[11]Cf. Richard Wagner:Jesus von Nazareth; pp. 79-90.—(Translator.)
[11]Cf. Richard Wagner:Jesus von Nazareth; pp. 79-90.—(Translator.)
[12]That man is endowed with true insight who sees that the same ruling power is inherent in all things, and that when these perish, it perishes not. For if he discerns the same ruling power everywhere present, he does not degrade himself by his own fault: thence he passes to the highest path.—For theBhagavadgîtâthe reader is referred to Vol. VIII. ofThe Sacred Books of the East(Oxford: Clarendon Press), where (p. 105) this passage is translated as follows:—"He sees (truly) who sees the supreme lord abiding alike in all entities, and not destroyed though they are destroyed. For he who sees the lord abiding everywhere alike, does not destroy himself[*] by himself, and then reaches the highest goal."[*]"Not to have true knowledge, is equivalent to self-destruction."Cf. Fauche: Le Mahā-bhārata: Paris, 1867; Vol. VII., p. 128:—"Celui-là possède une vue nette des choses, qui voit ce principe souverain en tous les êtres d'une manière égale, et leur survivre, quand ils périssent. Il ne se fait aucun tort à soi-même par cette vue d'un principe qui subsiste également partout: puis, après cette vie, il entre dans la voie supérieure."The obscurity of Schlegel's Latin in the second sentence is sufficiently removed by these more recent translations.—(Translator.)
[12]That man is endowed with true insight who sees that the same ruling power is inherent in all things, and that when these perish, it perishes not. For if he discerns the same ruling power everywhere present, he does not degrade himself by his own fault: thence he passes to the highest path.—For theBhagavadgîtâthe reader is referred to Vol. VIII. ofThe Sacred Books of the East(Oxford: Clarendon Press), where (p. 105) this passage is translated as follows:—"He sees (truly) who sees the supreme lord abiding alike in all entities, and not destroyed though they are destroyed. For he who sees the lord abiding everywhere alike, does not destroy himself[*] by himself, and then reaches the highest goal."
[*]"Not to have true knowledge, is equivalent to self-destruction."
Cf. Fauche: Le Mahā-bhārata: Paris, 1867; Vol. VII., p. 128:—
"Celui-là possède une vue nette des choses, qui voit ce principe souverain en tous les êtres d'une manière égale, et leur survivre, quand ils périssent. Il ne se fait aucun tort à soi-même par cette vue d'un principe qui subsiste également partout: puis, après cette vie, il entre dans la voie supérieure."
The obscurity of Schlegel's Latin in the second sentence is sufficiently removed by these more recent translations.—(Translator.)
Quaestionem anno1837propositam, "utrum philosophiae moralis fons et fundamentum in idea moralitatis, quae immediate conscientia contineatur, et ceteris notionibus fundamentalibus, quae ex ilia prodeant, explicandis quaerenda sint, an in alio cognoscendi principio," unus tantum scriptor explicare conatus est, cujus commentationem, germanico sermone compositam, et his verbis notatam: "MORAL PREDIGEN IST LEICHT, MORAL BEGRÜNDEN IST SCHWER,"praemio dignam judicare nequivimus. Omisso enim eo, quod potissimum postulabatur, hoc expeti putavit, ut principium aliquod ethicae conderetur, itaqae eam partem commentationis suae, in qua principii ethicae a se propositi et metaphysicae suae nexum exponit, appendices loco habuit, in qua plus quam postulatum esset praestaret, quum tamen ipsum thema ejusmodi disputationem flagitaret, in qua vel praecipuo loco metaphysicae et ethicae nexus consideraretur. Quod autem scriptor in sympathia fundamentum ethicae constituere conatus est, neque ipsa disserendi forma nobis satisfecit, neque reapse, hoc fundamentum sufficere, evicit; quin ipse contra esse confiteri coactus est. Neque reticendum videtur, plures recentioris aetatis summos philosophostam indecenter commemorari, ut justam et gravem offensionem habeat.
In 1837 the following question was set as subject for a Prize Essay: "Is the fountain and basis of Morals to be sought for in an idea of morality which lies directly in the consciousness (or conscience), and in the analysis of the other leading ethical conceptions which arise from it? Or is it to be found in some other source of knowledge?" There was only one competitor; but his dissertation, written in German, and bearing the motto: "To preach Morality is easy, to found it is difficult"[1]we cannot adjudge worthy of the Prize. He has omitted to deal with the essential part of the question, apparently thinking that he was asked to establish some fundamental principle of Ethics. Consequently, that part of the treatise, which explains how the moral basis he proposes is related to his system of metaphysics, we find relegated to an appendix, as an "opus supererogationis," although it was precisely the connection between Metaphysics and Ethics that our question required to be put in the first and foremostplace. The writer attempts to show that compassion is the ultimate source of morality; but neither does his mode of discussion appear satisfactory to us, nor has he, in point of fact, succeeded in proving that such a foundation is adequate. Indeed he himself is obliged to admit that it is not.[2]Lastly, the Society cannot pass over in silence the fact that he mentions several recent philosophers of the highest standing in an unseemly manner, such as to justly occasion serions offence.
[1]The Academy has been good enough to insert the second "is" on its own account, by way of proving the truth of Longinus' theory (V. De Sublimitate: chap. 39,ad fin.), that the addition or subtraction of a single syllable is sufficient to destroy the whole force of a sentence. (P. Longinus:De Sublimitate Libellus; edit. Joannes Vablen, Bonnae, 1887.)—(Translator)
[1]The Academy has been good enough to insert the second "is" on its own account, by way of proving the truth of Longinus' theory (V. De Sublimitate: chap. 39,ad fin.), that the addition or subtraction of a single syllable is sufficient to destroy the whole force of a sentence. (P. Longinus:De Sublimitate Libellus; edit. Joannes Vablen, Bonnae, 1887.)—(Translator)
[2]I suppose this is the meaning ofcontra esse confiteri.— (Translator.)
[2]I suppose this is the meaning ofcontra esse confiteri.— (Translator.)