讀論壇漫想: 尼采的上帝、克利的抽像畫、愛因斯坦的因緣法

来源: 中间小谢于 2021-11-25 13:32:20 [档案] [旧帖] [给我悄悄话] 本文已被阅读：次 (4876 bytes)

我衹讀過尼采的一些言論片段，印像中尼采是貝多芬、戈雅、李小龍那類人，但初時衹找到華格納(夸飾、漫無目的的力量，缺乏真正的意志 -Will)。後來否定了華格納，但也没做成貝多芬找到自然渾成的方式和章法去表達真正的意志，於是就卡在華格納和貝多芬之间的状态。貝多芬曾説(他的)音樂高於哲學，也许是感悟了西方文化的一些構成特貭也說不定。

尼采說的"上帝死了"不是説没有了上帝或否定了上帝，更不是莫名其妙的弑父；而是說那個精神的具體方式和可見的推動力量不在了。但精神還在。在哪裏？在意志。頗有人心即佛心的意味。但如上述，他自己没有達成，没有''證悟"。

好比某人父親去世，說"我父親死了''，這不是說他否定了父親。没有父親哪有他？

(注：我没聽過多少華格納的音樂，因此對他的印像可能不準確。)

我不太喜歡克利(Paul Klee)的畫，有?僵，作意重，不比米羅(Joan Miro)的靈動自然，飄逸天成。

關於解讀問題：任何作品的意義可以是多重的，但不應是任意的。這跟欣赏者是外行、内行無關。多重意義如同一箭雙鵰，任意意義如同無的放矢。

Therefore there should be a sharp distinction between multiple meaningfulness and arbitrary meaningfulness.

The arbitrary contains no power. There is no Will behind it.

Again, this reminds of the Will in Beethoven's music that makes it truly great.

曾翻阅一本愛因斯坦的文集，有段話令人對他刮目相看：When Einstein was a youth, he noticed that everything that supported his life was not made by himself: food that fed him, clothes that covered him, languages that connected him to others, physics that he was learning...

He saw 因緣 even when he was a youth! This impressed me more than his later activities in physics. No wonder he turned out an Einstein.

He specifically mentioned the availability of and a man's dependence on language, which, is not made by himself.

A language is far more significant than merely being a tool or tools, it also shapes the mind. That is, It doesn't just provide you, but also makes you. This insight is alreasy quite close to the Buddhist idea of 緣起性空.

The distinctions or criterions for 公and私 become very insignificant in the light of this understanding. They are just conventions, conveniences, or merely styles for expression.

(事實上，愛因斯坦這個智慧後來即體现在他的物理學上。經典物理的固定而分隔的物貭和能量概念，空间和時间概念即在新的物理理論(本貭即物理學的因緣法)中消溶、合一。)