immediate perception； of sensuous idea or of a more defined idea deduced from natural；
physical or mental manifestations and conditions。
Art brings about this consciousness； in that it gives permanence and cohesion to the fleeting visible
appearance through which objectivity passes in sensation。 The shapeless； sacred stone； the more
place； or whatever it is to which the desire for objectivity first attaches itself； receives from art；
form； feature； determinate character and content which can be known and which is now present
for consciousness。 Art has thus become the instructress of the people。 This was the case with
Homer and Hesiod for instance； who； according to Herodotus （II。 53）； 〃Made the Greeks their
Theogony；〃 because they elevated and consolidated ideas and traditions in unison with the spirit of
the people； wherever and in whatever confusion they might be found； into definite images and
ideas。 This is not the art which merely gives expression in its own way to the content； already
perfectly expressed； of a Religion which in thought； idea and words has already attained complete
development； that is to say； which puts its matter into stone； canvas； or words as is don